教育改革必須以教學為重心，教學評鑑的目的在蒐集教師教學品質的資料，提供教師教學上的回饋，作為改進教學的參考，使教學不斷精進，因此教學品質的提昇有賴教學評鑑的實施。教學評鑑之目的除了提昇教學品質外，有時也作為學校人事決策及學生選課之參考。 本文首先闡述教學品質的意義與向度，說明教學評鑑的意義，進而從文獻中探討教學評鑑的測量品質，接著參考期刊評鑑的分析方法，應用台東師院全校教師教學評鑑得分資料，以多元迴歸做適當的統計控制，分析影響教學評鑑的偏誤因素與實質因素，探究個別變項對教學評鑑得分的淨影響。藉以找出影響教師教學評鑑得分的因素，作為大學教師提昇教學品質與大專院校實施教學評鑑之參考。迴歸分析結果顯示： 對教學評鑑得分有顯著影響的可能實質因素，除了教師服務單位之外，助理教授、講師及教授的得分均顯著高於副教授；兼三長或系所主管的得分顯著高於未兼行政者；大專教學年資未滿1 年及20 年以上者得分顯著低於2-19 年者；而女性教師的教學評鑑得分顯著高於男教師。至於對教學評鑑有顯著影響的可能偏誤因素，發現教師給學生分數的平均數越高，其教學評鑑得分也顯著越高；在課程性質方面，必修課得分顯著低於選修或共選課；而其他課程性質間並無顯著差異。 整體而言，原先眾所質疑的「可能造成偏誤的因素」，對教學評鑑的影響並不大，教師在教學評鑑上的得分大致可反應其教學品質，而有不錯的效度。

At first, this study was to explore the meaning and dimension of teaching quality. Secondly, according to the literature review on the measure quality of teaching evaluation, this study applied to the biased analysis of journals’ evaluations to the data of the teaching evaluation at the National Taitung Teachers College. This study analyzed the biased factors and substantial factors of influencing teaching evaluation with the multiple regressions as a reference for upgrading the teaching quality and carrying out the teaching evaluation to universities and colleges. The results of this study as follow: According to the substantial factors related with the teaching evaluation, besides the teachers service departments, assistant professors, instructors and professors gained significantly higher scores than associate professors. Administratorsgained significant higher scores than others. Those who teach experience less than one year and over twenty years gained significant lower than two to nineteen years. Females gained significant higher scores than males. According to the biased factors related with the teaching evaluation, the higher mean scores which teachers gave students and the higher scores on the teaching evaluation. As far as the character of courses was concerned, these required courses made significant lower scores than optional courses and there were not significant differences among other different courses. To sum up, the biased factors were not important influence to teaching evaluation. The score of teaching evaluation could approximately reflect the teaching quality for teachers and have a fairish validity.