07saharat Laksanasut

International Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews (IJSASR), 2 (2)

: March-April 2022, page 61-70. ISSN: 2774-0366

Website: https://so07.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/IJSASR/index
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14456/jsasr.2022.13
The Development of Supervision Model to Enhance Research Competencies of Basic Education

Teachers in Thailand: The Incasing of the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary Educational Service
Area Office
Saharat Laksanasut
Head of Education Development Research Department, Angsilapittayakom School (Chonburi Province), Thailand
Corresponding author e-mail: [email protected]; ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4428-2607
Received 18/04/2022 Abstract:- This study used the Research and Development (R&D) design to develop a
Revised 24/04/2022 supervision model and investigate its effects on the research competencies improvement
Accepted 25/04/2022 of basic education teachers in Thailand. Sixty-seven teachers and educational personnel
from Angsilapittayakom School, which is part of the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary
Educational Service Area Office, were chosen as the study's samples using the volunteer
sampling method in the academic year 2021. The findings revealed that the investigation
and analysis of teachers' needs were carried out during the early stages of developing a
supervision model and that 92.14 percent of the samples had difficulty determining their
research problems. The researcher synthesized and developed the "SAHARAT Supervisory
Model." There were 7 cyclic steps as follows, 1) Strength Relationship, 2) Attainments of
Research, 3) Head-together Plan, 4) Audit of Classroom and Research, 5) Reflection
Conference, 6) Award and Reinforcement, and 7) Trumpet the Best Practices. According
to expert and specialist evaluations, the supervision model synthesized and developed by
the researcher received the highest level of appropriateness and was deemed suitable for
use. According to the effects of using the developed supervision model on teachers'
research competencies, at a.01 level of statistical significance, the samples' research
competencies level after the implementation of the SAHARAT Supervisory Model was
higher than the research competencies level before the implementation. Taking into
account the satisfaction of the overview samples with the SAHARAT Supervisory Model,
the overall sample satisfaction with the researcher-synthesized supervision model was at
the highest level. The findings of the study will be used as a guideline for educational
supervision, with an emphasis on improving teachers' research competencies.
Keywords: Supervision Model; SAHARAT Supervisory Model; Research Competencies; Basic Education
Teachers; Thailand
Introduction
Education is intended to aid in the development of countries for them to prosper. Teachers play
critical roles in overseeing and directing the teaching and learning process in all aspects. Teacher
professional development is emphasized in the National Education Act B.E. 2562 (2019) because it
affects the development of education and the community of nations. It is safe to say that teachers have
the responsibility of ensuring that the community as a whole develops and prospers. However,
according to the Office of the Education Council's assessment, there is still an urgent challenge in
developing in-service teachers that must be addressed (Office of the Education Council, 2020).
Nowadays, Thai people in all sectors place a high value on education, but they almost never consider
the importance of teachers, as a result of which Thailand's overall education quality has been steadily
declining over the last decades (Chetha, 2021). Furthermore, recent research findings on educational
reformation revealed that Thailand's teachers required development and enhancement in terms of
teaching profession competencies in a variety of areas, the most critical of which was the development
of classroom action research competencies, which were required of all teachers to effectively develop
teachers as well as students in both short-term and long-term developments (Waranyaporn, 2021).
Classroom action research is widely acknowledged as a valuable and necessary tool for the
advancement of the teaching profession. However, the findings of numerous studies on teachers'
classroom action research revealed that more continuous and efficient development of classroom action
research competencies was required. In fact, conducting classroom action research on teachers was not
done to improve the quality or effectiveness of teaching and learning, but rather to respond to the
[61]
Citation: Laksanasut, S. (2022). The Development of Supervision Model to Enhance Research Competencies of Basic
Education Teachers in Thailand: The Incasing of the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary Educational Service Area Office.
International Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews (IJSASR), 2 (2), 61-70; DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14456/jsasr.2022.13
assigned policy of educational administrators. Inaccurate research report writing, as well as a lack of
knowledge and competencies in conducting classroom action research, are examples of current
challenges in the development of teacher research competencies. Although some teachers are equipped
with the knowledge and competencies to conduct classroom action research, they are unable to do so
entirely on their own because what they know and what they can do about classroom action research is
insufficient; they require the assistance of advisors or coaches throughout the research process.
Furthermore, Thai teachers today require more research competencies training; otherwise, they appear
to struggle with conducting research in the classroom and tend to give up on doing classroom research
because they lack the necessary knowledge and competencies to complete the classroom action research
(Thanikarn, 2017). To develop and equip teachers with sufficient research competencies to allow them
to conduct correct and qualified classroom action research, a systematic development procedure known
as educational supervision is required and needed because it can assist in identifying and solving any
problems and challenges that occur in the classroom and at school, such as problems in applying school
curriculums, problems in teacher's teaching and learning, and problems in student learning (Gkickman,
Gordon & Ross-Gordon, 2007).
According to the researcher's surveys and interviews, the overall educational supervision in the
researcher's school and other schools under the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary Educational Service Area
Office is currently being performed, with a focus on teachers' teaching and learning processes in
classrooms. It does not appear to have any educational supervisions that are primarily focused on
teacher classroom action research, which is thought to be a tool to help improve both teachers and
students at the same time. The most obvious need expressed by the teachers polled and interviewed is
a lack of overall understanding and competencies in conducting research. For these reasons, the
researcher is interested in conducting a study to develop a supervision model to improve the research
competencies of basic education teachers in Thailand, under the auspices of the Chonburi-Rayong
Secondary Educational Service Area Office. The study's findings will serve as a guideline for
educational supervision, with a focus on improving teachers' research competencies.
Objectives
1. To develop a supervision model to enhance the research competencies of basic education
teachers in the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary Educational Service Area Office.
2. To investigate the effects of utilizing the developed supervision model on the teachers’
research competencies.
Hypothesis
The samples’ research competencies level after the implementation of the researcher-developed
supervisory model was higher than the research competencies level before the implementation.
Research conceptual framework

