中文摘要 本研究旨在建構我國大學院校績效評鑑指標,以供各大學院校及教育當局進一步規劃、實施各大學之績效評鑑參考。經由文獻分析與Delphi Method,歸納出三個評鑑層面、十八個評鑑項目與八十五個評鑑指標。並以十三位學者專家作為Delphi 專家成員。Delphi 專家成員的主要任務是針對評鑑指標之適切性根據其專業做出評判。進行兩個回合的Delphi 問卷調查,得出評鑑指標的適切性程度。進而,建構出適合於國內大學績效評估指標。研究結果顯示計有: 一、內部評鑑層面 包含了六個評鑑項目及其相對之適切性平均值,如下: A-1 學生素質為4.93 、A-2 教師資源為5.08 、A-3 財務資源為5.02 、A-4 教學資源為5.13 、A-5 學生結構為4.96 、A-6 發展目標、特色為5.53。故在內部評 鑑層面之適切度排序依序為A-6→A-4→A-2→A-3→A-5→A-1。除此之外,對各評鑑項目中的評鑑指標亦有適切性程度上之排序。 二、過程評鑑層面 包含了六個評鑑項目及其相對之適切性平均值,如下: B-1 教學品質為5.14 、B-2 研究為5.24 、B-3 行政為5.27 、B-4 課程為5.21 、B-5 輔導為5.19 、B-6 續讀率為4.91。故在過程評鑑層面之適切度排序依序為 B-3→B-2→B-4→B-5→B-1→B-6。除此之外,對各評鑑項目中的評鑑指標亦有適切性程度上之排序。 三、外部評鑑層面 包含了六個評鑑項目及其相對之適切性平均值,如下: C-1 學校聲譽為5.43 、C-2 資金捐贈為4.93 、C-3 學術交流為5.29 、C-4 推廣教育服務為4.87 、C-5 畢業生的進路狀況為5.21 、C-6 公民社會責任與公民義 務為5.29。故在外部評鑑層面之適切度排序依序為C-1→C-6=C-3→C-5→C-2→C-4。除此之外,對各評鑑項目中的評鑑指標亦有適切性程度上之排序。 關鍵字:高等教育,德爾慧法,績效評鑑指標
Abstract The main purpose of this study was to establish the performance evaluation indicators of Higher education, and to provide the reference of performance evaluating for universities and the government educational authorities to planning and practicing further. By reviewing related literature and Delphi Method, 3 dimensions, 18 items and 85 indicators were postulated. And thirteen experts were recommended to help developing the performance evaluation indicators. The main task of these experts was to judge the availability of performance evaluation indicators. After two turns of response, come out to the proper degree of performance evaluation indicators. Finally, we will establish the performance evaluation indicators of Higher education. The conclusion manifests as follows: 1. Internal evaluation dimensions These includes six evaluation items and the availability as follows: 「student selectivity」is 4.93, 「faculty resources」is 5.08, 「financial resources」 is 5.02, 「teaching resources」is 5.13,「student structure」is 4.96,「goal and characteristic of developing」is 5.53. Then, the proper degree of performance evaluation items was B-3→B-2→B-4→B-5→B-1→B-6. Furthermore, performance evaluation indicators in each item also establish the proper degree. 2. Operational evaluation dimensions These includes six evaluation items and the availability as follows: 「teaching quality assessment」is 5.14,「Research」is 5.24,「administration」is 5.27, 「program」is 5.21,「guidance」is 5.19,「retention」is 4.91. Then, the proper degree of performance evaluation items was B-3→B-2→B-4→B-5→B-1→B-6. Furthermore, performance evaluation indicators in each item also establish the proper degree. 3. External evaluation dimensions These includes six evaluation items and the availability as follows: 「reputation」is 5.43,「financial resources」is 4.93,「science communicate」is 5.29, 「spread education service」is 4.87,「Graduates job egress」is 5.21,「social duty of citizen」is 5.29. Then, the proper degree of performance evaluation items was C-1→C-6=C-3→C-5→C-2→C-4. Furthermore, performance evaluation indicators in each item also establish the proper degree. Key words: Higher education , Delphi Method, Performance evaluation indicators