MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415453614 · doi:10.5539/jel.v14n6p470

Design Thinking as a Crucial Needs Assessment for Developing Innovative Design Competency in Pre-Service Teachers’ Learning Management in Thailand

2025· article· W4415453614 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldPsychology
TopicCompetency Development and Evaluation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLikert scaleNeeds analysisNeeds assessmentStratified samplingResearch designData collectionMultimethodologyVariance (accounting)Index (typography)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the needs assessment of design thinking to enhance innovative design competency in pre-service teachers’ learning management in Thailand. The research aimed to assess teaching performance and identify key areas for developing innovative design competency. A total of 346 pre-service teachers from universities across four regions of Thailand were selected using stratified random sampling and 20 key informants were purposively selected for in-depth interviews, comprising five primary school teachers, five secondary school teachers, five administrators, and five supervisors. Data collection involved questionnaires and in-depth interviews. The research instruments include a questionnaire about pre-service teachers’ opinions, a five-point Likert scale, and a structured interview form. Quantitative analysis included percentage, mean (M), standard deviation (S.D.), Priority Needs Index Modified (PNImodified), and multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA). Qualitative data focused on teaching performance issues in three areas: the learning innovation context, knowledge of learning innovations, and competencies in learning innovations. The findings showed that the teaching performance issues were significant (M = 3.52, S.D. = 0.41), and the need for developing innovative design competency was high (M = 4.66, S.D. = 0.29). Differences in the needs assessment among participants were minimal. The overall priority needs assessment index (PNImodified = 0.38) highlighted the urgent need to enhance innovative design competency in pre-service teachers’ learning management in Thailand. Respondents anticipate significant improvements, prioritizing the practical application of learning innovations. This necessitates training programs emphasizing practical implementation over theoretical knowledge. Priority Needs Index (PNImodified) values support a structured intervention focused on developing practical skills.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.397
Teacher spread0.343 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it