Guidelines for Student Affairs Administration for Building the Resilience of Secondary Students under the Secondary Educational Service Area Office Chonburi Rayong GUIDELINES FOR STUDENT AFFAIRS ADMINISTRATION FOR BUILDING THE RESILIENCE OF SECONDARY STUDENTS UNDER THE SECONDARY EDUCATIONAL SERVICE AREA OFFICE CHONBURI RAYONG

Abstract

This research aims to study, develop, and evaluate guidelines for student affairs administration for building the resilience of secondary students. The main informants for this study were selected purposefully, following specific inclusion criteria, resulting in six participants. These included two school administrators, two student affairs supervisors from schools under the secondary educational service area office Chonburi Rayong, and two school psychologists. The assessment group comprised a population of 51 schools, totaling 102 participants, which included 51 school administrators and 51 student affairs supervisors. The research tools included semi-structured interviews and assessment guidelines: data analysis involved calculating frequency, percentage, arithmetic mean, standard deviation, and content comparison analysis. A comparison table was created to identify relationships within the data.

            The research revealed that guidelines for student affairs administration for building the resilience of secondary students comprised three main components: 1) Principles and Reasons, 2) Objectives, and 3) Operational Guidelines. These components encompass six missions: 1) Student Affairs Planning, 2) Student Affairs Administration, 3) Promoting and Developing Students' Discipline, Morality, and Ethics, 4) Implementing the Student Care and Support System, 5) Promoting Democracy in Schools, and 6) Evaluating Student Affairs Performance. When the target population evaluated the guidelines, the overall assessment was at the highest level (μ = 4.54, σ = 0.57). A closer examination of each aspect indicated that propriety was rated at the highest level (μ = 4.56, σ = 0.58), utility also received the highest level (μ = 4.56, σ = 0.57), and feasibility was similarly rated at the highest level (μ = 4.5, σ = 0.57).