Active learning management for Gen Z learners
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This article presents guidelines for school administration aimed at promoting active learning among Generation Z learners who have grown up in the digital era. The framework for managing schools to foster active learning consists of the following components: 1) Curriculum management that emphasizes active learning, 2) Teacher development to enhance competencies in active learning management, 3) Resource management that supports active learning implementation, 4) The use of technology and digital platforms in managing learning processes, and 5) Active-oriented assessment and evaluation. These components establish five key strategies for school administration to promote active learning: 1) Defining policies and visions that support active learning, 2) Building an organizational culture that encourages active learning, 3) Designing assessment and evaluation systems aligned with active learning approaches, 4) Encouraging community and network participation in supporting active learning, and 5) Developing technological infrastructure to facilitate active learning management.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
1. Any views and comments in the Journal of Social Innovation and Lifelong Learning are the authors’ views. The editorial staff have not to agree with those views and it is not considered as the editorial’s responsibility.
2. The responsibility of content and draft check of each article belongs to each author. In case, there is any lawsuit about copyright infringement. It is considered as the authors’ sole responsibility.
3. The article copyright belonging to the authors and The Far Eastern University are copyrighted legally. Republication must be received direct permission from the authors and The Far Eastern University in written form.
References
ทิศนา แขมมณี. (2557). ศาสตร์การสอน (พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 18). กรุงเทพฯ: จุฬาลงกรณ์มหาวิทยาลัย.
พระราชบัญญัติการศึกษาแห่งชาติ (ฉบับที่ 4) พ.ศ. 2562. (2562, 1 พฤษภาคม). ราชกิจจานุเบกษา. เล่ม 136 ตอนที่ 57 ก. หน้า 49-53.
เรวัติ อยู่สุข. (2567). ถอดรหัส Gen Z ทำความเข้าใจและปรับตัวเพื่อการสื่อสารที่มี https://gened.kmutt.ac.th/generationgap_genz/?utm_source=chatgpt.com
วิจารณ์ พานิช. (2561). อาชีพน่าสนใจใจศตวรรษที่ 21. นิตยสารพัฒนาความรู้และความคิดสร้างสรรค์เพื่อเพิ่มศักยภาพทุนมนุษย์ผ่านกระบวนการเรียนรู้สาธารณะ, 2(11), 14-15. https://www.okmd.or.th/upload/pdf/magazine/The_Knowledge_vol_11.pdf
สถาบันส่งเสริมการสอนวิทยาศาสตร์และเทคโนโลยี. (2563). การให้ความช่วยเหลือและสนับสนุนของครูส่งผลต่อผลการประเมินด้านการอ่านของนักเรียนอย่างไร – PISA Thailand. https://pisathailand.ipst.ac.th/issue-2020-57/
สำนักงานเลขาธิการสภาการศึกษา กระทรวงศึกษาธิการ. (2560). แผนการศึกษาแห่งชาติ พ.ศ. 2560- 2579. กรุงเทพฯ: พริกหวาน กราฟฟิก.
สิริลักษณ์ สุขสวัสดิ์. (2562). The Lost Generation: เด็ก Gen Z กับช่องโหว่ทางการศึกษาไทย. https://urbancreature.co/the-lost-generation/
Andrade, H., & Brookhart, S. M. (2019). Classroom assessment as a reciprocal process. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 38(4), 16–25.
Andrade, H., & Heritage, M. (2018). Using formative assessment to enhance learning, achievement, and academic self-regulation (pp. 80–120). Routledge.
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory (pp. 94–104). Prentice Hall.
Barrett, P., Davies, F., Zhang, Y., & Barrett, L. (2015). The impact of classroom design on pupils' learning: Final results of a holistic, multi-level analysis. Building and Environment, 89, 118–133. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.013
Beichner, R. J., Dori, Y. J., & Belcher, J. W. (2006). New physics teaching and assessment: Laboratory- and technology-enhanced active learning. In J. J. Mintzes & W. H. Leonard (Eds.), Handbook of college science teaching: Theory, research and practice (pp. 97–106). NSTA Press.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (2018). Classroom assessment and pedagogy. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 25(6), 551–575. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969594X.2018.1441807
Bonk, C. J., & Graham, C. R. (2006). The handbook of blended learning (pp. 3–21). Pfeiffer Publishing.
Cheryan, S., Ziegler, S. A., Plaut, V. C., & Meltzoff, A. N. (2017). Designing classrooms to maximize student achievement. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 4(1), 4–12. https://doi.org/10.1177/2372732214548677
Christiansen, B., & Even, A. M. (Eds.). (2024). Prioritizing skills development for student employability (pp. 28–57). IGI Global.
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020). Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development. Applied Developmental Science, 24(2), 97–140.
Deterding, S., Dixon, D., Khaled, R., & Nacke, L. (2011). Gamification: Using game-design elements in non-gaming contexts. In CHI '11 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 2425–2428). ACM.
Dillenbourg, P. (2013). Design for classroom orchestration. Computers & Education, 69, 485–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.04.013
Doung-In, S. (2017). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. Walailak Journal of Learning Innovations, 3(2), 71–78.
Drake, S. M., & Reid, J. L. (2018). Integrated curriculum as an effective way to teach 21st-century capabilities. Asia Pacific Journal of Educational Research, 1(1), 31–50. https://doi.org/10.30777/APJER.2018.1.1.03
DuFour, R., & Fullan, M. (2013). Cultures built to last: Systemic PLCs at work™ (pp. 1–60). Solution Tree Press.
DuFour, R., & Reeves, D. (2016). The futility of PLC lite. Phi Delta Kappan, 97(6), 69–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/0031721716636878
Epstein, J. L. (2002). School, family, and community partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Adolescence, 37, 435.
Falk, J. H., & Dierking, L. D. (2019). Reimagining public science education: The role of lifelong free-choice learning. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research, 1(1), 10. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43031-019-0013-x
Furco, A., & Billig, S. H. (2002). Service-learning: The essence of the pedagogy (pp. 53–146). Information Age Publishing.
Glickman, N. S., & Hall, W. C. (2018). Language deprivation and deaf mental health (pp. 52–68). Routledge.
Greenhow, C., Robelia, B., & Hughes, J. E. (2009). Learning, teaching, and scholarship in a digital age: Web 2.0 and classroom research: What path should we take now? Educational Researcher, 38(4), 246–259.
Guskey, T. R., Townsley, M., & Buckmiller, T. M. (2020). The impact of standards-based learning: Tracking high school students’ transition to the university. NASSP Bulletin, 104(4), 257–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/0192636520975862
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (2009). An educational psychology success story: Social interdependence theory and cooperative learning. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 365–379. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09339057
Khlaisang, J., Huang, F., Koraneekij, P., & Teo, T. (2023). Using mobile technologies to teach 21st-century learning skills: A study of teachers' acceptance in Thai secondary schools. International Journal of Mobile Learning and Organisation, 17(1–2), 254–279. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMLO.2023.128343
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (pp. 1–23). Prentice Hall.
Li, R., Srikhao, S., & Jantharajit, N. (2024). An experimental study on the impact of collaborative and active learning instructional methods to improve learning achievement and self-motivation. Latin American Journal of Development, 6(3), 145–160.
Mertler, C. A. (2019). The Wiley handbook of action research in education (pp. 7–24). John Wiley & Sons.
Michaelsen, L. K. (2004). Getting started with team-based learning. In Team-based learning (pp. 27–50). Routledge.
Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2016). Handbook of technological pedagogical content knowledge (TPACK) for educators (pp. 189–200). Routledge.
OECD. (2019). Education at a glance 2019: OECD indicators (pp. 2–6). OECD Publishing.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2007). Critical thinking: The art of Socratic questioning. Journal of Developmental Education, 31(1), 36–37. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ832681.pdf
Piaget, J. (1972). Development and learning. In C. S. Lavattelly & F. Stendler (Eds.), Reading in child behavior and development (pp. 38–46). Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
Picciano, A. G. (2018). Online education: Foundations, planning, and pedagogy (pp. 20–32). Routledge.
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
Resta, P., & Laferrière, T. (2015). Digital equity and intercultural education. Education and Information Technologies, 20, 743–756.
Robinson, V. (2011). Student-centered leadership (pp. 1–50). Jossey-Bass.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1020
Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. International Journal of Instructional Technology and Distance Learning, 2(1), 3–10. http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Jan_05/article01.htm
Slavin, R. E. (1995). Cooperative learning: Theory, research, and practice (pp. 179–194). Allyn & Bacon.
Wiggins, G., & McTighe, J. (2011). The understanding by design guide to creating high-quality units (pp. 60–88). ASCD.
Wiles, A. M., & Simmons, K. (2022). Establishment of an engaged and active learning space (Discord-enhanced). Medical Education Online, 27(1), 9053070. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2022.9053070
Zhang, Y., Adams, D., & Cheah, K. S. L. (2023). Technology leadership for schools in the twenty-first century. In D. Adams (Ed.), Educational leadership (pp. 185–202). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-8494-7_10
