The researcher developed a draft of EPMS system features, system plan, and storyboard of the screen. The draft
was examined by 5 experts on e-Learning or EPMS. The draft was improved according to the suggestions of the
experts. The system and manual of EPMS were developed based on Mahara E-Portfolio System. The system and
manual were checked by 5 experts on e-Learning or EPMS. Then the system was improved according to the
suggestions of the experts. The research found that the system should consist of two respective sub-systems, the eportfolio system and the rubric creator system, and one reference page as the TQF guidelines as shown in Figure 5.
Screen captures of TCU-EPMS are shown in Figure 6 and 7. The average evaluation rating results were mean = 4.77
and SD = 0.36 which was the highest level according to evaluation rating criteria: mean 5.00–4.50= highest, 4.49–
3.50= high, 3.49–2.50= medium, 2.49–1.50 = low, and 1.49–1.00= lowest. The details are as shown in Table 1.
The researcher developed a draft of EPMS system features, system plan, and storyboard of the screen. The draftwas examined by 5 experts on e-Learning or EPMS. The draft was improved according to the suggestions of theexperts. The system and manual of EPMS were developed based on Mahara E-Portfolio System. The system andmanual were checked by 5 experts on e-Learning or EPMS. Then the system was improved according to thesuggestions of the experts. The research found that the system should consist of two respective sub-systems, the eportfolio system and the rubric creator system, and one reference page as the TQF guidelines as shown in Figure 5.Screen captures of TCU-EPMS are shown in Figure 6 and 7. The average evaluation rating results were mean = 4.77and SD = 0.36 which was the highest level according to evaluation rating criteria: mean 5.00–4.50= highest, 4.49–3.50= high, 3.49–2.50= medium, 2.49–1.50 = low, and 1.49–1.00= lowest. The details are as shown in Table 1.
การแปล กรุณารอสักครู่..
