:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:臺北市國民中學校務評鑑之評析
書刊名:初等教育學刊
作者:湯志民 引用關係
作者(外文):Tang, Chih-min
出版日期:2002
卷期:11
頁次:頁25-50
主題關鍵詞:國民中學校務評鑑評鑑學校評鑑Junior high schoolEvaluationSchool evaluation
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(7) 博士論文(10) 專書(1) 專書論文(1)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:6
  • 共同引用共同引用:178
  • 點閱點閱:343
評鑑是一種描述和價值判斷的歷程,其目的誠如Stufflebeam等人所言:「評鑑的目的不在証明什麼,而在改進。」。對學校而言,評鑑的目的在改進學校教育,提升教育績效,促進學校發展,使之更臻完美。學校評鑑應注意客觀性、民主性、廣泛性、個別性、多元性、統整性、動態性、繼續性之原則,惟國內實施學校評鑑多年,成效不甚理想。臺北市政府教育局為因應教育改革、提升學校效能及校長遴選之需,特委請專案研究臺北市國民中學校務評鑑。研究者以其參與研究和評鑑的相關經驗,分析上述北市國民中學校務評鑑的特色為:(1)實施本土研究,(2)回歸學校效能,(3)增加教學評 鑑,(4)重視動態機制,(5)評鑑適度量化,(6)評鑑符應權貴,(7)強調學校特色,(8)尋求評鑑共識。並對其實施和發展,提供六點建議:(1)併校長遴選使評鑑制度化,(2)評鑑指標宜增列學生成就,(3)評鑑應客觀並能重視互動,(4)公布並適度說明評鑑結果,(5)形成性和總結性評鑑同步,(6)轉化與發展學校本位評鑑。
Evaluation is a process of description and value judgment. The purpose of evaluation, as Stufflebea et al. put it, is "not to prove, but to improve." For schools, the purpose of evaluation is to improve school education, to promote education accountibility, to accelerate school's development, and overall to make our school a better one. Therefore, school evaluation should follow several guidelines: objective, democratic, comprehensive, individual, multiple, integrative, dynamic and continuous. However, school evaluation in Taiwan didn't achieve satisfactory results after years of practice. Taipei City Government's Bureau of Education, aiming to realize goals of the educational reform, to increase school effectiveness, and also to provide an indicator for principal selection, appointed the professional to conduct a research on school evaluation of Taipei City's junior high schools. Based on relevant experiences acquired from joining researches and evaluations, the researcher made an analysis and concluded that school evaluation of Taipei City's junior high schools has the following characteristics: (1) doing local researches, (2) back to school effectiveness, (3) more teaching evaluations, (4) practical and clear indicators, (5) emphasis on dynamic mechanism, (6) adequate time to evaluate, (7) evaluation appropriately quantified, (8) evaluation in accordance with authority, (9) emphasis on school characteristics, (10) negotiating an agreement over evaluation. Finally, suggestions are made focusing on the implementation and development of school evaluation: (1) institutionalizing school evaluation through combining with principal selection; (2)"student achievement" should be added as the indicator; (3) evaluation should be objective and should put an emphasis on interaction; (4) The result of evaluation should be announced and properly explained; (5) Formative evaluation and summative evaluation should be made together; and (6) School-based evaluation should be transformed and developed.
期刊論文
1.Stufflebeam, D. L.(1994)。Introduction: Recommendations for improving evaluation in U. S. public schools。Studies in Educational Evaluation,20,3-21。  new window
學位論文
1.林劭仁(2001)。我國高級中學後設評鑑指標之研究(博士論文)。國立政治大學,台北市。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.游家政(1994)。國民小學後設評鑑標準之研究(博士論文)。國立臺灣師範大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.江文雄(1982)。國民中小學實施教學評鑑之研究。臺中:臺灣省政府教育廳。  延伸查詢new window
2.黃武鎮(1982)。國民中小學教學正常化評鑑之研究。臺中縣:臺灣省政府。  延伸查詢new window
3.黃炳煌(1983)。教育與訓練。臺北市:文景。  延伸查詢new window
4.曾文錄、湯志民、李珀、馮清皇、楊慶齡、賴文堅(2001)。國民小學校務評鑑指標建立及評鑑實施之研究。臺北市:臺北市政府教育局。  延伸查詢new window
5.張岳仁、林堯文、吳和惠、曾正吉、彭桂梅、戴麗緞(2001)。臺北市國民中學校務評鑑手冊。臺北市:臺北市政府教育局。  延伸查詢new window
6.Provus, M.(1971)。Discrpancy evaluation: For educational program improvement and assessment。Berkeley, CA:McCutchan。  new window
7.Stufflebeam, D. L.、Foley, W. J.、Gephart, W. J.、Guba, E. G.、Hammond, R. L.、Merriman, H. O.(1971)。Educational evaluation and decision making。Itasca, IL:F. E. Peacock。  new window
8.Wiles, J.、Bondi, J. C.(1984)。Curriculum development: A guide to practice。Columbus:A Bell & Howell Company。  new window
9.Nevo, D.(1995)。School-based Evaluation: A Dialogue for School Improvement。Elsevier Science。  new window
10.秦夢群(1998)。教育行政--實務部分。台北:五南圖書出版公司。  延伸查詢new window
11.Stufflebeam, Daniel L.、Shinkfield, Anthony J.、黃光雄(1989)。教育評鑑的模式。臺北:師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
12.陳漢強(1995)。美國大專院校評鑑之研究。臺中縣:臺灣省政府教育廳。  延伸查詢new window
13.吳清山(2000)。學校行政。臺北市:心理出版社。  延伸查詢new window
14.楊文雄(1981)。教育評鑑之理論與實際。臺灣省政府教育廳。  延伸查詢new window
15.行政院教育改革審議委員會(1996)。教育改革總諮議報告書。台北:行政院教育改革審議委員會。  延伸查詢new window
16.Lincoln, Yvonna S.、Guba, Egon G.(1989)。Fourth generation evaluation。Sage Publications。  new window
17.郭昭佑(20000000)。學校本位評鑑。臺北市:五南。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.湯志民(2001)。知識與教育轉型。現代教育論壇:知識經濟與教育。臺北:湯志民。  延伸查詢new window
2.Chelimsky, E.(1997)。The coming transformations in evaluation。Evaluation for the 21st century: A handbook。Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage。  new window
3.Stake, R. E.(1983)。Program evaluation, particularly responsive evaluation。Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation。Boston:Kluwer-Nijhoff。  new window
4.盧增緒(1995)。論教育評鑑觀念之形成。教育評鑑。師大書苑。  延伸查詢new window
5.湯志民(1988)。視導與評鑑。學校行政。高雄:復文。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE