Ph.D. Defense: October 10, 2013

a Ph.D. Defense
Candidate: Vorasuang Duangchinda 49560190
| October 10, 2013Assessment of Integrative Delivery Method based on Mobility towards eMM for Education in Thailand

Assessment of Integrative Delivery Method based on Mobility towards eMM for Education in Thailand #2
Thesis title
การพัฒนาเกณฑประเมินวุฒิภาวะอีเลิรนนิงในประเทศไทย ตามหลักการพัฒนา
เกณฑประเมินวุฒิภาวะอีเลิรนนิงในประเทศไทย ตามหลักวิธีนําสงสื่อ
การเรียนการสอนเชิงบูรณาการ ดวยคุณสมบัติของการเคลื่อนที่
EN
TH
Assessment of Integrative Delivery Method based on Mobility towards
eMM for Education in Thailand
Keywords: e-Learning, Delivery Method, Integrative Method, e-Learning Maturity Model, Mobility

Advisory Team & the Candidate
Principle advisor
• Assistant Professor Dr. Surasak Mungsing
Co-advisors
• Dr. Kittima Mekhabunchakij
• Professor Dr. Kim YoungHwan
Candidate
• Mr. Vorasuang Duangchinda

Proposal Examination
Examiners
• Assistant Professor Dr. Surasak Mungsing
• Dr. Sasiporn Usanavasin
• Assistant Professor Dr. Thapanee Thametar
• Assistant Professor Dr. Anuchai Theeraroungchaisri
When?
• Monday September 13, 2010
• 09.30-12.00
• Building 1, room 1-401
Sripatum University,
Bangkok, Thailand

Defense Examination
Examiners
• Assistant Professor Dr. Thepparit Banditwattanawong
• Assistant Professor Dr. Surasak Mangsing
• Associate Professor. Dr. Boonlert Wajatrakul
• Assistant Professor Dr. Thapanee Thametar
• Assistant Professor Dr. Anuchai Theeraroungchaisri
Co-Advisors
When?
• Thursday October 10, 2013
• 13.00-15.00
• Building 11, room 1201
Sripatum University,
Bangkok, Thailand
• Video Conferencing via
Google Hangout

Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 Terminology
1.2 Research
Background
1.3 Research Objectives
1.4 Research
Significance
1.5 Research Framework
1.6 Research Questions
1.7 Research Scope
2. Literature
Review
2.1 Starting Point
2.2 eMM
2.3 IDM
2.4 Mobility
3. Research
Methodology
3.2 Research Design
3.3 Research Steps
3.4 Research Tools
4. Findings &
Discussion
4.1 Step 1: Thesis title
4.2 Step 2: Confirm the
eMM
IDM
IDM with Mobility
4.5 Step 5: Integration
with the eMM
5. Conclusion
5.1 Research Summary
5.2 Recommendation
5.3 Publications and
Presentations

I. Introduction
Assessment of Integrative Delivery Method based on Mobility towards eMM for Education in Thailand

1.1 Terminology (1/3)
eMM: e-Learning Maturity Model
A quality improvement framework based on the ideas of the Capability Maturity
Model (CMM) and Software Process Improvement and Capability dEtermination
(SPICE) methodologies.
Marshall, S., Mitchell, G., and Beames, S. (2007). Benchmarking for quality improvement: The e-Learning maturity model. Poster in Proceedings at ASCILITE
Singapore 2007.
Marshall, S., and Mitchell, G., (2006), “Assessing sector e-learning capability with an e-learning maturity model”, Proceedings of the Association for Learning
Technologies Conference, 2006, Edinburgh, UK.
Marshall, S., (2005), “Determination of New Zealand tertiary institution e-learning capability: an application of an e-learning maturity model: report on the e-
learning maturity model evaluation of the New Zealand tertiary sector”, report to the New Zealand Ministry of Education, Available online at:
http://www.utdc.vuw.ac.nz/research/emm/documents/SectorReport.pdf Last accessed: August 19, 2010
Marshall, S., and Mitchell, G. (2004). Applying SPICE to e-Learning: An e-Learning Maturity Model? In Proceedings of the Sixth Australasian Computing
Education Conference (ACE2004), Dunedin. Conferences in Research and Practice in Information Technology, Vol. 30. R. Lister and A. Young, Eds. pp: 185-191.

Integrative Delivery Methodology
One of four Program Delivery Methods in Extension Education. Integrative
Method gives opportunities for learners to discuss, clarify, or to gain better
understanding of the study content, and therefore effective learning can take
place.
Duangchinda. V., Kim. Y.H., and Mekhabunchakij. K., (2010) "Mobility and e-Learning Delivery Methods: Through the Perspectives of Thailand Cyber
University Project (TCU)", Asia-Pacific Cybereducation Journal, vol. 6., no. 1 (2010), pp. 30-49. Also available online at:
http://acecjournal.org/2009/Journal_Data/Vol6No1/6-1-3.pdf
Richardson, J. G., Jenkins, D. M., and Crickenberger R. G., (1994), “Program Delivery Methods in Extension Education”, North Carolina Cooperative Extension
Service, Available online at: http://www.ces.ncsu.edu/resources/education/sd6/ Last accessed: February 14, 2010

