MCDM Techniques for Performance Evaluation of Higher Education Based on Quantitative Indicators

• Main Authors: Cho Hsin Hui, 卓新惠
• Other Authors: 吳泓怡
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2007
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/83837137672343205439

碩士 === 開南大學 === 企業管理學系碩士班 === 95 === “Education” which has great impacts on the development and cultural continuation of a country is the most important foundation for a nation. In particular, the institutions providing "higher education" such as universities or colleges are thought of as primary places for cultivating high-tech talents and elites. Recently, the number of universities has been increasingly growing in Taiwan. According to the officially statistical data, up to 2006, the universities have reached to 162. The unceasingly increasing quantities of universities has renovated the “outer covering”, however, the “intrinsic quality” of teaching, teachers etc. and school performance have not been promoted basically. The evaluation criteria of universities are not properly classified with regard to the attributes of schools. Even the classification of evaluation indexes is not very clear, especially the weights of quantification indexes. Therefore, the evaluation criteria of universities used currently can not assess accurately school performance. Then, it causes dispute easily and makes many universities feel dissatisfied with unfair evaluation results. So far, a fair and convincible performance evaluation or ranking standards of the universities in our country has not yet been developed. Currently, the evaluation criteria of quantification indexes used by the universities have no assigned weights. In addition, even most related previous research only focused the evaluation items of school management performance without considering weights as well. However, the evaluation results may be different because of different weights of evaluation criteria. Accordingly, the research is aimed at exploring the quantification evaluation indexes of universities. The basis of quantification indexes of the evaluation framework is proposed by the Taiwan Assessment and Evaluation Association (TWAEA). And it employs the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) method of Multiple Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) to collect and synthesize the experts’ opinions and analyze the relative weights among the evaluation indexes. Then, the VlseKriterijumska Optimizacija I Kompromisno Resenje (VIKOR) method is adopted for performance evaluation using an empirical study of 12 private universities listed by Ministry of Education. The results of analysis indicate that the “evaluation category” of “professions” is more important than the one of “administrative affairs” in universities; three “evaluation dimensions” such as “quality of teachers,” “quality of teaching,” and “quality of research” are most important; “the ratio of teachers to students,” “the ratio of foreign teachers,” and “the ratio of full-time teachers to part-time teachers” are three most concerned “evaluation criteria.”; and “the proportion of full-time foreign teachers,” “the ratio of teachers to students ", “the ratio of students to administrative support manpower,” and “the total number of employment counseling” and so on are most emphasized. Furthermore, on the basis of collected secondary data of 12 private universities published by the Ministry of Education, the research analyzes synthesis performance of each school against the weights of each evaluation index. Then, it compares the ranking of results with the one of the Ministry of Education. The results of comparison show slightly discrepancy; however, all the universities, especially schools with poor performance, may diagnose themselves through the performance evaluation to pinpoint out the most needed improvements. And it can help the schools to achieve optimal promotion of performance with limited resources. Finally, it is hoped that the findings of research can provide as principle reference for the universities and related educational institutions while carrying out evaluation, improving performance and forming educational policies.