本研究採立意抽樣，以環球技術學院學生為研究對象，做體育教師教學評鑑量表研究，目的在編製合適量表，藉以提供給學校做為評鑑體育教師之參考；在97 位樣本中，經項目分析、因素分析後，得以下結論： 一、量表編製以驗證性分析量表編製方法來說，本研究題目來源共有五種，獲得66個題目；就建構效度上，本量表以驗證性因素分析進行內部一致性效標處理，再以因素分析—主成分分析法，以Kaiser 常態化的Varimax 法，取出特徵值大於1.0的因素，各題目因素負荷量都大於.5 之因素與題目，最後呈現五個因素20道題目的5分等級量表；其過程皆依據編製原則要點，逐一刪減，製作嚴謹。二、量表各數據在量表因素分析，總量表α值.9070，累計解釋變異量71.955。分量表一「教學態度」有9 題，分量表二「教學評量」4題，分量表三「師生互動」3 題，分量表四「學生自評」2題，分量表五「教學內容」2題。由於這是一份態度、心理知覺量表，因此由以上各數據顯示，總量表α值.9070實屬值得參考使用程度。

The study in question is conducted on random samples taken from students at Transworld Institute of Technology. The evaluation on PE teachers' performance is to produce an appropriate performance table for evaluation of PE teachers by the school administration. The 97 samples that were received underwent an itemized analysis and a factor breakdown before reaching the following conclusions: 1. Preparation of performance table Based on the preparation of performance table using the confirmatory factor analysis, the thesis of this study is contributed by 5 sources totaling 66 issues. In terms of construction efficiency, this performance table undergoes a criterion of internal consistency process with the confirmatory factor analysis. Secondly, with factor analysis—principal components analysis and Kaiser's normalized Varimax approach, factors with an eigen value above 1.0 are taken. With the factors and questions with a factor loading above. 5 duly selected, a 5-degree performance table with 20 questions belong to 5 factors are produced. The process undergoes a rigid screening by following the preparation highlights and eliminating the unnecessary ones. 2. Figures on the performance table When it comes to the performance factor analysis, total performance evaluation α is .9070 and the accumulated interpretation variation amounts 71.955. Performance Evaluation Table 1 Teaching Attitude comes with 9 questions; Performance Evaluation Table 2 Teaching Evaluation brings 4 questions, Performance Evaluation Table 3 Teacher-Student Interaction comes with 3 questions, Performance Evaluation Table 4 Students' Self Evaluation has 2 questions and finally, Performance Evaluation Table 5 Contents of Teaching shows 2 questions. As this performance evaluation table deals with attitude and psychological awareness, the figures indicated above suggest that the total performance evaluationαof .9070 is worth taking for reference. This study suggests taking follow-up works incorporating a qualitative analysis, especially for evaluation of teachers. After all, all an evaluation can do is for reference and figures may experience distortions for specific reasons, in particular, when the evaluation has much to do with promotion, seniority and examination of teachers that make it paramount to carry out the work in a meticulous way.