Mobility
Using portable computing devices (such as laptops, tablet PCs, PDAs, and smart
phones) with wireless networks enables mobility and mobile learning, allowing
teaching and learning to extend to spaces beyond the traditional classroom. Within
the classroom, mobile learning gives instructors and learners increased flexibility and
new opportunities for interaction. Mobile technologies support learning experiences
that are collaborative, accessible, and integrated with the world beyond the
classroom.
Educause: M-Learning and Mobility (2013), Available online at: http://www.educause.edu/eli/programs/learning-technologies, Last accessed: February 14,
2010

1.2 Research Background
• Current education needs to improve, e-Learning may be possible solution.
• Credible Benchmarking for e-Learning needs to be addressed.
• Mobility plays more important role for e-Learning than before.
• Credible Benchmarking for e-Learning needs to be addressed with
characteristics of Mobility.

1.3 Research Objectives (1/3)
General Objective [GO]
To Assess Integrative Delivery Methodology based on Mobility towards

Sub Objectives
[SO 1]
To study comprehensively about Integrative Delivery Methodology
[SO 2]
To assess which mode(s) of Integrative Delivery Methodology can be
significantly improved with Mobility

Sub Objectives
[SO 3]
To apply the findings of [SO 2] to the Delivery Dimension of the e-Learning
Maturity Model (eMM), across five processes
[SO 4]
To propose a set of criteria for measuring Mobility in the Delivery Dimension
of the eMM Framework

1.4 Research Significance (1/2)
Educational institutions in Thailand can have reference criteria to measure
Mobility of their e-Learning within Delivery Dimension of eMM, and have a
reference set of the modes of Integrative Delivery Methodology with
Mobility for successful implementation of their e-Learning.

1.4 Research Significance (2/2)
For the very first time, educational institutions in Thailand will be able to
see where they stand in the eMM if they want or have deployed e-Learning or
m-Learning.
Although eMM does have a comprehensive checklist for e-Learning, but
the checklist does not take Mobility into account.

Five Processes
• Learning
• Development
• Support
• Evaluation
• Organization
Mobility
Modes of
Integrative
Delivery
Methodology
Extraction of
Keys to measure eMM
Delivery Dimension
based on Modes of
Integrative Methodology
•Delivery
•Planning
•Definition
•Management
•Optimization
Five Dimensions
4
4 3 2 2 1
4 4 3 0
4 2 1 0 0
4 3 2 2 1
4 4 3 0 0
Marshall, Mitchell, and Beames,(2007),
Marshall and Mitchell, (2006), Marshall,
(2005), and Marshall and Mitchell (2004).
Duangchinda, Kim, and Mekhabunchakij, (2010)
Richardson, Jenkins, and
Crickenberger, (1994)
Ehlers and Pawlowski (2006), Fraser (2005), [ 36 ] Weiser (1995), and
Bhattacharya, I., and Sharma, K., (2007), "India in the knowledge economy – an electronic paradigm",
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp. 43-568
SO2
SO1
SO3 – SO4

1.6 Research Questions
1. What modes of Integrative Delivery Methodology is suitable for
Mobility in Thai Education?
2. Which criteria of the Delivery Process of the e-Learning Maturity
Model (eMM) can be measured to accommodate the Modes of
Integrative Delivery Methodology?

1.7 Research Scope (1/2)
• To study Education Mobility suitable in Thailand context
• Within Delivery Dimension of the e-Learning Maturity Model (eMM)

1.7 Research Scope (2/2)
EN
TH

II. Literature Review

2.1 Starting Point
e-Learning Maturity Model (eMM)
Integrative Delivery Methodology
Mobility
e-Learning Benchmarking Model?
Delivery Methodology?
Technology?

2.2 e-Learning Maturity Model (eMM)
Global Quality Assurances
Model
for Management and
Products/Services
The International Organization
for Standardization (ISO)
Model
International Standards for
Benchmarking Education
ELTI, eMM, MIT90s,
OBHE/ACU, Pick&Mix
eMMDelivery Dimension

2.2 eMM
Example of Reference Process Model derived from the ISO quality standard ISO/IEC 19796-1
ISO standards related to e-Learning as governed by ISO/IEC JTC1 (a joint committee of ISO and IEC),
an e-learning standardization body (Devedzic, 2007).

2.2 eMM

e-Learning Maturity Model (eMM)
• The eMM identified the importance of planned intentionality in
relation to e-learning and reinforced the need for an institution-
wide approach, involving availability of support as well as
assessment and recognition of developing skills in e-learning.
• eMM reflects on the ways in which both personal and institutional
factors are seen to influence experiences and engagement in
e-learning Professional Development.
Juliana, M., Gordon, S., Duncan, O., and Amanda, G., (2009), "Professional development: assuring quality in e-learning policy and
practice", Quality Assurance in Education, vol. 17, iss. 3, 2009, pp/ 233-249.
2.2 eMM

The answer to large-scale reform is not to try to emulate the
characteristics of the minority who are getting somewhere under
present conditions … Rather, we must change existing conditions so
that it is normal and possible for a majority of people to move
forward
Fullan, 2001, page 268 | as in Marshall, Mitchell, and Beames, 2007
2.2 eMM

e-Learning Maturity Model: The Five Processes
2.2 eMM

e-Learning Maturity Model: Processes 1
2.2 eMM

2.2 eMM

e-Learning Maturity Model: The Five Dimensions
2.2 eMM

e-Learning Maturity Model: Process & Dimensions?
From: Marshall, Stephen. Journal of Distance Education, 2010, Vol. 24 Issue 1, p143-165, 23p
2.2 eMM

