Developing Learner Centered Action Learning Model

Problem statement: This study aimed to examine the effects of using Le arn r Centered Action Learning Model. The research was research an d development by applying Participatory Action Research method. Instruments used were an achieveme nt test, a questionnaire on students’ satisfaction and focused group discussion. Approach: The statistic included the Mean, Standard Deviation , effectiveness index and Dependent Sample t-test. Th e results revealed that the learning model had 2 Key factors: PAR with 6 stages and using the model with 21 sub activity together with learning activity organization showing efficiency in cogniti ve domain, psychomotor domain, affective domain, effectiveness index and learning retention. Result: The students showed their satisfaction at the highest Level. The factors of success included: Par ticipation in actions of the participants and researcher, responsibility and learning climate. Conclusion: The factor of success in knowledge management outcome on Learner Centered Action Learn ing with the product after using Participatory Action Research aligned with learning activity impl ementation, consisted of Key aspects as: (1) the participation in performance practice, (2) the awar eness, feeling, thinking, good attitude, responsibi lity in the course they were studying both of individual performance and group performance, (3) the persistence in acting for achieving common agreemen t, (4) the learning climate, the instructor was a facilitator encouraging for learning in program, in cluding textbook of he course, media and instrument to search for, AAR and case study from the senor co horts for comparing the quality of their performances, (5) the evaluation and conclusion of implementation in outcome Learner Centered Action Learning Model regarding to knowledge, feeli ng and skill of practice in field performance, (6) sharing among the students, instructors and learnin g network.


INTRODUCTION
The intention of National Educational Act 1999, was the focus on the performance units relating to educational management and the institute enhancing and developing for the education with quality and ability to adjust with the changing situation. The Ministry of Education, 1999 Besides, the policy was determined for higher education institutes to provide the education through curriculum in graduate study level in order to support and conduct research in the implementation of performance units, educational institutes,Sub-district Administrative Organization Municipality other community organization network, as well as collaboration in conducting research in institutional level for adding value to intellectual asset focusing on the students studying for understanding with local problem and wisdom, relevant to the needs of locality in many patterns as interdisciplinary and learner centered action learning usage of research process as a leader in education for performance development and meaningful learning with more systematic The Ministry of Education, 2001.

Research objectives:
To develop a learner centered action learning model of Master Degree Students in Educational Administration, Faculty of Education, Mahasarakam University.
To study the effect of learner centered action learning from teachers during the first semester of 2009 academic year.
To study the Master Degree Students' satisfaction on the instructor's quality of teaching and facilities for learning during the first semester of 2009 academic year.
To study factor of success by the findings of learner centered action learning of the instruction during the first semester of 2009 academic year.

Significance of the study:
The appropriate and efficient model of learner centered action learning in master degree level, was obtained.
The factor of success in developing Learner centered action learning model of Master Degree Students studying "Educational Management for Local Development" course, was known.
There were guidelines in planning and developing the instructional performance, book, textbook, supplementary document, instrument for performance development, innovation learner centered action learning in graduate study level.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
Research participants classified as: Key researcher was the researcher with responsibility in teaching in "Educational Management for Local Development" Course during the first semester of 2009 academic year, Sri-saked Center.
Research Participants were the students enrolling during the first semester of 2009 academic year and studying in "Educational Management for Local Development" course, Sri-saked Center, implementationlearner centered action learning model, selected by Purposive Sampling. They were research participant group. The criterion in considering the attendance and participation in activities throughout the specific time, out of 47 students. Forty five students were selected as the research participants, as the samples implementationLearner centered action learning model. For this study, there were both individual and group or team learning. Were the leaders, experts, wisdoms participating in development of performance, activity and project in the boundary of the issues and content of pilot village of Sufficiency Economy or Learning Village or Strong Village based on the conceptual frameperformance of study, who was leaders of community or research participants, selected according to the shared studied issues. They were research participants providing information, transferring experience, myth or legend, deciphering body of knowledge, 10-15 persons each village.