The research conceptual framework in developing a supervision model to enhance research
competencies of basic education teachers in the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary Educational Service Area
Office was established based on various concepts, theories, and pieces of research papers related to the
principles of educational supervision and classroom action research as follows, 1) Clinical Supervisory
Model, which is a collaborative and supportive approach to teacher professional development that
fosters meaningful relationships with co - workers (Wiedmer, 1995), 2) the Concept of a Collaborative
Network, which held that networking is a collaborative working model in which the horizontal line
connects people in positions of power in order to overcome any pedagogical weaknesses (Hanson,
2003), 3) Martin's Supervisory Model, which held that cooperation leads to helping one another in order
to ensure that everyone benefits collectively (Martin, 1999), 4) the Theory of Developmental
Supervision, which stated that all teachers can develop to their full potential with the proper and
appropriate support, as well as the skill level of each (Glickman et al., 2004), and 5) the Interpersonal
[62]
Theory, which stated that human relations are motivational processes (David, 1997). The following is
the researcher's summary of the research conceptual framework:
Educational Supervision Related Theories The development of supervision model to enhance

1) Clinical Supervisory Model (Wiedmer, 1995) research competencies of basic education
2) The Concept of a Collaborative Network teachers in the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary
(Hanson, 2003) Educational Service Area Office
3) Martin's Supervisory Model (Martin, 1999)
4) Theory of Developmental Supervision
(Glickman et al., 2004)
5) The Interpersonal Theory (David, 1997)
The effects of using the developed supervision
model on the research competencies of teachers
Figure 1: Research Conceptual Framework
Methodology
The research was carried out using the Research and Development (R&D) design, which
consisted of four major stages: 1) the investigation and analysis of teachers' needs, 2) the development
of a supervision model and its quality evaluation, 3) the testing of teachers' research competencies, and
4) the examination of teachers' satisfaction with the developed supervision model. Each stage is
described in detail below.
Stage 1: the investigation and analysis of teachers' needs
The researcher examined concepts, theories, and research papers related to educational
supervision and classroom action research principles. The researcher then used an online questionnaire
via the Google Form system to investigate the problem conditions as well as the need to promote the
development of teachers' research competencies. The five-point questionnaire passed the Index of
Consistency check (IOC) by 5 experts in the supervision of education and classroom action research
with a consistency index ranging from 0.80 to 1.00. In the academic year of 2021, sixty-seven teachers
and educational personnel in Angsilapittayakom School under the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary
Educational Service Area Office were determined with the volunteer sampling method as the samples
of this research. Following the collection of data from the questionnaire, the researcher analyzed the
data using the frequency distribution, mean, and content analysis, and used it as the basis for planning
and developing a supervision model that can respond to the problems and needs of teachers in the
development of research competencies.
Stage 2: the development of a supervision model and its quality evaluation
The researcher synthesized and created a draft supervision model based on the analyzed data
of the problems and needs of teachers in the development of research competencies in the earlier stage.
It was presented to a group of nine experts and specialists, which included higher education instructors,
educational supervisors, and educational administrators. The appropriateness of the presented
supervision model was determined using a five-point questionnaire, followed by standardized criteria
proposed by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (JCSEE). The criteria
included four major topics to be considered: 1) accuracy, 2) propriety, 3) feasibility, and 4) utility
(Wongwanich, 2006). According to the expert and specialist evaluations analyzed with mean and
standard deviation, the supervision model synthesized and developed by the researcher was rated at the
highest level of appropriateness (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.39, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.64) and considered suitable for use. Furthermore,
some minor modifications were implemented to improve the overall quality of the supervision model
before trying it out.
[63]
Stage 3: the testing of teachers' research competencies

