1. present by Preeyapus Phooljan Field of Study Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Industrial Education and Technology, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi, Bangkok,Thailand Thesis Advisor Assoc.Prof Dr.Sumalee Chanchalor

2. This research aimed to compare learning achievements of students who had different feedback methods and to study the satisfaction of students who had learning activities via website which has 2 types of feedback methods and 2 types of display. The sampling group was 68 of 1 st year vocational certificate students. This sampling group was separated into 4 groups as follows: 1. Learning via the website which has solution before test feedback method and private displaying 2. Learning via the website which has solution before test feedback method and public displaying 3. Learning via the website which has solution after test feedback method and private displaying 4. Learning via the website which has solution after test feedback method and public displaying. The learning achievement comparison of each group was analyzed by two-way analysis of variance. This found that students who had private or public display did not get different learning achievements while students who had solution before and after test had different learning achievements. The satisfaction of students who had learning activities via website was in a good level.

3. Figure 1 web page www.krutaaw.com

4. Figure 2 Lesson on website

5. Figure 3 Lesson on website

6. Figure 4 Lesson on website

7. Figure 5 Lesson on website

8. 1) The subject of Electrical Circuit 1 2) Teaching and Learning through web 3) Adobe Photoshop CS 3 4) PHP Langeuage 5) MySQL

9. 1) Instrument creation procedure 2) Simple Group 3) Analysis 4) Conclusion

10. 1) Instrument creation procedure Figure 6 online lesson

11. 1) Instrument creation procedure (continue) Figure 7 review lesson

12. 1) Instrument creation procedure (continue) Figure 8 answer key

13. 1) Instrument creation procedure (continue) Figure 9 posttest online

14. 2) Simple Group Figure 10 Simple Group 1

15. 2) Simple Group (continue) Figure 11 Simple Group 2

16. 2) Simple Group (continue) Figure 12 Simple Group 3

17. 2) Simple Group (continue) Figure 13 Simple Group 4

18. 3) Analysis Table 1 Efficiency analysis of online lesson EfficiencyFull scoreX% Process efficiency (E1) 3,37949.6982.81 Achievement efficiency (E2) 3,33148.9881.64

19. 3) Analysis ( continue ) Table2 comparing pretest score and posttest score of four student group. NPre-testPost-testDifferencet- test XS.D.X X Group 11725.5 0 4.0350.1 6 3.3824.6 6 4.6721.4 6* Group 21726.5 5 3.4849.9 5 3.5123.4 0 3.8324.9 8* Group 31724.9 3 2.5446.6 2 1.3627.5 7 2.7629.3 2* Group 41727.5 7 2.7648.7 8 3.0921.2 1 3.7417.1 9* Total6826.1 0 3.3848.9 8 3.2622.8 8 3.96

20. 3) Analysis ( continue ) Table 3 average and standard deviation of score achievement analyze by feedback result and test solution. DetailTotal Average CD XSD.X X A50.163.3849.953.5150.053.40 B46.621.3648.783.0947.632.53 Total Average 48.503.1549.473.3548.983.26

21. 3) Analysis ( continue ) Table 4 2 ways variance analysis of achievement between feedback and result SSdfMSF feedback method (A) 87.2 0 1 9.37 * Displaying method (B) 16.0 2 1 1.72 Interactions (A × B) 16.0 2 116.0 1 1.72 Within Group595. 77 649.30 Total71567

22. 4) CONCLUSION This research can be concluded as follow: This found that students who had private or public display did not get different learning achievements while students who had solution before and after test had different learning achievements. The satisfaction of students who had learning activities via website was in a good level.

23. Thank you