The Five Dimensions of eMM
Dimension 1: Delivery
• Concerned with the creation and delivery of process outcomes.
• The extent to which the process is seen to operate within the
institution. It is important to emphasize that institutions can have
extremely effective processes operating within this dimension, but in
the absence of capability in other dimensions there is risk of failure or
unsustainable delivery and wasting resources through needless
duplication.
2.2 eMM

Dimension 2: Planning
• Assesses the use of predefined objectives and plans in conducting the
work of the process.
• The use of predefined plans potentially makes process outcomes more
able to be managed effectively and reproduced if successful.
2.2 eMM

Dimension 3: Definition
• Covers the use of institutionally defined and documented standards,
guidelines, templates and policies during the process implementation.
An institution operating effectively within this dimension has clearly
defined how a given process should be performed. This does not mean
that the staff of the institution follows this guidance.
2.2 eMM

Dimension 4: Management
• Concerned with how the institution manages the process
implementation and ensures the quality of the outcomes.
• Capability within this dimension reflects the extent of measurement
and control of the outcomes and the way in which the practices of the
process are performed by the staff of the institution.
2.2 eMM

Dimension 5: Optimization
• Captures the extent an institution is using formal approaches to
improve capability measured within the other dimensions of this
process. Capability of this dimension reflects a culture of continuous
improvement.
2.2 eMM

Example of Practical use:
2.2 eMM

Five Processes
• Learning
• Development
• Support
• Evaluation
• Organization
•Delivery
•Planning
•Definition
•Management
•Optimization
Five Dimensions
4
4 3 2 2 1
4 4 3 0
4 2 1 0 0
4 3 2 2 1
4 4 3 0 0
Marshall, Mitchell, and Beames,(2007), [ 16 ] Marshall and Mitchell, (2006), [ 17 ] Marshall, (2005), and [ 18 ] Marshall and Mitchell (2004).
eMM Representation:
2.2 eMM
eMM – Five Dimensions Leading to Process Capability (Marshall, Mitchell, and Beams, 2007)

Assessment of Integrative Delivery Method based on Mobility towards eMM for Education in Thailand #432.2 eMM
eMM – Five Processes with Five Dimensions and How Scoring can be applied (Marshall,
Mitchell, and Beams, 2007), and Tawsopar and Mekhabunchakij (2009)
eMM
Utilization
3D Graphical
Interface
Application of eMM in 3D Approach Tawsopar
and Mekhabunchakij (2009)

As mentioned in Petch, Jim; Calverley, Gayle; Dexter, Hilary; Cappelli, Tim. Electronic Journal ofe-Learning, 2007, Vol. 5 Issue 1, p49-58,
2.2 eMM

Related works
Embedding Learning Technologies
Institutionally (ELTI)
MIT90s
Mistry, V., (2008), "Benchmarking e-learning: trialling the “MIT90s” framework", Benchmarking: An International Journal, vol. 15, iss. 3, 2008, pp. 326-340.
Observatory for Borderless Higher
Education (2007)/Association of
Commonwealth Universities
(OBHE/ACU)
Pick&Mix
Rooted on a systematic review of other approaches to benchmarking e-
learning and looks for commonalities of approach while also making a
fresh start.
Devised a collaborative benchmarking methodology which promotes
the development of shared good practice statement
Designed to provide a framework for understanding the effect of
evolutionary and revolutionary change through the development of the
use of technology in educational organizations leading to a range of
increasing potential benefits.
Designed to inform the process of embedding e-learning
technologies, and assist in developing organizational structures,
cultures and expertise by encouraging cross boundary collaborations
and groupings
2.2 eMM

2.3 Delivery Methodology?
• Is one of the three delivery methods in Extension Education, as defined by the
North Carolina Cooperative Extension Service
(Richardson, Jenkins, & Crickenberger, 1994).
• The method is comprehensive and has been tested in several studies including
Adeoye, Adenle, & Adeyemo (2008), and Crocoll (2001).
Adeoye, B. F., Adenle, S. O., and Adeyemo, S. A., (2008), "Framework for Choosing Teaching and Learning Delivery Methods in Nigerian Universities", European Journal of Scientific Research, Vol.20 No.1
(2008), pp.134-140.
Crocoll, C. E. (2001), “Inspiring Volunteer Development: A Resource Book for Training Senior Volunteers in Intergenerational Programs”, National Service Fellow, Corporation for National Service, National
Service Fellowship Program, USA.

