The Development of a DTULE Learning Management Model Integrating Design Thinking within a Ubiquitous Learning Environment to Enhance High School Students’ Creative Problem-Solving Abilities
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
This study was a four-stage research and development (R&D) project with the objectives to: (1) investigate the problems and needs; (2) develop the DTULE learning management model; (3) pilot and evaluate the model’s effectiveness; and (4) assess the quality of the DTULE learning management model. The sample comprised 35 students from Grade 11, section 16 (Mathayom 5/16) at Sarakham pitthayakhom School. Research instruments included the DTULE learning management model, a questionnaire on problems and needs, an expert evaluation form, a test measuring creative problemsolving ability, and a satisfaction questionnaire. A onegroup pretest–posttest quasiexperimental design was used. Data were analyzed using the mean (x̄), standard deviation (S.D.), and ttest for dependent samples.
Results showed that:
(1) the main problem was lecturecentered instruction with insufficient handson practice, which led to students’ lack of skills and indicated a need for a practiceoriented model that integrates technology;
(2) the developed DTULE learning management model consists of five steps: D: Discover & Define, T: Think & Transform, U: Unite & Understand, L: Learn & Link, and E: Experiment & Evaluate, and experts rated its appropriateness at the highest level;
(3) students’ creative problemsolving scores after instruction were significantly higher than before instruction at the .05 level, and students’ satisfaction with the model was at the highest level; and
(4) the DTULE learning management model demonstrated high quality and potential to promote the skills required of 21stcentury learners.In conclusion, the DTULE learning management model can effectively develop creative problemsolving abilities in upper secondary students and is suitable for learning in the digital era. However, the study has limitations, such as the sample being restricted to a single context, which may affect the generalizability of the findings to different student populations.
Downloads
Article Details
References
กรวิชญ์ โสภา. (2566). การพัฒนาชุดกิจกรรมกระบวนการคิดเชิงออกแบบ (DESIGN THINKING) เพื่อพัฒนาความสามารถด้านการออกแบบเชิงวิศวกรรม. วารสารมหาวิทยาลัยบูรพา, 28(4), 1-17. https://journal.lib.buu.ac.th/index.php/education2/article/view/8534
กระทรวงศึกษาธิการ. (2560). แผนการศึกษาแห่งชาติ พ.ศ. 2560-2579. พริกหวานกราฟฟิก.
จามจุรี ภูมิ. (2564). ผลการจัดการเรียนรู้แบบสร้างสรรค์เป็นฐานที่มีต่อผลสัมฤทธิ์ทางการเรียนและความสามารถในการแก้ปัญหาทางวิทยาศาสตร์เรื่องแรงและการเคลื่อนที่ ของนักเรียนชั้นมัธยมศึกษาปีที่ 2 โรงเรียนในสังกัดสำนักงานเขตพื้นที่การศึกษามัธยมศึกษาสิงห์บุรี อ่างทอง. [วิทยานิพนธ์ปริญญามหาบัณฑิต, มหาวิทยาลัยสุโขทัยธรรมาธิราช]. https://ir.stou.ac.th/bitstream/123456789/11507/1/FULLTEXT.pdf
ชลิตา มิ่งขวัญ. (2563). การพัฒนากิจกรรมการเรียนรู้จากการปฏิบัติการในชั้นเรียน เพื่อส่งเสริมความสามารถในการออกแบบเว็บสำหรับการฝึกอบรมออนไลน์ของนักศึกษาปริญญาตรี คณะศึกษาศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยศิลปากร [วิทยานิพนธ์ปริญญามหาบัณฑิต, มหาวิทยาลัยศิลปากร]. http://ithesis-ir.su.ac.th/dspace/bitstream/123456789/3263/1/59257301.pdf
ณัฐที ปิ่นทอง, และทิพย์วิมล วังแก้วหิรัญ. (2567). การพัฒนาระบบสนับสนุนการจัดการความรู้ออนไลน์เพื่อเสริมสร้างทักษะการเรียนรู้ในยุคดิจิทัลสู่ชีวิตวิถีถัดไป. วารสารวิชาการอุตสาหกรรมศึกษา, 18(2), 66–86. https://ejournals.swu.ac.th/index.php/jindedu/article/view/16322
สำนักงานคณะกรรมการการศึกษาขั้นพื้นฐาน. (2566). รายงานผลการประเมินคุณภาพผู้เรียนระดับชาติ (National Test: NT) ปีการศึกษา 2565. กระทรวงศึกษาธิการ.
สุภาพร บัวผัด. (2562). การใช้วิธีคิดเชิงออกแบบ (Design Thinking) เพื่อพัฒนาระบบการโค้ชนิสิตในการทำกิจกรรม: กรณีศึกษา การสร้างทีมนิสิตทุนให้มีทักษะการเป็นผู้ประกอบการ (Entrepreneurship). มหาวิทยาลัยพะเยา. https://dsa.up.ac.th/public/file_upload/news/ATTACHED_FILE/1661730223.pdf
วิวัฒน์ มีสุวรรณ์. (2567). วิจัยทางเทคโนโลยีการศึกษา (พิมพ์ครั้งที่ 3). สำนักพิมพ์มหาวิทยาลัยนเรศวร.
Binkley, M., Erstad, O., Herman, J., Raizen, S., Ripley, M., Miller-Ricci, M., & Rumble, M. (2012). Defining Twenty-First Century Skills. In P. Griffin, B. McGaw, & E. Care (Eds.), Assessment and Teaching of 21st Century Skills (pp. 17–66). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-2324-5_2
Bloom, B. S. (1968). Learning for mastery. Evaluation Comment, 1(2), 1–12. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED053419
Borg, W. R., & Gall, M. D. (1996). Educational research: An introduction (6th ed.). Longman.
