Improvement of Rational Thinking Competency of Pre-service Teachers for Electrical Engineering Education

  • Nutchanat ChumchuenEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1135)


The research objective were to develop the QSDC learning model to improve the rational thinking competency of pre-service teachers for electrical engineering education. Theoretical research has revealed a gap in teaching methods as rational thinking relates to teachers’ competency. The development of the QSDC learning model based on rational thinking competencies using various teaching activities was provided inside the MIAP learning processes. This research has pointed to teacher training, integrating between active learning model and rational thinking through the development of the QSDC instructional package. Thus, the conclusion of this study was a presentation of the QSDC learning model with the rubric evaluation rational. The performance of the developed learning model was 72.13%, and the overall evaluation of rational thinking was 70.58%. This means the students gain higher competency and their achievement performance was satisfactory. Therefore, the development of teaching and learning process can be applied effectively in the teaching of electrical engineering education.


Rational thinking competency Pre-service teachers Electrical engineering education MIAP learning process 



I would like to acknowledge Faculty of Technical Education and King Mongkut’s University of Technology North Bangkok, Thailand to support granted financial. Special thanks should be given to Associate Professor Dr.Somsak Akatimagool for professional guidance, valuable support and constructive suggestions in this research work.


  1. 1.
    Phanomnakorn, M.: Teacher’s characteristic of 21st century. In: Proceedings of the 2017, MBU Education Journal, Faculty of Education Mahamakut Buddhist University, July–December 2017, vol. 5, no 2, pp. 23–35 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Krathwohl, D.R.: A revision of bloom’s taxonomy. Theory Practice 41(June 2014), 37–41 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Uma, D., Thenmozhi, S., Hansda, R.: Analysis on cognitive thinking of an assessment system using revised bloom’s taxonomy. In: Proceedings of 2017, 5th IEEE International Conference on MOOCs, Innovation and Technology in Education (IEEE), pp. 152–159, November 2017Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ismail, W., Saifuddin, W.O.A.: Critical thinking and problem solving skills among engineering students at Public Universities in Malaysia. In: Proceedings of 2017, 7th World Engineering Education Forum (WEEF), pp. 262–267, November 2017Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wagener, W.E.: Model for Practical-Educational Counterpart Training, pp. 10–11. German Agency for Technical Cooperation Ltd., Stuttgart (1975)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Abosalem, Y.: Assessment techniques and students higher-order thinking skills. In: Proceedings of the 2016, International Journal of Secondary Education, pp. 1–11, January 2016Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Liu, S., Yang, X., Zhang, H., Wang, Y., Yoneda, T., Li, Z.: Study on teaching methods for developing higher order thinking skills for college students in flipping classroom. In: Proceedings of 2017 International Conference of Educational Innovation through Technology (EITT), pp. 254–257, December 2017Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Recktenwald, G., Edwards, R.: Guided inquiry laboratory exercises designed to develop qualitative reasoning skills in undergraduate engineering students. In: Proceedings of 2010, 40th ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference (EITT), pp. 1–6, October 2010Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kawano, A., Isogai, E., Aoyama, M.: A model and evaluation method of learning motivation in the education and training of professional engineers. In: Proceedings of 2016 IEEE International Conference on Teaching, Assessment, and Learning for Engineering (TALE 2016), pp. 311–318, December 2016Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Stiggins, R.: Student - Centered Classroom Assessment. Merrill, Columbus (1997)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Teacher Training in Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Technical Education King Mongkut’sUniversity of Technology NorthBangkokThailand

Personalised recommendations