Duangchinda. V., Kim. Y.H., and Mekhabunchakij. K., (2010) "Mobility and e-Learning Delivery Methods: Through the
Perspectives of Thailand Cyber University Project (TCU)", Asia-Pacific Cybereducation Journal, vol. 6., no. 1 (2010), pp. 30-
49.
Also available online at:
22 Modes as in the Integrative Methodology
2.3 IDM

Delivery Methodology?
Delivery modes should be variety, each learners do have different
characteristics
Halawi, L., Pires, S., & McCarthy, R.. (2009). An Evaluation of E-Learning on the Basis of Bloom's Taxonomy: An Exploratory Study. Journal of
Education for Business, 84(6), 374-380.
2.3 IDM

2.3 Program Delivery Methods (1/4)
(Richardson,Jenkins, and Crickenberger, 1994)
1. Integrative Methods
• Refers to one of Program Delivery Methods in Extension Education.
• Program delivery methods that provide the learner opportunities to
discuss, clarify, or otherwise gain greater understanding of new
information can be classified as integrative methods.
• These methods generally provide opportunities for learners to merge
new information with their existing knowledge.
2.3 IDM

2. Experiential Methods
• Audio cassette, Video cassette,
• Interactive video, Audio compact disk,
• Video compact disk, Method demonstration,
• Result demonstration, On- farm
• test, Tour, Field day, Workshop,
• Analysis of data or results, Game, Skit,
• Networking, Role play, and Case study
2.3 IDM

3. Reinforcement Methods
• Fact sheet, Notebook, Leaflet or flier,
• Pamphlet or booklet, Magazine article,
• Journal article, Poster, Book, Fax message,
• and Computer software,
• Newsletter, Letter, Home study kit
2.3 IDM

4. Others
• Broadcast television,
• Cable television, Radio,
• Newspaper, Movie (film), Film strip,
• Slide-tape presentation, Photograph,
2.3 IDM
• Bulletin board, Show, Fair, Exhibit,
• Lecture, Speech, Teletip message,
• Church bulletin, Comics, and Novelty
• items

2.4 Technology > Mobility? (1/4)
A generic term describing one's ability to use technology
while moving, as opposed to portable computers, which
are only practical for use while deployed in a stationary
configuration.
Joan., K., L., (2010), "A mobile future for academic libraries" Reference Services Review, Vol. 38, No. 2, 2010, pp. 205-213
Sumati., S., (2009), "Career Development International", Vol. 14, No. 2, 2009, p. 145, USA..
Wikipedia. (2010). Mobile Computing. Available online at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_computing Last accessed:
August 19, 2010

Mobility
Using portable computing devices (such as laptops, tablet PCs, PDAs, and smart
phones) with wireless networks enables mobility and mobile learning, allowing
teaching and learning to extend to spaces beyond the traditional classroom. Within
the classroom, mobile learning gives instructors and learners increased flexibility and
new opportunities for interaction. Mobile technologies support learning experiences
that are collaborative, accessible, and integrated with the world beyond the
classroom.
Educause: M-Learning and Mobility (2013), Available online at: http://www.educause.edu/eli/programs/learning-technologies, Last accessed: February 14,
2010
Technology > Mobility? (2/4)
2.4 Mobility

Mobility is very important for education
• A better understanding might emerge on the diffusion of Knowledge… this being
mobile is a key of success
Szejnwald, H., B., and Carbone., C., (2004), “Social Learning through Technological Inventions in Low-Impact Individual Mobility: The Cases of Sparrow
and Gizmo”, Greener Management International, Vol. 47, pp. 77-88.
• Factors such as flexibility, mobility and technology as important issues in building
design and workspace design.
an intelligent classroom on pupils' interactive beTúlio Tibúrcio, & Edward F Finch. (2005). The impact of haviour. Facilities, 23(5/6), 262-278
• Educators can benefit from the students’ inherent curiosity by allowing them to choose the interesting
aspects presented in a video and either request more information or contribute to the information
already stored regarding those particular aspects.
Cucu, C., Cristescu, M., & Cristescu, C.. (2010). Contributions to Using IT in Education: An Educational Video Player. Informatica Economica, 14(2), 108-119
2.4 Mobility

Mobility is very important for education
Reveiu, A., Smeureanu, I., & Dârdala, M.. (2009). Generating Multimedia Components for M-
Learning. Informatica Economica, 13(3), 88-95.
The networked nature of
these devices allows the
communication and
information sharing,
so that we can share the
information within them,
while the devices are
personal.
2.4 Mobility

III. Research Methodology

Five Processes
• Learning
• Development
• Support
• Evaluation
• Organization
Mobility
Modes of
Integrative
Delivery
Methodology
Extraction of
Keys to measure eMM
Delivery Dimension
based on Modes of
•Delivery
•Planning
•Definition
•Management
•Optimization
Five Dimensions
4
4 3 2 2 1
4 4 3 0
4 2 1 0 0
4 3 2 2 1
4 4 3 0 0
Marshall, Mitchell, and Beames,(2007),
Marshall and Mitchell, (2006), Marshall,
(2005), and Marshall and Mitchell (2004).
Duangchinda, Kim, and Mekhabunchakij, (2010)
Richardson, Jenkins, and
Crickenberger, (1994)
Ehlers and Pawlowski (2006), Fraser (2005), [ 36 ] Weiser (1995), and
Bhattacharya, I., and Sharma, K., (2007), "India in the knowledge economy – an electronic paradigm",
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol. 21, No. 6, pp. 43-568
SO2
SO1
SO3 – SO4