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2018). Research methods in education (8th ed.). Routledge.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Guetterman, T. C. (2019). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (6th ed.). Pearson.
Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297–334. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02310555
Crompton, H., & Burke, D. (2018). The use of mobile learning in higher education: A systematic review. Computers & Education, 123, 53–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.04.007
Design Council. (2005). The double diamond design process model. https://www.designcouncil.org.uk/our-resources/the-double-diamond/
El-Sofany, H. F., & El-Seoud, S. A. (2022). Implementing effective learning with ubiquitous learning technology during coronavirus pandemic. Computer Systems Science & Engineering, 40(1), 381–392. https://doi.org/10.32604/csse.2022.018619
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2019). How to design and evaluate research in education (10th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2019). Multivariate data analysis (8th ed.). Cengage Learning.
Hanlin, K. (2025). Research on ubiquitous learning environments from an ecological perspective. Lifelong Education, 14(2), 44–51. https://ojs.piscomed.com/index.php/LE/article/view/5399
Huang, Y. M., Silitonga, L. M., & Wu, T. T. (2022). Applying a business simulation game in a flipped classroom to enhance engagement, learning achievement, and higher-order thinking skills. Computers & Education, 183, Article 104494. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104494
Hunde, A. B., Abate, M. T., & Wedajo, A. L. (2025). Lesson study as a tool for improving teachers’ transformative assessment practices. SAGE Open, 15(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440251333483
IDEO. (2014). Design thinking for educators toolkit (2nd ed.). https://f.hubspotusercontent30.net/hubfs/6474038/Design%20for%20Learning/IDEO_DTEdu_v2_toolkit+workbook.pdf
Järvelä, S., Malmberg, J., & Koivuniemi, M. (2021). Recognizing socially shared regulation by using the temporal sequences of online chat and logs in CSCL. Learning and Instruction, 72, 101344.
Johnson, D. W., & Johnson, R. T. (1999). Learning together and alone: Cooperative, competitive, and individualistic learning (5th ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivational design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach. Springer.
Kirkpatrick, D., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2016). Evaluating training programs: The four levels (3rd ed.). Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.
Kukulska-Hulme, A., Bossu, C., Coughlan, T., Ferguson, R., FitzGerald, E., Gaved, M., Herodotou, C., Rienties, B., Sargent, J., Scanlon, E., Tang, J., Wang, Q., Whitelock, D., & Zhang, S. (2022). Innovating pedagogy 2022: Open University Innovation Report 10. The Open University.
Lewin, K. (1946). Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues, 2(4), 34–46. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1946.tb02295.x
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE Publications.
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Osborn, A. F. (1953). Applied imagination: Principles and procedures of creative problem-solving. Charles Scribner’s Sons.
Park, Y. (2011). A pedagogical framework for mobile learning: Categorizing educational applications of mobile technologies into four types. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 12(2), 78–102. https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v12i2.791
Phuangphae, P. (2017). Creativity-based learning in social studies. Veridian E-Journal, Silpakorn University, 10(5), 365–374. https://he02.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/Veridian-E-Journal/article/view/109701
Radzi, S., Tan, J. S., Rajalingam, P., Cleland, J., & Mogali, S. R. (2025). Developing and testing a framework for learning online collaborative creativity in medical education: Cross-sectional study. JMIR Medical Education, 9, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.2196/50912
Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What is design thinking and why is it important?. Review of Educational Research, 82(3), 330–348. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Sharples, M., Taylor, J., & Vavoula, G. (2007). A theory of learning for the mobile age. In R. Andrews & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of e-learning research (pp. 221–247). SAGE Publications.
Sung, H. Y., Hwang, G. J., Lin, C. J., & Hong, T. W. (2017). Experiencing the Analects of Confucius:An experiential game-based learning approach to promoting students’ motivation and conception of learning. Computers & Education, 110, 143-153. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2017.03.014
Stanford d.school. (2018). Design thinking bootleg. Stanford University. https://dschool.sfo3.digitaloceanspaces.com/documents/dschool_bootleg_deck_2018_final_sm2-6.pdf
Treffinger, D. J., & Isaksen, S. G. (2005). Creative problem solving: History, development, and practice. In S. G. Isaksen, K. B. Dorval, & D. J. Treffinger (Eds.), Creative approaches to problem solving: A framework for change (2nd ed.). Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.
Trust, T., Krutka, D. G., & Carpenter, J. P. (2020). “Together we are better”: Professional learning networks for teachers. Computers & Education, 142, 103637.
Turner, R. C., & Carlson, L. (2003). Indexes of item-objective congruence for multidimensional items. International Journal of Testing, 3(2), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327574IJT0302_5
Virtanen, M. A., Haavisto, E., Liikanen, E., & Kääriäinen, M. (2018). Ubiquitous learning environments in higher education: A scoping literature review. Nurse Education Today, 76(6), 85–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10639-017-9646-6
Waltz, C. F., Strickland, O. L., & Lenz, E. R. (2017). Measurement in nursing and health research (5th ed.). Springer Publishing Company.
Wang, F., & Hannafin, M. J. (2005). Design-based research and technology-enhanced learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 5–23. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02504682
Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2005). Understanding by design (2nd ed.). ASCD.
Wong, L.-H., & Looi, C.-K. (2011). What seams do we remove in mobile-assisted seamless learning? A critical review of the literature. Computers & Education, 57(4), 2364–2381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2011.06.007
World Economic Forum. (2020). The future of jobs report 2020. https://www.weforum.org/reports/
