The Essential Needs for School Administration Model Under the Office of the Basic Education Commission According to the King’s Philosophy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aimed to: 1) investigate the components and indicators of school administration under the Office of the Basic Education Commission of Thailand according to the King’s Philosophy; 2) examine the current state, desired state, and the needs of school administration under the Office of the Basic Education Commission of Thailand according to the King’s Philosophy. The research is divided into 2 phrases. Phase 1: examine the components and indicators of the school administration under the Office of the Basic Education Commission of Thailand according to the King’s Philosophy, targeting a qualified group of 9 experts selected through purposive sampling. This selection is based on the appropriateness assessment using the components and indicators evaluation form. Phase 2: examine the current state, desired state, and the needs of school administration under the Office of the Basic Education Commission of Thailand according to the King’s Philosophy. The sample group comprises 320 school administrators selected through multi-stage random sampling and applying the table of Krejcie and Morgan. The data were collected through semi- structured interview form and questionnaire with a 5-level Likert scale. Average, standard deviation, Priority Needs Index (PNImodified) and content analysis were used to analyze the data. The findings of the study revealed the following: 1. There are 4 components and 30 indicators of school administration under the Office of the Basic Education Commission of Thailand according to the King’s Philosophy categorized as follows: 1) academic administration with 10 indicators, 2) financial administration with 5 indicators, 3) personnel administration with 4 indicators, and 4) general administration with 11 indicators. Overall, the proficiency level is rated as the highest. 2. The current state is rated as the moderate level, and the desired state is at the highest level. When assessing the needs of school administration under the Office of the Basic Education Commission of Thailand according to the King’s Philosophy, it is found that the component with the highest need is general administration. This is followed by personnel administration, financial administration, and academic administration, with the lowest index of essential needs respectively.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".