Integration, to
confirm by
Step 4.1-4.2
Integration, to
confirm by
Step 5.1-5.2
Final Deliberation
3.2 Research Design
SO
4
SO
3
Mobility
Confirmed by
Publication
(Step 3)
e-Learning
Benchmarking
Models
e-Learning
Delivery
Methods
e-Learning
Maturity Model
(eMM)
Integrative
Delivery Method
Confirmed by
Interviews
(Step 2)
Confirmed by
Publication
(Step 3)
SO
1
SO
2
SO
2

3.3 Research Steps
Step 1 Create the Study Topic
Step 2
Establishment of
Fundamental Framework
Step 3
Establishment of
e-Learning Delivery Method
Step 4
Confirmation of the e-Learning
Delivery Method based on Mobility
Step 5
Integrate finding of Step 4
within eMM Dimension 1 (Delivery)
SO
1
SO
1/2
SO
3/4

3.4 Research Tools
Step 1
Create the Study Topic
Assessment of Integrative Delivery Method based on Mobility towards eMM for
education in Thailand
Step 2
Establishment of Fundamental Framework
e-Learning Maturity Model (eMM): Finding and Confirmation
Step 2.1: Model Review
Step 2.2: Qualitative Research: Interview International Experts
Step 3
Establishment of e-Learning Delivery Method
Integrative Method: Finding and Confirmation
Step 3.2: Qualitative Research: Preliminary Survey Thai Experts
Step 4
Confirmation of the e-Learning Delivery Method based on Mobility
Step 4.1: Quantitative Research: Survey of experienced lecturers in Thailand
Step 4.2: Model Refinement
Step 5
Integrate finding of Step 4 within eMM Dimension 1 (Delivery)
Step 5.1: Content Analysis of eMM Dimension 1 (Delivery)
Step 5.2: Integrate Finding of Step 5.1 with the Finding of Step 4.2
SO
1
SO
1/2
SO
3/4

Step 1: Create the Study Topic
Objective
• To define research scope and topic.
Methodology
• Series of literature reviews and extensive discussion with supervisory team.
3.4 Research Tools
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5

Step 2: Establish of Fundamental Framework
Objective
• To establish framework of this study, and confirm the framework.
Methodology
• Step 2.1: Model Review
Series of literature reviews and extensive discussion with supervisory team.
• Step 2.2: Qualitative Research: Interview International Experts
Interview eight international experts.
3.4 Research Tools
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
2.1
2.2

Qualitative interview with eight world class experts at Professors level who have had
extensive experience and research on e-Learning and e-Learning quality assurance.
1. Prof. Dr. YoungHwan Kim (Pusan National University, Korea)
Also President of the Institute of APEC Collaborative Education, and Coordinator of APEC EDNET
(now as the Lead Shepherd of the APEC HRD (Human Resource Development) Working Group.)
2. Prof. Dr. Yoshida Masami (Chiba University, Japan)
Advisor to MOE of Thailand for e-Learning
3. Prof. Dr. Tsuneo Yamada (Open University of Japan)
Lead Researcher in eASEM
3.4 Research Tools

4. Prof. Dr. Kinya Tamaki (Aoyama Gakuin University, Japan)
Leader for Government Research in eQA in Japan
5. Prof. Dr. Juan Casstilo (Colima University, Mexico)
Director of Distance Education & Key Members of Mexican ICT for Education Committee
6. Prof. Ricardo Diaz (Colima University, Mexico),
Key Members of Mexican ICT for Education Committee
7. Prof. Gary Matzin
Dean of Continuing Education University Extension, University of California, Irvine, USA
8. Asst. Prof. Christian Stark (key member of e-ASEM research network, German)
Coordinator of eASEM Network and eQA European Research
3.4 Research Tools

Questions Asked
1. Have you ever used or researched about Maturity Model for e-Learning?
2. Have you heard of eMM? Why or Why not?
3. If you have never used it, will you consider using eMM or any similar models in the future? Why or Why not?
4. Open question: Tell about usage of mobile or ubiquitous learning
To maintain validity and reliability of the research, questions were constructed based on the same technique used
for the previous study, as in:
Tse, H., Peart, F., Duangchinda, V., Wong, W., & Elston, L. (2004), Australia and NewZealand Academy of
Management (ANZAM) Conference: Understanding the Conceptions of Leadership in Supervisor-Subordinate
Relationships: A Phenomenographic Approach.
3.4 Research Tools

Step 3: Establish e-Learning Delivery Method
Objective
• To establish e-Learning Delivery Method for the study, and confirm the finding.
Methodology
• Step 3.1: Model Review
Series of literature reviews and extensive discussion with supervisory team.
• Step 3.2: Qualitative Research: Preliminary Survey Thai Experts
Confirm the finding with experts in Thailand who have had extensive experience in e-Learning
Delivery Method.
3.4 Research Tools
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
3.1
3.2

• An online survey form has been used to capture expert’s choices and
opinions in relation to the Integrative Method.
• Research participants included all the 14 teachers of the e-Pro program,
who were lecturers from various universities around Thailand. The e-Pro
teachers have had hand-on experiences in teaching the program since
2006.
• Note: The online form passed IOC process for validity prior to distribution.
3.4 Research Tools

Step 4: Confirm the e-Learning
Delivery Method Based on Mobility
Objective
• To confirm the e-Learning Delivery Method based on Mobility
Methodology
• Step 4.1: Quantitative Research: Survey of experienced lecturers in Thailand
• Step 4.2: Model Refinement (Focus group with the experts – the 14 experts in step 3)
3.4 Research Tools
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
4.1
4.2
Step
5

