CAUSAL MODEL AFFECTING THE EDUCATIONAL SUSTAINABILITY OF ECONDARY SCHOOLS IN THE CENTRAL PROVINCES

Main Article Content

Piyarat Janzangpen
Nopporn Chantaranamchoo

Abstract

This research aimed to study the causal model affecting educational sustainability in secondary schools in the western region of Thailand. The sample group consisted of school administrators and teachers from extra-large secondary schools under the Office of the Basic Education Commission in the western provinces, namely Nakhon Pathom, Kanchanaburi, Ratchaburi, Suphan Buri, Prachuap Khiri Khan, Phetchaburi, Samut Sakhon, and Samut Songkhram. A stratified random sampling method was used. Data were collected using a questionnaire focusing on five aspects of the organizational innovation model to promote educational sustainability in secondary schools: 1) Knowledge Management, 2) Work Engagement, 3) Educational Networks, 4) Organizational Innovation, and 5) Educational Sustainability. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and structural equation modeling (CB-SEM).


The research findings revealed the following: 1. Knowledge Management (β=.224) and Educational Networks (β=.610) had a statistically significant influence on Organizational Innovation. In contrast, Work Engagement (β=.109) had no statistically significant influence on Organizational Innovation (R2=.762). 2.Organizational Innovation (β=.305), Knowledge Management (β=.209), Work Engagement (β=.157), and Educational Networks (β=.315) all had a statistically significant influence on Educational Sustainability (R2=.805). The study suggests that schools should promote knowledge management, foster work engagement, build educational networks, and lead to organizational innovation to achieve educational sustainability.

Article Details

Section
Article

References

นพพร จันทรนำชู (2563). พัฒนศึกษา: ความหลากหลายของกระบวนทัศน์เพื่อการพัฒนาที่ยั่งยืน. วารสารมหาวิทยาลัยศิลปากร ฉบับภาษาไทย, 36(2), 149

พินิติ รตะนานุกูล. (2555). อนุสารอุดมศึกษา. กรุงเทพมหานคร: สำนักคณะกรรมการการอุดมศึกษา.

Anne, S. (2003). Networking for Educational Innovation: A Comparative Analysis. Networks of Innovation, 49-63.

Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sociological Methods & Research.

Corson, W. H., et.al. (1990). The Global Ecology Handbook. Boston: Beacon Press.

Galimova, L. (2009). Education Cluster as a mechanism of innovative development of industrial activity. Bulletin of Kazan technological university, 5, 125-127.

Gallucci, M., & Jentschke, S. (2022). SEMLj: A Suite for Structural Equation Models for jamovi [ซอฟต์แวร์คอมพิวเตอร์].

Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate Data Analysis.

Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal.

Kimiz, D. (2011). Knowledge Management in Theory and Practice. The MIT Press.

Kline, R. B. (2023). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling.

Leicht, A., Heiss, J., & Byun, W. J. (2018). Issues and trends in Education for Sustainable Development. UNESCO.

Lopes, C. M., Scavarda, A., Hofmeister, L. F., Thomé, A. M. T., & Vaccaro, G. L. R. (2017). An analysis of the interplay between organizational sustainability, knowledge management, and open innovation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 476-488.https://doi.org/https://doi.org

Maja, R., & Tjasa, S. (2020). Organisational climate components and their impact on work engagement of employees in medium-sized organisations. Routledge, 8-9.