台灣省高級職業學校校務評鑑指標建構之研究

• Main Author: 賴文淨
• Other Authors: 戴文雄
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2010
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/92040946961983085167

碩士 === 國立彰化師範大學 === 工業教育與技術學系 === 98 === Abstract The purpose of this study is to construct indicator suitable for the senior vocational high schools’ administrative evaluation in Taiwan. These indicator are used to achieve equitable and rational evaluation. In addition, they also help to understand the functioning and performance of the senior vocational high school’s administrative operation. First, we analyze the related work on evaluating the senior vocational high schools’ administrative operation. And then, the questionnaire is synthesized according to the previous analysis. The Delphi Method is used to systematically forecast the study result. A panel of savants including five experts in educational administration, nine scholars in universities, and five school principals and two directors in senior vocational high schools are invited to answer the questionnaire. The statistical analyses including the mode, the mean, and the standard deviation are used to determine the common result. Moreover, this study is adapted to achieve more correct result according to the experts’ opinions. These experts have had the experiences of vocational education and had engaged in evaluating the senior vocational high schools’ administrative operation. Finally, according to the analysis, this study has following conclusions: 1.There are certain problems related to constructing the indicator of the senior vocational high schools’ administrative evaluation: （1）The schemes and the indicator for measuring the administrative operations need to be integrated. （2）The evaluating system lacks Meta-Evaluation and following. （3）The evaluating system needs to be completely constructed. （4）A few of the members participating the evaluating activities are short of specialized abilities. （5）It is difficult to give consideration to both the face validity and content validity. （6）There is still a lack of impersonal measures about the evaluation classes and indicator. （7）There is short of evaluation schemes in different classes. （8） The team for the evaluating activities is usually temporary combined. There are many subjective indicator in the team. （9）The evaluation indicator are usually not concrete. It is difficult to explicitly illustrate the administrative performance. （10）The evaluation indicator are not explicitly quantified. It is difficult to distinguish the good qualities from the bad. 2.To construct the indicator of the administrative evaluation must consider three guiding policies, eight terms of conditions, and six principles. 3.The system of the administrative evaluation complete consists of 10 fields, 49 classes, and 185 indicator.