The One Group Pretest – Posttest Design was employed throughout this stage to investigate
and confirm the results of using the developed supervision model. Prior to implementing the researcher-
developed supervision model, forty items from the multiple-choice pretest were used to assess the
current state or level of the samples' research competencies. All pretest test items passed the Index of
Consistency check (IOC) performed by 5 experts in education and classroom action research, with a
consistency index ranging from 0.80 to 1.00. Following that, the research samples engaged with the
researcher-created supervision model. After completing the supervision model implementation, the
samples' research competencies were tested again using the same method as the pretest. The data from
the pretest and post-test were analyzed using mean, standard deviation, and paired-samples t-test to
determine whether the results of using the developed supervision model were statistically significantly
different or not.
Stage 4: the examination of teachers' satisfaction with the supervision model
The five-point satisfaction questionnaire, which passed the Index of Consistency check (IOC)
performed by 5 experts in education and classroom action research with a consistency index ranging
from 0.80 to 1.00, was used at the end of the researcher-developed supervision model to investigate the
samples' satisfaction with the implementation of the researcher-developed supervision model. There
were five aspects to be evaluated in the satisfaction questionnaire: 1) supervision principles and
objectives, 2) supervision content, 3) supervision process, 4) supervision tools, and 5) acquired
knowledge and experience. The data from the satisfaction questionnaire was analyzed using the mean
and standard deviation.
Results
The research findings were presented following the following research objectives:
1) The investigation and analysis of teachers' needs were conducted during the initial stage of
the process of developing a supervision model to enhance the research competencies of basic education
teachers in the Chonburi-Rayong Secondary Educational Service Area Office and revealed that 92.14
percent of the samples found difficulty in determining their research problems, 87.64 percent of them
appeared to be unable to design and develop their research instruments, When it came to selecting
statistics to be used for their research data analysis, 73.47 percent of them were perplexed, 70.92 percent
lacked abilities and understanding in writing their research reports, and 64.28 percent had difficulty
reviewing related pieces of literature and research.
The researcher synthesized and developed the “SAHARAT Supervisory Model” based on
data from problems and needs of teachers in the development of research competencies, as well as the
reviewed concepts, theories, and research papers related to educational supervision and classroom
action research principles. There were 7 cyclic steps in the implementation of the SAHARAT
Supervisory Model as follows,
Step 1: Strength Relationship (S) referred to establishing and maintaining a positive
supervisor-supervisee relationship that resulted in mutual trust and openness while supervising and
monitoring the supervisee's classrooms and research operations.
Step 2: Attainments of Research ( A) referred to the development of supervisees' research
competencies by upskilling what they already knew and reskilling what they needed to know about
conducting classroom action research on their own. E-learnings, seminars, and workshops, to name a
few, were organized as tools for developing the supervisee's research competencies. This was done to
ensure that supervisees had adequate research skills.
Step 3: Head-together Plan (H) referred to the process of meeting and brainstorming with
supervisors and supervisees to plan the overall research and classroom supervision implementation for
the entire curtain academic year. This was done to encourage both supervisors and supervisees to
participate and to ensure that they shared the same information.
[64]
Step 4: Audit of Classroom and Research (A) referred to classroom and research supervision
procedures, which are regarded as the heart of this researcher-developed supervisory model. According
to the supervision plan from the previous step, supervisees' classrooms and research operations were
supervised, followed up on, and evaluated at least twice during a semester in a specific academic year
by the schools' appointed supervisors.
Step 5: Reflection Conference (R) referred to the professional learning community (PLC) that
provides opportunities for both supervisors and supervisees to meet and review the overall results of
the classroom and research supervision procedures that were previously implemented. In this reflection
meeting, supervisees' concerns, problems, and questions were raised in order for supervisors to provide
assistance and suggestions to the supervisees. However, once the step of organizing the reflection
conference was completed, if the school’s supervisory committee required additional evidence or data
about the supervisees' classrooms and research operations, steps 4 and 5 could be reimplemented as
many times as needed since they were loopable steps.
Step 6: Award and Reinforcement ( A) referred to the final evaluation process of each
supervisee's full-text classroom action research that was submitted to the school's supervisory
committee. All full-text classroom action research pieces from supervisees that met the target criteria
for evaluating classroom action research would be awarded to encourage supervisees to learn from one
another and improve their classroom action research further.
Step 7: Trumpet the Best Practices (T) referred to the process of publicizing the best
practices, or the top 5 of all supervisees' classroom action research pieces that received the highest
scores, via various platforms and academic databases, such as the school's knowledge management
system and qualified academic journals.
The SAHARAT Supervisory Model is depicted graphically below.
Audit of Classroom and

Research
S A H A R A T
Strength Attainments of Head-together Plan Award and Trumpet the Best
Relationship Research Reinforcement Practices
Reflection
Conference
Figure 2: the SAHARAT Supervisory Model
In order to assess its appropriateness, the SAHARAT Supervisory Model was presented to a
group of nine experts and specialists, which included higher education instructors, educational
supervisors, and educational administrators. The supervision model synthesized and developed by the
researcher received the highest level of appropriateness (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.39, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.64) and was considered
suitable for use, according to expert and specialist evaluations. According to Table 1, the feasibility of
the synthesized supervision model received the highest scores (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.56, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.73), while the
propriety of the supervision model received the lowest scores (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.11, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.60).
[65]
Table 1 the outcome of the SAHARAT Supervisory Model's appropriateness evaluation.

Aspects of Appropriateness Evaluation 𝑥𝑥̅ 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. Interpretation
1. The accuracy of the supervision model 4.44 0.53 The highest level
2. The propriety of the supervision model 4.11 0.60 The high level
3. The feasibility of the supervision model 4.56 0.73 The highest level
4. The utility of the supervision model 4.44 0.73 The highest level
The overall appropriateness 4.39 0.64 The highest level
2. The effects of using the developed supervision model on teachers' research competencies
were determined by first testing teachers' research competencies and then assessing teachers'
satisfaction with the supervision model. To begin, forty items from the multiple-choice pretest were
used to assess and compare the level of research competencies of the samples before and after the 7-
step SAHARAT Supervisory Model implementation.
With regard to the comparison of the samples’ research competencies level before and after
SAHARAT Supervisory Model implementation, Table 2 illustrated that the samples’ research
competencies level after the implementation of SAHARAT Supervisory Model ( 𝑥𝑥̅ = 2 6 . 2 5 , 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. =
5.85) was higher than the research competencies level before the implementation ( 𝑥𝑥̅ = 1 8 . 2 8 , 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. =
5.24) at a .01 level of statistical significance. Therefore, the research's hypothesis was confirmed.
Table 2 the comparison of the samples’ research competencies levels before and after SAHARAT
Supervisory Model implementation
Research Competencies Level n 𝑥𝑥̅ 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. t sig.
Before the implementation of SAHARAT Supervisory
67 18.28 5.24
Model
11.59* .000
After the implementation of SAHARAT Supervisory
67 26.25 5.85
Model
*Statistical significance at a .01 level.
At the end of the SAHARAT Supervisory Model implementation, a five-point satisfaction

