國民中學校務評鑑倫理之研究─以北部六縣市為例

A Research of the Ethics of School Administrative Evaluation at Junior High Schools- Based on the Schools in Six Counties and Cities of Northern Taiwan

黃耀輝(Yaw-Huei Huang)

指導教授 ： 黃乃熒

國立臺灣師範大學/教育學院/教育學系/博士(2012年)

摘要

本研究旨在探討國民中學校務評鑑倫理的實踐原則與作法、可能面臨的問題與解決之道。首先，針對國民中學校務評鑑倫理、正當性與倫理爭議問題及解決途徑等相關文獻加以探討。其次，以研究者自編「國民中學校務評鑑倫理現況調查問卷」作為調查工具。以北部六縣市國民中學教育人員為研究對象，共計1,432名為研究樣本，回收有效樣本956份，實徵調查所得資料，透過信度及效度分析、多元迴歸分析、階層迴歸分析、線性結構關係模型、變異數分析、t檢定等統計方法，進行資料分析。最後，根據研究結果提出結論與建議。
本研究所獲致之結論如下：
一、校務評鑑倫理4大面向︰倫理信念、倫理實踐、人際倫理及社會倫理皆屬「中
高」程度認同。其中符合程度最高者為「人際倫理」，最低者為「社會倫理」。
二、校務評鑑正當性3大取向︰評鑑實用、評鑑認知及評鑑規範皆屬「中高」程
度認同。其中符合程度最高者為「評鑑規範取向」，最低者為「評鑑實用取
向」。
三、校務評鑑倫理爭議問題3大層面︰行為動機、行為規範及行為實踐皆屬「中
低」程度認同。其中符合程度最高者為「行為動機」，最低者為「行為實踐」。
四、校務評鑑倫理爭議問題解決途徑能有效解決倫理爭議問題。
五、校務評鑑倫理、正當性與倫理爭議問題及解決途徑會因為背景變項不同而有
所差異。
六、校務評鑑倫理與正當性有明顯的互補關係。
七、校務評鑑倫理可以有效促進校務評鑑正當性。
八、校務評鑑倫理可以直接透過校務評鑑正當性解決校務評鑑倫理爭議問題。
九、校務評鑑倫理及正當性對倫理爭議問題有影響作用。
十、校務評鑑倫理爭議問題解決途徑可以促進倫理爭議問題之解決。
綜合上述研究結論，本研究針對教育行政機關、執行校務評鑑機構、評鑑委員、學校及未來相關研究提出若干建議。

關鍵字

校務評鑑 ； 校務評鑑倫理 ； 校務評鑑正當性

並列摘要

This research aims to shed light on the ethics of junior high schools. It is done through examining the principles of implementation, procedures, possible obstacles and solution. First of all, ¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬¬we explored the literary reviews on the ethics of school administrative evaluation, legitimacy, ethically controversial issues and the solutions. Secondly, the researcher compiled the “questionnaire of the ethics of school administrative evaluation at junior high schools”, with the study subjects being junior high schools in six counties and cities of Northern Taiwan. A total of 1432 questionnaires were distributed, and 956 valid responses returned. The validity of responses were determined by reliability and validity analysis, multiple regression analysis, hierarchical regression analysis, linear structural relationships, ANOVA, and t-test . Finally, we reached the conclusion according to the results and gave suggestions.
The major findings were as follows:
I. The four guiding policies of the ethics of school administrative evaluation are: Ethical belief, ethical practice, interpersonal ethics and social ethics; all show high-intermediate degree of agreeableness. Among all, the highest agreeableness is interpersonal ethics and the lowest social ethics.
II. The three approaches of the legitimacy of school administrative evaluation: Evaluative practicality, evaluative cognition, and evaluative norms; all show high-intermediate degree of agreeableness. Among all, the highest agreeableness is the approach of evaluative norms, and the lowest the approach of evaluative practicality.
III. The three dimensions of controversial issues of the ethics of school administrative evaluation: Behavioral motives, behavioral norms and behavioral practicality; all show low-intermediate degree of agreeableness. Among all, the highest agreeableness is the behavioral motives and the lowest the behavioral practicality.
IV. The solutions to controversial issues of the ethics of school administrative
evaluation can effectively solve those issues.
V. The ethics of school administrative evaluation, legitimacy, ethically controversial issues and the approaches may differ due to the background variables.
VI. There is an obvious complimentary relationship between the ethics of school administrative evaluation and legitimacy.
VII. The ethics of school administrative evaluation can effectively promote the legitimacy of school administrative evaluation.
VIII. The ethics of school administrative evaluation can directly solve the ethically
controversial issues through the legitimacy of school administrative evaluation.
IX The ethics of school administrative evaluation and legitimacy have an influence on the ethically controversial issues.
X The solutions to ethically controversial issues of school administrative evaluation can prompt the settlement of the ethically controversial issues.
Based on the conclusion, some relevant suggestions are made for the educational administrative institutes, institute of executive administrative evaluations, evaluators, schools and related researchers in the future.

並列關鍵字

School administrative evaluation ； Ethics of school administrative evaluation ； Legitimacy of school administrative evaluation

參考文獻

牛格正（1991）。諮商專業倫理。臺北市：五南。

王保進（2009）。掌握系所評鑑的重點－系所評鑑之精神與認可要素。評鑑雙月

王保進（2010）。建立學生學習成效評估機制之大學校務評鑑。評鑑雙月刊，26。2011年10月20日取自財團法人高等教育評鑑中心基金會網站，http://epaper.heeact.edu.tw/archive/2011/02/23/4122.aspx

王保進（2011）。校務評鑑確保評鑑委員專業化之作法。評鑑雙月刊，30，15-19。

王健文（1995）。奉天承運：古代中國的『國家』概念及其正當性基礎。臺北市：