Target group: Each group/teamperformance, 45 research participants. The students were assigned into 8 groups, 5-6 students each group, studying with community leaders, experts, local wisdoms of the model village in Sufficiency Economy as the target group according to the agreement that the selected research participants were the villages to be studied as case study based on specified criterion, for 8 villages, according to the selection by research participant groups. They were research participants in village level, at least 15 persons each village. The product of learning included the report of study in pilot community and academic article.
Each person were the students studying "Educational Management for Local Development" course, Sri-saked Center, studying regularly, total of 45 students. The product of learning included the self studying based on The Course Package, AAR and portfolio. Duration of research study during 4th June 2009-5th October 2009, for 4 months.
The development of the learner centered action learning model by applying Participatory Action Research with 6 Phases: (1) the collaboration in determination of 6 issues by instructors and students, (2) the collaboration in performance planning, (3) the implementation and performance development, (4) the evaluation and refection for the findings of learning, (5) the conclusions of implementation and (6) the sharing aligned with Learning Activity Implementation Plan with 13 sub-activities including (1) the development of agreement in action learning from both of group performance and individual performance, (2) the pretest/former knowledge measurement, (3) the introduction of instrument course package and learning innovation, (4) the implementation based on learning activity management plan focusing on analyzing and synthesizing based on the learning issues of the course package and case study, (5) the quiz during studying by analytical thinking and AAR usage, (6) the presentation of findings from real practice by the group in classroom and reflection and discussion by the researcher group, (7) the conclusions of findings, report writing of the study in the document, (8) the presentation and reflection of findings the course package study as portfolio of individual performance in class, (9) the evaluation of knowledge performance from the posttest, (10) the evaluation of knowledge findings after class for 2 weeks, (11) the evaluation of overall learning from the instruction in the course by using small group discussion and large group discussion, (12) the evaluation of satisfaction on the instructor's teaching and (13) sharing on the clear knowledge package of team.
There were 2 kinds of research instrument: the instrument for performance development and the instrument for data collection, classified as follows: The instrument for performance development included: The Course Package Book of "Educational Management for Local Development" The Administration and Development J. Faculty of Education, Mahasarakam University. Six Activity Implementation Plans of learning by Learner centered action learning Video Script: (1) Banpoo, Sufficiency Economy Village, (2) Wisdom from Practice, (3) Supplementary on community learning organization for self-reliant of Mahasarakam. The instrument for data collection: The Learning Achievement Test in the course "Educational. Management for Local Development," as 5 alternatives multiple choice, 110 items, by using the t-test, Chung Teh Fan's 27% proportion, with item discrimination between 0.20-1.00 and reliability coefficient of total issue as 0.80. After Action Review, adapted from Plainoi (2005) and Chantarasombat (2009a, b) as the issues for setting the questions including total of 8 issues: (1) How did we plan and what would be the performance objective?, (2) What happened after we implementing for a period of time?, (3) What happened as the plan/why was it?, (4) What were our problems and obstacles in performanceing?, (5) What could we do to improve it?, (6) Were there the written records on performance performances, what topics?, (7) What would we want to be different for future performance?, (8) What kinds of performance piece you would like to present, telling, or showing to learning network.

Statistic using for data analysis:
The statistic using for analysis of instrument quality: Find item discrimination of each item by using Simple Correlation between each item and sum scores of each aspect by using Item-total Correlation. Analyze the reliability coefficient of questionnaire by using Cronbach's Alpha Coefficient. The statistic using for data analysis included: Mean deviation from the formula. Standard Deviation (SD) by using the formula. The statistic using for comparing the indicators of success between before the development and after the development testing the mean differences by using the Independent Samples t-test. (Srisa-ard, 2002).