questionnaire was used to investigate the samples' satisfaction with the researcher-synthesized
supervision model. The overview samples' satisfaction with the SAHARAT Supervisory Model was
shown in Table 3.
Table 3 the overview samples' satisfaction with the SAHARAT Supervisory Model
Aspects of Satisfaction Evaluation 𝑥𝑥̅ 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. Interpretation
1. Supervision principles and objectives 4.08 0.58 The highest level
2. Supervision content 3.91 0.55 The high level
3. Supervision process 3.99 0.76 The high level
4. Supervision tools 4.18 0.59 The highest level
5. Acquired knowledge and experience 4.26 0.67 The highest level
Overall samples' satisfaction 4.05 0.95 The highest level
Table 3 showed that overall sample satisfaction with the researcher-synthesized supervision
model was at the highest level ( 𝑥𝑥̅ = 4 . 0 5 , 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.95). When each component of the samples'
satisfaction was considered, the aspect of acquired knowledge and experience was at the highest ( 𝑥𝑥̅ =
4.26, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.67), followed by supervision tools (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.18, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.59), supervision principles and
[66]
objectives (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.08, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.58), and supervision process (𝑥𝑥̅ = 3.99, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.76). The content of
supervision was at the lowest level (𝑥𝑥̅ = 3.91, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.55).
Discussions
According to the research findings, the discussions were presented in accordance with the
following research objectives below:
1) The researcher-developed supervision model, named SAHARAT Supervisory Model, was
synthesized from the application of various concepts and theories as follows, 1) Clinical Supervisory
Model (Wiedmer, 1995), 2) The Concept of a Collaborative Network (Hanson, 2003), 3) Martin's
Supervisory Model (Martin, 1999), 4) Theory of Developmental Supervision (Glickman et al., 2004),
and 5) The Interpersonal Theory (David, 1997). These made the developed supervision model
systematic and well organized. There were processes and activities in place to assist, suggest, promote,
and improve teachers' research competencies. The goal was to improve teaching quality by utilizing
classroom action research as a tool. Supervisees would be advised on their development by their
supervisors, who would also advise supervisees with little experience or who were just starting out on
how to develop and promote their classroom research competencies. This was related to Chonburapun
(2017), who stated that the use of various theories and methods could make educational supervision
more effective because the emphasis of educational supervision was placed on the use of a variety of
techniques that were appropriate to the problems and needs of the supervisees, such as the
implementation of the planning, follow-up, evaluation of the teacher's development, and applying the
results of supervision to monitor and elicit feedback.
When it came to the appropriateness evaluation of the developed supervision model, the
SAHARAT Supervisory Model, which was an educational supervision model to enhance teachers’
research competencies, included 7 cyclic steps in the implementation as follows, 1) Strength
Relationship, 2) Attainments of Research, 3) Head-together Plan, 4) Audit of Classroom and Research,
5) Reflection Conference, 6) Award and Reinforcement, and 7) Trumpet the Best Practices. The
supervision model synthesized and developed by the researcher received the highest level of
appropriateness (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.39, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.64) and was considered suitable for use, according to expert and
specialist evaluations. This was due to the wide-ranged review of educational supervision documents
and research that can be synthesized into integrated supervision in all aspects, as a result of which the
SAHARAT Supervisory Model was the form of supervision Integration of procedures that were clear,
appropriate, and efficient. This was in line with Yankomut et al. (2015), who had organized the
supervision process appropriately as a result of the model's systematic implementation with concepts,
