透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.140.188.16
  • 學位論文

科技大學行政部門內外部自我評鑑媒合之研究

A Study on the Match between Internal and External Self-study of Administrative Departments in Universities of Technology

指導教授 : 曾淑惠

摘要


內外部評鑑長久以來一直是受到關注的議題,且文獻分析亦顯示自我評鑑仍有其爭議;因此本研究旨在探究科技大學行政部門內外部自我評鑑媒合之困境及其因應方式,透過訪談內部自我評鑑人員、外部自我評鑑人員及專家學者合計17位,並對於訪談的內容進行質化資料的編碼分析,據以詮釋內外部自我評鑑在規劃、實施與結果運用階段相互配合之情形,研提建議給予相關單位參考,最後得致以下結論: 一、自我評鑑媒合問題共有12項,依序為「標準未考慮到各校之差異」、「不清楚如何辦理自評」、「缺乏評鑑知能」、「內部自我評鑑人員資源不足」、「內部自我評鑑人員缺乏信任」、「內部自我評鑑人員資料蒐集上的困境」、「發現問題的一致性」、「結果缺乏回饋」、「評鑑目的是否達成」、「主管對自我評鑑的態度」、「內部自我評鑑人員資料呈現之完整性」、「結果報告不被認可」。 二、自我評鑑在「評鑑人員角色不同影響評鑑觀點」困境之解決方式為「慎選評鑑人員並建立對話機制」、在「成員參與程度」困境之解決方式為「透過主管要求與動員並積極鼓勵校內成員參與」及在「目的與實施上的矛盾」困境之解決方式為「建立評鑑知能與委託第三者辦理自我評鑑」。

並列摘要


There has been an important issue between internal evaluation and external evaluation. In addition, literature review that has indicated there still has argument on self-study. Therefore, this study aimed to explore the difficulties and solution methods of the match between internal and external self-study of administrative departments in universities of technology. To aim this purpose, semi-structured interview was used to interview internal evaluators, external evaluators, and experts. Then, ATLAS. ti 5.2 was used in order to analyze the text. At last, the main conclusions are as the follows: 1. There are 12 match problems in self-study which are: (1) evaluators don’t use the difference criterias for different schools, (2) people don’t know how to hold a self-study, (3) people are short of evaluation competence, (4) internal evaluators don’t have enough resources, (5) internal evaluators can’t trust the others, (6) the barrier of internal evaluators in data-collecting, (7) both internal and external evaluators’ don’t have the same opinon, (8) lack of feedback for the evaluation report, (9) the goal of evaluation is achieved or not? (10) superintendence’s attitude toward self-study, (11) the completed degree of data-displaying by internal evaluators, (12) evaluation report is unrecognized. 2. The difficulties in self-study are (1) “different evaluators have different point of view toward self-study,” and can be settled by ”choose evaluators carefully and set up a mechanism of communication;” (2) “member’s participation in self-study;” and can be solved by “superintendence have to ask, mobilize and encourage in order to raise member’s participation;” (3) “the contradiction between purpose and practice” can be eased by “build competences of evaluation and commission the third party to transact self-study”.

參考文獻


王保進(2006b)。標竿取向的高等教育評鑑標準設計之研究。教育研究月刊,142,頁9-32。
江愛華(2007)。澳洲高等教育品質保證制度:背景、政策與架構。台北市:高等教育。
林天祐(2006)。評鑑小辭典。評鑑雙月刊,2,頁10-11。
林劭仁(2006)。專業學習社群運用於師資培育自我評鑑之探究。中正教育研究,5(2),頁79-111。
林尚平(2007)。未來技專校院評鑑執行策略與指標發展評析。評鑑雙月刊,10,頁29-33。

被引用紀錄


陳孟婷(2013)。我國大學校務自我評鑑機制實施現況研究〔碩士論文,國立臺灣師範大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://www.airitilibrary.com/Article/Detail?DocID=U0021-0801201418034051

延伸閱讀