Step 4.1: Quantitative Research: Survey experienced lecturers in Thailand
• Aim
To use Quantitative Research to verify the finding of step 3 with experienced lecturers around Thailand
who have at least 3 years of direct experience in teaching with e-Learning.
• Survey Form
Survey form was created, and delivered in the end of September 2010, the results will be electronically
collected and analyzed by middle of October 2010.
Note: The online form passed IOC process for validity prior to distribution.
3.4 Research Tools

Step 4.1: Quantitative Research: Survey experienced lecturers in Thailand
• The Population
There are 78 public Higher Education Institutions, 69 private Higher Education Institutions, and 19
Community Colleges around Thailand, making 166 institutions in total.
Should there be 3 e-Learning experts at their institution; the total research population is likely to be 498
persons. Through the connection of Thailand Cyber University Project (TCU), an online survey form was
sent to key contact person of each institution, the results was collected electronically and analyzed
accordingly. Basic statistical analysis approach was used.
3.4 Research Tools

Step 4.2: Qualitative Research: Focus Group to confirm the finding
• Aim
To ask experts from Step 3 to confirm the finding of 4.1
3.4 Research Tools

Step 5: Integrate Findings of Step 4
with eMM Dimension 1 (Delivery)
Objective
• To integrate finding of step 4.4 within eMM dimension 1 (Delivery)
Methodology
• Step 5.1: Content Analysis of eMM Dimension 1 (Delivery)
• Step 5.2: Integrate Finding of Step 5.1 with the Findings from Step 4
Tool
• Context Analysis
3.4 Research Tools
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
5.1
5.2

IV. Findings & Discussion

3.3 Research Tools
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3
Step 4
Step 5
SO
1
SO
1/2
SO
3/4
Recapture

4.1 Thesis title
EN
TH
Step 1
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5

Step 2
4.2 Confirm the eMM
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
2.1
2.2

4.2 Confirm
the eMM
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
2.1
2.2

Step 3
SO
1
4.3 Confirm
the IDM
Duangchinda. V., Kim. Y. H., and Mekhabunchakij. K., (2010)
"Mobility and e-Learning Delivery Methods: Through the
Perspectives of Thailand Cyber University Project (TCU)",
Asia-Pacific Cybereducation Journal, vol. 6., no. 1 (2010),
pp. 30-49.
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
3.1
3.2

4.3 Confirm the IDM
Integrative Delivery Modes
Number of Teachers
have used? have NOT used?
Person - % Person - %
• Conference 8 57% 6 43%
• Convention 5 36% 9 64%
• Seminar 9 64% 5 36%
• Panel 3 21% 11 79%
• Forum 6 43% 8 57%
• Meeting 6 43% 8 57%
• Symposium 1 7% 13 93%
• Colloquy 2 14% 12 86%
• Dialogue 5 36% 9 64%
• Institute 3 21% 11 79%
• Buzz group 6 43% 8 57%
• Discussion group 14 100% 0 0%
• Brainstorming 12 86% 2 14%
• Audience reaction team 3 21% 11 79%
• Listening team 2 14% 12 86%
• Interview 4 29% 10 71%
• Teleconference 5 36% 9 64%
• Telephone conversation 9 64% 5 36%
• Computer network 5 36% 9 64%
• Satellite conferencing 1 7% 13 93%
• Personal visit 0 0% 14 100%
Which Integrative e-
Learning Delivery
Method have been used
by TCU e-Pro teachers?
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
3.1
3.2

What are the e-Pro teachers
opinions if mobility can improve
the Integrative Method?
Will/Does Mobility
for each mode
Avg of 5 Rank
Discussion group 4.79 1
Forum 4.57 T2*
Brainstorming 4.57 T2*
Conference 4.43 4
Buzz group 4.29 5
Interview 3.36 18
Institute 3.29 19
Listening team 3.21 20
Personal visit 2.57 21
Office visit 2.50 22
4.3 Confirm the IDM
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
3.1
3.2
Top 5
Bottom 5

Step 4
SO
1/2
20
14
20
23
7
6
8
5
3
3
2
7
43
9
16
12
5
15
4
3
3
2
2
4
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
< 1 Year
1 Year
2 Year
3 Year
4 Year
5 Year
6 Year
7 Year
8 Year
9 Year
10 Year
> 10 Year
Number of Responders (persons)
Responders' Experience in e-Learning
As Learner As Educator
4.4 Confirm
the IDM with
Mobility
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
3.1
3.2

What are the e-Pro teachers
opinions if mobility can improve
the Integrative Method?
Will/Does
Mobility
for each mode
Avg of 5 Rank
Discussion group 4.79 1
Forum 4.57 T2*
Brainstorming 4.57 T2*
Conference 4.43 4
Buzz group 4.29 5
Interview 3.36 18
Institute 3.29 19
Listening team 3.21 20
Personal visit 2.57 21
Office visit 2.50 22
4.4 Confirm the IDM
with Mobility
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
4.1
4.2
Step
5
Top 5
Bottom 5

Experience
IDM in
Modes
% of Responders and their Experience
Traditional Education e-Learning
   