theories, and principles as a framework for model development. The supervision model was recognized
and qualified as effective by experts, and it was consistent with the pertinent concepts, theories, and
data. According to Vasana's (2021) research, an integrated supervision model was developed to promote
competence in the active learning management of teachers at the basic education levels. The supervision
model developed consisted of five components: principles, objectives, content, supervision activities,
and measurement and evaluation. The following were the three steps of supervision activities: Step 1:
Strategic Planning step 2: Supervision Process, and step 3: Knowledge Development. The
appropriateness evaluation of the integrated supervision model to promote competency in active
learning management and the manual on the use of the integrated supervision model were found to be
highly appropriate in all aspects of the assessment.
2) According to the effects of using the developed supervision model on teachers' research
competencies, the samples’ research competencies level after the implementation of SAHARAT
Supervisory Model (𝑥𝑥̅ = 26.25, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 5.85) was higher than the research competencies level before
the implementation ( 𝑥𝑥̅ = 1 8 . 2 8 , 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 5.24) at a . 01 level of statistical significance. Therefore, the
research's hypothesis was confirmed. This was consistent with Satjapiboon's (2 0 1 7 ) assertion that
supervision could be enhanced by allowing supervisors to supervise both face-to-face in the classroom
[67]
and through the concept of blended learning, and assist supervisors in performing supervision in a more
convenient and timely manner because there were various consulting channels Including the ability to
make suggestions for teachers and educational personnel's self-improvement. This was also related to
Glickman et al. (1995), whose developmental supervision aimed to develop teachers' potential directly
from low self-improvement levels to higher self-improvement abilities. As a result, the overall
educational supervision operations would be more efficient.
Considering the overview samples' satisfaction with the SAHARAT Supervisory Model, the
overall sample satisfaction with the researcher-synthesized supervision model was at the highest level
(𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.05, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.95). When each component of the samples' satisfaction was considered, the aspect
of acquired knowledge and experience was at the highest ( 𝑥𝑥̅ = 4 . 2 6 , 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.67), followed by
supervision tools (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.18, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.59), supervision principles and objectives (𝑥𝑥̅ = 4.08, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.58),
and supervision process (𝑥𝑥̅ = 3.99, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.76). The content of supervision was at the lowest level (𝑥𝑥̅
= 3.91, 𝑆𝑆. 𝐷𝐷. = 0.55). This could be attributed to the use of a diverse set of techniques and methods in
the form of integrated educational supervision, which was provided by credible academics who were
appropriate for and consistent with the supervision content and activities. It was fascinating supervision
that could be put to use in practice. Satisfaction with the supervision model, according to Kobkum
(2017), could be due to the synthesis of various scholars' ideas with reliability in every element being
appropriate. Furthermore, the supervision process was ongoing and interconnected, and there was a
willingness to participate in it. According to Vasana's (2021) research, which studied and developed an
integrated supervision model to promote competence in the active learning management of teachers at
the basic education levels, teachers were most satisfied with the integrated supervision model.
Recommendations
1. Applying finding recommendation: One of the key findings was the success of this model's
trial. It was the educational establishment's readiness, as well as the voluntary need of the teachers
receiving supervision. This allowed the supervision to proceed smoothly and continuously until the task
was completed. As a result, in order to achieve clear and concrete supervision results, it was necessary