The implementation in implementation of Learner centered action learning model of Key factors as: 6
Phases of Participator Action Research aligned with 13 sub-activities of Learning Activity Implementation Plan as specified in 1.1 by improving and adapting the activities to be more appropriate and congruent with the context as well as efficient as real sub-activities of Learning Activity Implementation Plan in Phase 2. But, the 6 Phases of Participatory Action Research was still applied. For the Learning activity Implementation Plan, it was adapted as 21 sub-activities including: (1) the survey of need, emphasis, measurement and evaluation in the students' learning activity management, (2) the consideration in outlining the learning activity management plan to include the conclusion as learning outcome, (3) the review of agreement, goal, Learner centered action learning model, (4) the researcher and research participants certified the model of action learning and the learning activity management plan in role and function of individual and team, (5) the determination of challenged goal including indicator of both individual performance and group performance, (6) the usage of case study/the research participants' real practice of searching by the community based in field study practice as the planned project, (7) the implementation based on the learning activity management plan before, during and after learning activity management by using the course package, media, video, AAR, (8) the sharing in performance practice both of individual performance and group performance, organize the portfolio, group performance of report by comparing to the former cohort students' performance in order to improve the performance performance, (9) the improvement of knowledge level by video script and case study of research for local development leading to the analysis and synthesis based on the issues, (10) the pretest by using The Learning Achievement Test and BAR before implementation of learning, (11) the evaluation during studying by using the measurement instrument based on the specified course package in each chapter, total of 8 chapters and DAR usage, (12) the posttest by using the same test of The Learning Achievement Test and AAR, (13) the evaluation of satisfaction on the instructor's teaching and issues of focus group discussion for analyzing the indicator of success, (14) the evaluation of retention of learning after studying for 2 weeks by using The Achievement Test from Posttest Issue, (15) the establishment of questions and discussion of small group and large group by using concept map, performancesheet and note taking, (16) the presentation of findings in group implementation from team learning, report of study in large group, (17) the presentation of findings in individual learning by oneself, organization for portfolio of small group and large group, (18) the Key researcher presented the findings of implementation for improvement in performance of group/team and individual to be complete, (19) the organization of exhibition on performance of group/individual in the classroom, to be proud of performance piece, (20) the improvement of body of knowledge in writing an academic article by studying from academic journal, experts and case study and (21) the representatives of research participants presented their academic findings as research article on the academic stage of learning network.
According to the implementationof Learner centered action learning model including Participatory Action Research aligned with Learning Activity Implementation Plan, it caused the students' real desirable behaviors and developmental improvement in knowledge, practice, feeling and outcome of performance of individual, team/group and learning network. The model of action learning was tried out according to Fig.  1.

Fig. 1: Learner centered action learning model
For the overall efficiency of the developed activity implementation plan of Learner centered action learning, the efficiency of practice process on knowledge outcome was 84.86/78.03 as the specified criterion 80/80. For the overall effectiveness indicator of the activity implementation plan of Learner centered action learning, it was .5329 which showed that the students had higher level of knowledge from before studying as 53.29%.
For the students' learning achievement before action and after action, there was no significant difference at .05 level. For the retention of learning after studying for 2 weeks, the Key Researcher administered the same issue of the test for the posttest, found that the students' average posttest scores after studying and after studying for 2 weeks, there was no significant difference at. 05 level, which showed that the students still had their knowledge during the measurement. So, the students had retention of learning.
The Master Degree Students' overall satisfaction on the instructor's Quality of teaching and facilities supporting the studying in "Educational Management for Local Development," Course, it was in "The Highest" level with average value as 4.60 and Standard Deviation as 0.38. Considering each aspect, found that the satisfaction was in "The Highest" level for 6 aspects: (1) the instructor's characteristic included average value as 4.81 and Standard Deviation as (26, 2) the instructor's teaching skill (theory) included average value as 4.76 and Standard Deviation as (35, 3) the measurement and evaluation included average value as 4.71 and Standard Deviation as (34, 4) the content included average value as 4.67 and Standard Deviation as. 28, 5) the relationship between the instructor and students, the average value as 4.56 and Standard Deviation as. 39 and (6) the instructor's teaching skill (practice) included average value as 4.53 and Standard Deviation as. 45 respectively. For the facilities for learning, the satisfaction was in "High" level.
