美國技職教育評鑑機制對我國技職教育的啟示－以ACCSCT為例

全球化效應與知識經濟時代的來臨，國際社會存在著彼此合作卻又互相競爭的弔軌氣氛，各國政府必須努力提升國際競爭力，積極創造符合國際環境與人力市場需求的人才。技職體系是高等教育市場的一環，然國內技職教育之發展，對於國家經濟成長、產業轉型所需之人力著實扮演重要的角色。根據教育部技職司對於提升技職體系學校辦學品質的策略之一，是透過有效地推動外部評鑑機制，使得各校藉由評鑑情境相互觀摩成長，社會大眾亦能了解各校辦學進步情形，以做為選校時的參考依據。而美國是全世界最早實施學校評鑑的國家，本文則以美國全國性的認可團體「職業學校與技術學院的認可委員會(ACCSCT)」為例，分析其認可制度、被認可的學校類別與認可的實施歷程及與步驟，希望對於國內在推動技職教育的評鑑歷程有所助益。在了解ACCSCT與國內技職教育評鑑的發展與機制後，本文對於國內未來技職教育評鑑制度的發展，得到以下幾點啟示：一、成立專責之評鑑機構，並針對技職教育的特色落實評鑑工作。二、校務評鑑與專業評鑑應分開辦理，使專業成長與校務整合並進。三、強調學校自評機制之建立，並能與外部評鑑整合與接軌。四、擴大追踪評鑑的機制，隨時公佈評鑑項目的更新與發展方向並檢視學校因應之道。五、廣納不同民間教育團體或受評學校的建言，增加評鑑指標的適切性與公開化。六、強調評鑑機制的正面意義，而非只做為政府進行退場機制的手段。

關鍵字

學校評鑑；美國技職教育評鑑機制；職業學校與技術學院的認可委員會ACCSCT

並列摘要

With the trend of globalization and knowledge economy, the conflicts between mutual cooperation and competitions exist among international societies. The governments thus should develop necessary human resources to meet the needs of international labor markets and promote people's competitiveness. The vocational education plays an important role in the growth of economy and the development of necessary labor forces of different industries. According to Technological and Vocational Education of the Ministry of Education, one of the strategies to improve the educational (operational) quality of institutions is to have the external evaluation. Those institutions with the external evaluation can learn from each other. Based on the results of the external evaluation, the public are also able to justify the progress and educational quality of these institutions in order to have the right choices of schools. America is the first country to implement the mechanism of external evaluation to institutions. This study takes the ACCSCT in America for example, and intends to understand its accreditation, the kinds of accreditation and the processes of accreditation. The results of this study indicate the followings: (1) It is necessary to establish professional evaluation institutions and implement external evaluation based on school characteristics; (2) Institutional evaluation and programmatic evaluation should be separated; (3) Establishing the mechanism of self-evaluation and integrating it to the external evaluation should be emphasized; (4) It is necessary to strengthen the follow-up evaluation, to announce the updated evaluation items and development, and to examine the solutions to the problems of individual institutions; (5) The external evaluation should incorporate the comments from the public educational groups or evaluated institutions to ensure the property and publicity of the external evaluation. (6) The positive impacts of the external evaluation should be emphasized, rather than considering the results of external evaluation as a means of the government to shut an institution. These results are expected to provide with some pedagogical and administrative implications for our vocational education.