1. Conference 52.54 47.46 38.14 61.86
2. Convention 39.83 60.17 24.58 75.42
3. Seminar 69.49 30.51 38.98 61.02
4. Panel 42.37 57.63 23.73 76.27
5. Forum 53.39 46.61 56.78 43.22
6. Meeting 72.88 27.12 51.69 48.31
7. Symposium 36.44 63.56 18.64 81.36
8. Colloquy 18.64 81.36 7.63 92.37
9. Dialogue 35.59 64.41 26.27 73.73
10. Institute 28.81 71.19 20.34 79.66
11. Buzz group 39.83 60.17 25.42 74.58
12. Discussion Group 68.64 31.36 56.78 43.22
13. Brainstorming 68.64 31.36 48.31 51.69
14. Audience reaction team 21.19 78.81 13.56 86.44
15. Listening team 33.90 66.10 22.88 77.12
16. Interview 48.31 51.69 31.36 68.64
17. Teleconferencing 25.42 74.58 16.10 83.90
18. Telephone conversation 37.29 62.71 19.49 80.51
19. Computer network 72.03 27.97 60.17 39.83
20. Satellite conferencing 19.49 80.51 11.86 88.14
21. Personal visit 46.61 53.39 26.27 73.73
22. Office visit 41.53 58.47 19.49 80.51
Responders’ Experience
with 22 Modes of IDM
4.4 Confirm the IDM
with Mobility
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
4.1
4.2
Step
5

How Significance the Application
of Mobility will Improve Educational
Opportunities in e-Learning:
Top Five most Significance IDM
Modes
IDM Modes
Level of Significance
5 4 3 2 1
Computer network 67 40 9 2 0
Meeting 42 49 18 8 1
Teleconferencing 42 49 20 5 2
Brainstorming 41 55 17 5 0
Forum 40 43 28 7 0
Satellite conferencing 40 41 23 8 6
4.4 Confirm the IDM
with Mobility

Focus group with experts for confirmation
The 14 experts confirm in consensus the findings and suggested the intersection.
• Recommended IDM modes that may provide a decisive fact that education in Thailand is open
for the provision of delivering e-Learning with mobility; with the primary focus on the
following modes of IDM:
• Forum
• Brainstorming
• Discussion group
• Conference
• Buzz group
• Computer network
• Meeting
• Teleconferencing
4.4 Confirm the IDM
with Mobility
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
4.1
4.2
Step
5

Step 5
SO
3/4
4.5 Integration
with
the eMM
Step 5.1: To integrate finding of step 4.4 within eMM dimension 1 (Delivery) across the
five processes.
Based on the eMM Process Assessment Workbook (Marshall, 2007), each of the five
process of eMM is described in detail and in three categories,
1) Practices
2) Sources of Information Providing Evidence of Capability, with Questions for Eliciting
Evidence of the Capability
3) Documentary Evidence
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
5.1
5.2

For each process, Marshall (2007) has indicated clearly which questions
concern with which dimension. This can be seen from the “Questions for
Eliciting Evidence of Capability” section under the “Sources of Information
Providing Evidence of Capability” of each process.
4.5 Integrate with
the eMM
Process L1.
Learning objectives guide the design and implementation of courses
Sources of Information Providing Evidence of Capability
Questions for Eliciting Evidence of Capability
1. Are students made aware of the expectations that are inherent in all forms of
assessment?
(Dim1/Dim2)
Example of how to filter the Delivery Dimension across five processes - showing L1(1) (Modified from Marshall, 2007: 10)
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
5.1
5.2

From the total of 508 questions in eMM, 118 questions (23.23%) that concern with
Delivery Dimension across the five processes.
• Learning Process: total 104 questions, 12 questions (24.54%) filtered
L1(1), L2(1), L4(1, 2, 3), L5(1), L8(1), L9(1), and L10(1, 2, 3, 4)
• Development Process: total 82 questions, 22 questions (26.83%) filtered
D1(1, 2, 3, 4), D2(1, 2, 3, 4), D3(1), D4(1, 2, 3, 4), D5(1, 2), D6(1, 2, 3), and D7(1, 2, 3, 4)
• Support Process: total 129 questions, 17 questions (13.18%) filtered
S1(1, 2, 3), S2(1, 2, 3), S3(1, 2, 3), S4(1, 2), S5(1, 2, 3, 4), and S6(1, 2)
• Evaluation Process: total 37 questions, 18 questions (48.65%) filtered
E1(1, 2, 3, 4, 5), E2(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7), and E3(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6)
• Optimization Process: total 156 questions, 49 questions (31.41%) filtered
O1(1, 2, 3, 4), O2(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6), O3(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9), O4(1, 2, 3, 4, 5),
O5(2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12), O6(1, 2, 3), O7(1, 2, 3), O8(1), and O9(1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7)
4.5 Integrate with
the eMM
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
5.1
5.2