The factors of the findings in Learner centered action learning after using Participatory Action Research aligned with Activity Implementation Plan of learning by practicing, by focus group discussion and ranking the importance of the research participants or students included: (1) the participation in team performance practice and attendance including participation in determining for the need, goal of measurement and evaluation in the course from the beginning, (2) the student groups obtained real learning based on desirable behavior in every factor of the expected knowledge in: (1) the knowledge and understanding parts including the integration of knowledge for using in locality, (2) the feeling and thinking included the good attitude toward group performanceing, understanding the local problems, the importance of instructional management for locality and impression on local wisdom, (3) the performance practice skill in field performance, (4) the instructor as facilitator encouraging the students to obtain real practice from action learning and knowledge management, (5) the course package book was complete covering content, course description, available for searching, being guideline for education, used as reference. The students knew how to evaluate themselves both of before and after, with various kinds of knowledge, (6) the media, instrument, telling story with quality, were conducted research, with knowledge management and applying as body of knowledge, (7) the sharing by using AAR leading to discipline in notetaking, portfolio and action research of the students in future, (8) the outcome of both of individual and group performance included the report of pilot economic community in provincial level, there were presentations from every group, sharing in body of knowledge or good item in provincial level and the academic article presenting in academic stage of learning network and individual performance piece, (9) the self-studying based on learning plan in the course package book and portfolio, the students gained more self confidence, (10) the presentation of study from learning by real practicing which might be improved for higher level of standard.

DISCUSSION
The findings from implementationlearner centered action learning model, was the model found that it was successful as the expected goal since it might be because of the development of model, the researcher adapted conceptual frameperformance from the analysis and synthesis the approaches and research findings of experts in universal level as well as the related literature of the researcher developing continuously in developmental technique, such as using learning approach of learning by practicing in learning organization of Marquardt, integrating the developmental technique including the king's principle of performance including: (1) the explosion from inside focusing on human development, developing strength for community people and persons we developed to be ready to receive first, then, come to external society aligned with principle of learning by practicing, Participatory Action Research and others such as: (1) the determination of issues and common goal between instructor and students, (2) planning in collaborated performanceing, (3) implementation according to plan and performance development, (4) evaluation, reflection and conclusion of implementation, (5) sharing, aligned with 21 sub-activities of implementation activity plan. As a result, there were the students' empirical performance including the integration and development for human beings to obtain knowledge, theory, practice and feeling with good feeling on learning, instructor, themselves and classmates. The findings of this study was consistent with by the equation, theories of learning by practicing, learning organization of Marquardt (1999) by adding one more activity as sharing. Therefore, it could be written as principles of learner centered action learning. Research studies are also consistent with Hesson and Shad (2007) where a student-centered learning model will promote the skills and knowledge of the student and self learning. In this study, Learning was the prior knowledge plus Programmed Knowledge plus questioning, BAR, DAR, AAR and Question Insight + consideration, reflection of thinking, Reflection and conclusion and plus Sharing with meaningfulness and clear objective of learning by acting. The body of knowledge and knowledge management of individual and team/group, were deciphered. The researcher wrote as a rationale of theory of learning by practicing of this study into a formula as L = P + Q + R + S. Some parts of evidence indicated the success, should be criticized as follows: There were persons of learning. Every group included community of practitioners, 4 groups including: Facilitator, Practitioner, Note Taker and Network Manager. Consistent with Dilworth, (1998) statement that the most important person to action learning as the human beings collaborated in problem solving, achieving goal. But, basic value was on the occurred learning, ability to learn of organization would affect performance practice. It was consistent with Nonaka and Takeuchi (1995). For team development, it started from person as Key aspect. The member of organization understood their role and function in knowledge management as knowledge manager, the real person was important practitioner. The intermediate administrators groups were persons who interpreted and transformed knowledge into knowledge in the study. The knowledge managers determined the objective and develop climate facilitating for sharing and applying knowledge to be valuable. Consistent with the chief person on knowledge management in organization was Kun Amnuay supporting for sharing knowledge in activities, system and cultural aspects. Kun Kij was a group practitioner as knowledge manager or a person implemented activity for approximately 90% of total. Kun Likit was a person who taking note of knowledge management, conclude knowledge matter, record conference. Kun Prasan was a person cooperating network of knowledge management among organizational groups.
