Development of Education Administration Model Towards Excellence in the 21st Century for Thailand’s Primary Schools
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research aimed to study the components and indicators and develop, try out, and evaluate the education administration model towards excellence in the 21st century for Thailand’s primary schools. The research was divided into 4 phases: 1) study of components and indicators using the content synthesis method and in-depth interviews with nine school administrators in the best practice schools using semi-structured interviews. In addition, a focus group of 13 experts was organized: 2) develop a draft model from the components and indicators obtained from Phase 1 and collect feedback on the draft model from 9 experts using the connoisseurship technique, 3) try out the model in one volunteer primary school for three months, and 4) evaluate the model’s accuracy, suitability, feasibility, and usefulness by five experts. The results showed that the education administration model towards excellence in the 21st century for Thailand’s primary schools consisted of six components and twenty-seven indicators: 1) leadership of school administrators in the VUCA world (five indicators), 2) academic management towards excellence (five indicators), 3) strategic planning for empowerment in the 21st century (four indicators), 4) human resource management in the digital age (five indicators), 5) organizational management of change (four indicators), and 6) focusing on students, stakeholders, and building relationships in the digital world (four indicators).
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 | 0.000 | 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".