Assessment of Integrative Delivery Method based on Mobility towards eMM for Education in Thailand #904.5 Integrate with
the eMM
Confirmation by the 14 experts via Survey
Step 5.2: Integrate finding of Step 5.1 with the finding of Step 4
All 14 experts from 11 Higher Education institutions around Thailand have answered the
survey. Their opinions are quite conclusive. All of them believe that each question is or
may concern with Mobility.
All of the questions does concern with Mobility with at least 79% level of confidence.
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
5.1
5.2

the eMM
118 questions of Delivery Dimension in eMM across five processes
Step
1
Step
2
Step
3
Step
4
Step
5
5.1
5.2

the eMM
Radar of the expert’s opinion

IV. Conclusion

5.1 Research Summary (1/6)
• 8 International experts have confirmed the eMM a suitable framework
• 14 Thai experts have confirmed the IDM with the following modes with their
highest preference when incorporate Mobility:
1. Discussion group
2. Forum
3. Brainstorming
4. Conference
5. Buzz group

• 118 Thai lecturers have confirmed the IDM with the following modes with
their highest preference when incorporate Mobility:
1. Computer network
2. Meeting
3. Teleconferencing
4. Brainstorming
5. Forum
6. Satellite conferencing

• 14 Thai experts have confirmed the all preferred modes of IDM are as vital
when incorporate Mobility:
1. Discussion group
2. Forum
3. Brainstorming
4. Conference
5. Buzz group
6. Computer network
7. Meeting
8. Teleconferencing
9. Brainstorming
10. Forum
11. Satellite conferencing

• Filtered eMM on Dimension 1 (Delivery) reveals that from the total of 508 questions in
eMM, 118 questions (23.23%) that concern with Delivery Dimension across the five
processes. About 41.55% of that are in the Optimization process.
• 14 experts have confirmed with consensus that all 188 questions are valid when
integrating Mobility concept to each question. The experts have strong preference on the
Development Process.
• 14 experts have recommended that the notion of Mobility based upon the 11 modes of the
preferred IDM can be incorporated with the filtered eMM (Dimension 1: Delivery). This is
the Model Recommendation.

Major Contributions
Academic Contributions
• Introduction of eMM for academic management
• Identify which criteria of the Delivery Process of the e-Learning Maturity Model (eMM) can be
measured to accommodate the Modes of Integrative Delivery Methodology
• Introduction to IDM and with Mobility integration
• Identify modes of Integrative Delivery Methodology that are suitable for Mobility in Thai Education
Social Contributions
• Introduction of eMM
- part of assessment for Office of the National Standards and Quality Assessment of Thailand

5.2 Recommendation
Limited number of SME (Subject Matter Expert)
• Since there are not many e-Learning Quality Assurance/benchmark experts around the world, let alone
in Thailand, this research serves as a recommended guideline for further investigation in all directions.
This includes but not limited to:
• Repeating the process across the other dimensions
• Modification of the eMM questions based upon the findings
Research Technique
• Refine the model recommendation using Delphi Technique

5.3 Publications and Presentations
3 1 1 1
International
Conference
International
Journal
Excellent Paper
Certificate from
one International
Conference
Republished in
another
International
Journal

International Conference (1)
• Duangchinda. V., Kim. Y.H., and Mekhabunchakij. K., (2011), "Towards a Mobile
Learning Maturity Model: Application of Mobility into the e-Learning Maturity
Model (eMM)", The OAR International Conference 2011: Educational Leadership,
technology innovations, knowledge innovation and cultural diversity, Prince of
Songkla University, Thailand.
• Duangchinda. V., Kim. Y.H., and Mekhabunchakij. K., (2011), "Mobility and e-
Learning Delivery Methods: Perspective from Higher Education of Thailand",
Proceeding of The International e-Learning Conference 2011, Thailand Cyber
University Project, Office of the Higher Education Commission, Ministry of
Education of Thailand, pp. 51-59.
Presentations

International Conference (2)
• Duangchinda. V., Kim. Y.H., and Mekhabunchakij. K., (2010), "Holistic Systemic
Approach for the Sustainable Development and Inclusive Growth of APEC Future
Education: Higher Education: Policy, ICT & Systemic Change - Mobility and e-
Learning Delivery Methods: Through the Perspectives of Thailand Cyber
University Project (TCU)", The 6th APEC Future Education Forum & The 8th
International ALCoB Conference, pp. 131-142.
(Receiver of Excellent Paper and has been republished in an International
Journal: Journal of International Collaboration in Education)
Presentations

Excellent
Paper Award
Presentations

International Journal
• Duangchinda. V., Kim. Y.H., and Mekhabunchakij. K., (2010), "Mobility and e-
Learning Delivery Methods: Through the Perspectives of Thailand Cyber
University Project (TCU)", Asia-Pacific Cybereducation Journal, vol. 6., no. 1
(2010), pp. 30-49.
• Duangchinda. V. (2011), "Higher Education: Policy, ICT & systemic Change: Holistic
Systemic Approach for the Sustainable Development and Inclusive Growth of
APEC Future Education", Journal of International Collaboration in Education, vol.
6(1), pp. 43-60.
(Republished after the Excellent Paper award)
Presentations

Questions & Comment Please
Thank you for attending and contributing

Ph.D. Defense: October 10, 2013

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

La actualidad más candente

La actualidad más candente (20)

Similar a Ph.D. Defense: October 10, 2013

Similar a Ph.D. Defense: October 10, 2013 (20)

Más de Vorasuang (Michael) Duangchinda (Ph.D.)

Más de Vorasuang (Michael) Duangchinda (Ph.D.) (20)

Último

Último (20)

Ph.D. Defense: October 10, 2013