Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process to Construct the Teacher Evaluation Metrics of Private Technological University - Cases of Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence in Northern Region

• Main Authors: Siou-Hua Ya, 葉秀華
• Other Authors: Shyi-Huey Wu
• Format: Others
• Language: zh-TW
• Published: 2012
• Online Access: http://ndltd.ncl.edu.tw/handle/02774356722162243133

碩士 === 萬能科技大學 === 資訊管理研究所 === 100 === In recent years, with the growth of higher education, restructuring, upgrading and economic downturn, higher technological and vocational institutions has focused on the improvement of teacher quality in order to enhance the competitiveness of the education market. Due to the revision of the University Act, institutions are charged to evaluate the teachers’ performance through teacher evaluation system to improve the teacher quality. However, the current studies of teacher evaluation are more focused on the general public and private universities for the less technical colleges/universities. The purpose of this study is to construct teacher evaluation indicators for the private University of Science and Technology as a reference for implementation of the teacher evaluation. The Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is adopted. The AHP questionnaires are sent to six private Universities of Science and Technology in Center for Teaching and Learning Excellence in Northern Region, which have obtained the Teaching Excellence Project by Ministry of Education. The return questionnaires run 50% valid response rate. According to the analysis of the study results, summarized the main conclusions are as follows: First, this study based on teacher evaluation indicators architecture, the Teacher Evaluation System is divided into teaching, research, service and counseling categories; eleven projects category classification; then sort out the 59 evaluation indicators. Second, In accordance with the order of weight, teaching is the most important evaluation category (69%), followed by services and counseling (17%), research (14%) and the lowest. Third, teaching category is divided into teaching planning (39%), the effectiveness of teaching and learning (26 percent), teaching guidance (25%), Coordination with teaching affair (10%). Fourth, research category is divided into the research project (38%), journal paper (30%), specialized texts (18%), and academic participation (14%). Services and counseling programs is divided into student counseling (57%), school services (34%), and off-campus services (9%). The key project of teaching category, research category, as well as services and counseling category are teaching planning, research projects and student counseling, respectively. Finally, rubrics set should have the interested parties to participate in, and follow fair, just, open evaluation procedures, looking for institutions and teachers are a win-win situation. Keywords: Teacher Evaluation, the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), Evaluation Indicators, the Private University of Science and Technology