to study the conditions, needs, and availability of educational institutions, including budgets, materials,
equipment, and media, as well as the cooperation of all personnel in driving continuous and serious
supervision.
2. Further research recommendation: This was due to the fact that teachers' contexts for
teaching and learning differed depending on their field of study or subjects. As a result, research should
be conducted to develop a supervision model that promotes and develops research competency for
individual teachers or small groups of teachers in the field of study or subjects in similar contexts.
[68]
References
Chetha, T. ( 2021) . Teacher Problems: a Problem that Awaits Reform. Bangkok: Publishing House of
Secretariat of the House of Representatives.
Chonburapun, P. (2017). A model of instructional supervision for enhancing ability in developing the
thinking skills of the students in the basic education level. Bangkok: Dhurakij Pundit University.
David, K. (1997). Human behavior at work: Organization behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Glickman, C. D., Gordon, S. P., & Ross-Gordon, J. M. (1995). Supervision and instructional
leadership: A development approach. Massachusetts: Allyn and Bacon.
Glickman, C. D., Stephen, P. G., & Jovita, M. R. (2005). The basic guide to supervision and instruction
leadership. United States of America: Pearson Education.
Glickman, C.D., Stephen, P., G, & Jovita, M. R.S. (2007). Supervision and instruction leadership: A
developmental approach. (7th ed.), London: Pearson.
Hanson, E. M. (2003). Education administration and organizational behavior. (5th ed.), Boston:
Pearson Education.
Kobkum, A. (2017). A purposed advisory model for activity conduction and evaluation of analytical
thinking in reading and writing of teachers in expanding educational opportunity schools in the
upper northern area. Ganesha Journal, 13(2), 163-178.
Martin, E. (1999). Changing academic work, developing the learning university. Buckingham: The
Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University.
Office of the Education Council (2020). Thailand's Teacher Production and Development: A Research
Report. Bangkok: Ministry of Education.
Satjapiboon, S. (2017). The development of a teacher professional experience supervision model to
enhance instructional competency for the pre-service teacher. Journal of Education Research
Faculty of Education, Srinakharinwirot University, 11(2), 269-279.
Thanikarn, S. (2017). Factors Affecting of Teacher Core Competency of Thai Teacher Cluster United
Chonburi Primary Educational Service Area Office 1. Chonburi: Burapha University.
Vasana, B. (2021). The development of an integrated supervision model to enhance the active learning
competency of teachers of basic education. Journal of Education Naresuan University, 23(2),
269-280.
Waranyaporn, C. (2021). The new and efficient monitoring and evaluation model development for
policy implementation of the Office of the Basic Education Commission. Bangkok: Office of the
Basic Education Commission.
Wiedmer, T. L. (1995). Instructional improvement: the goal of clinical supervision, The Teacher
Educator, 30(3), 6-18.
Wongwanich, S. (2006). Meta-evaluation: Methodology and application. Bangkok: Chulalongkorn
University Printing.
Yankomut, N., Pranee, C., & Panawong S. (2015). Internal supervision model development based on
lesson study approach for private schools. Journal of Graduate Studies in Northern Rajabhat
University, 5(9), 25-40.
[69]
[70]

07saharat Laksanasut

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

07saharat Laksanasut

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

07saharat Laksanasut

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Sociologies and Anthropologies Science Reviews (IJSASR), 2 (2)

: March-April 2022, page 61-70. ISSN: 2774-0366

The Development of Supervision Model to Enhance Research Competencies of Basic Education

Research conceptual framework

Educational Supervision Related Theories The development of supervision model to enhance

Figure 1: Research Conceptual Framework

Stage 3: the testing of teachers' research competencies

The SAHARAT Supervisory Model is depicted graphically below.

Audit of Classroom and

Figure 2: the SAHARAT Supervisory Model

Table 1 the outcome of the SAHARAT Supervisory Model's appropriateness evaluation.

At the end of the SAHARAT Supervisory Model implementation, a five-point satisfaction

You might also like