The efficiency of Learner Centered Action Learning Model in the teaching course, had real outcome with the students both in part of the effect in using Participatory Action Research and Learning Activity Implementation Plan based on standard criterion both of practice and outcome of knowledge part. There were significant differences in learning achievement between the posttest and pretest at .05 level. The effectiveness index increased for 53.92%. Besides, the average value of retention on learning after studying for 2 weeks, existed with significant differences in average value at .05 level. It showed that the students had their retention of learning and the overall feeling on the instructor's quality of teaching and facilities supporting for learning, it was appropriate in "The Highest" level. Considering each aspect, six aspects were in "The Highest" level, only one aspect with "High" level as the facilities for learning. It might be because of the design of learning by allowing the students participate in surveying the need, focus they were interested in, measurement and evaluation, the course textbook for studying by themselves, assignment both of individual performance and group performance were adequate, various kinds of learning media challenging the students to follow. It was observed that the students didn't miss their class, but came to class on time. There were research instruments both of innovation for development and collecting data with quality through the try out and improvement. The collected data had validity. Data were analyzed by statistical technique with appropriateness and congruence with the students group and duration. The teaching was integrated both in theories and real practice including case study according to the interested issues as the things they could be able to think and solve problems. They could be able to adjust themselves both as individual and team/group. The instructor was a facilitator enhancing the students' experience and development in all aspects in which integrated with Participatory Action Research and implementation according to the plan combining as sub-components as model of learning by practicing in appropriate learning principles. Consistent with Chantarasombat (2009c) that the alignment of both knowledge management plan and the action learning learner centered from "Educational Management for Local Development" course as the developed plan, had an efficiency of model in action learning aligned with practice based on 9 phases of learning activity implementation plans as: (1) the development of agreement in determination of learning plan of learning substance in the course both of individual performance and group performance, (2) the pretest, (3) the organization of learning according to the knowledge management plan focusing on the analysis and synthesis from case study both of instructors and students, (4) the record of daily and monthly learning performance on the AAR as portfolio, (5) the quiz during studying by analytical thinking, (6) the presentation of group performances , (7) the posttest, (8) the evaluation of satisfaction on the instruction and (9) the reflection of learning performance both of individual performance and group performance, learning plan aligned with practice of efficient process of product, was 93.99/80.79 as the specified criterion. The effectiveness index of knowledge management plan aligned Learner centered action learning in "Educational Management for Local Development" Course, was 0.5742, showed that the students had higher level of achievement for 57.42%. Moreover, they showed the overall satisfaction on "Educational Management for Local Development" Course, in "The Highest" level. Consistent with Rothwell, (1999) statement that the model of action learning included key phases as follows: (1) the consideration of the appropriate situation with the practice, (2) the selection and establishment of team for learning by practicing, (4) the summarize for the team and determination of limitation, (5) the empowerment of the right and power in specifying and testing by alternatives, 6) the product evaluation and (7) the determination of future direction. Consistent with Dotlich and James, (1998) that the substantial action learning included: (1) the supporter, (2) the strategic control, (3) the learning process, (5) the establishment of team for shared learning, (6) instructing for performance, (7) orientation for problem situations, (8) data collection, (9) data analysis, (10) the outlining of the presentation, (11) the presentation and (12) the reflection of performance practice.

CONCLUSION
The factor of success in knowledge management outcome on Learner Centered Action Learning with the product after using Participatory Action Research aligned with learning activity implementation, consisted of Key aspects as: (1) the participation in performance practice, (2) the awareness, feeling, thinking, good attitude, responsibility in the course they were studying both of individual performance and group performance, (3) the persistence in acting for achieving common agreement, (4) the learning climate, the instructor was a facilitator encouraging for learning in program, including textbook of the course, media and instrument to search for, AAR and case study from the senor cohorts for comparing the quality of their performances, (5) the evaluation and conclusion of implementation in outcome Learner Centered Action Learning Model regarding to knowledge, feeling and skill of practice in field performance, (6) sharing among the students, instructors and learning network. The knowledge package from practice was obtained by brining as core and meaningful knowledge for individual and team/group in creative way as well as the meaningful lesson both in individual performance and group performance. It might be because of the model of arranged action learning was a new experience which the students never had the lesson before. The learnercentered or student-centered model results were more positive and the students performed better than compared to teacher-centered structure (Ulaş, 2008). As a result, it was an innovation occurring with the students as a valuable lesson and could be able to be applied with the organization. Furthermore, the studying in this course was a challenged self development and teamperformance. When the research participants solved the existed problems both in themselves and teamperformance, with confidence and certainty that they could successfully deal with the problems and obstacles with the condition of outcome as the performance piece which had to lead to presentation of the study and sharing, with time as the determinant. According to the situation, the research participants had common awareness by performanceing with persistence by real practice and learning. The instructor as key researcher played his role as a facilitator. There was an establishment of questions after AAR and follow up the progress of individual and team/group, conclusion and reflection of both of the performance product and progress based on the implementation plan continuously. In addition, there was an organization of academic stage for the research participants and teamperformance to present their academic performance as an article from real discovery of study which was their new experience. They were proud of their performance since they were given certificate by the university administrator. Consistent with Marquardt (1999) statement that the aspects of program of learning by acting, was the empowerment in power and benefit from the dependent and interacted aspects for 6 issues as: (1) the problem, (2) the group, (3) the questioning, (4) the solution into practice, (5) the persistence in learning and (6) the facilitator. Consistent with findings that there were 7 aspects of action learning: (1) the problem was the gap between current situation and the need to achieve, (2) the persistence to perform with achievement motivation, (3) the group/team came from the same or different performance plans, attended the conference according to schedule, (4) the facilitator as both of instructor and consultant, (5) the questioning, discussion, talking according to the issues after action, (6) the reflection of thinking of research participants, they had discipline of themselves, group and classroom and (7) the learning process from putting plan into practice and reflection of thinking, deciphering on body of knowledge from action as Knowledge management form.
Recommendations: Before using Learner Centered Action Learning Model for effective teaching, in case of the center outside teaching during the first semester of each academic year, the design of teaching should be stage without continuity so that the students could study by themselves and performance in team according to the shared activity implementation plan. In addition, the time for Learner Centered Action Learning Model, should be added out of normal duration as 32 specified hours. Consequently, the appropriate and efficient integrated action learning would occur.
For using the course book, developed by the researcher, the BAR, DAR and AAR, should be included at the end of each chapter. In addition, one chapter as "Educational Research and Development for Local Development," or "Participatory Action Research," should be added.
The development of Learner Centered Action Learning Model was the design of integrated learning with integration for students' desirable behaviors in all of 3 aspects including: knowledge, practice and feeling aspects. It was a combination of which needed to be replicated with larger number of samples as well as various groups as small group, medium group and large group.
Learner centered action learning should be conducted to search for factor of success in learning both for individual, team or group levels and classroom level, or organization appropriate with Thai context or society.