:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:技專校院校務標竿管理指標與程序及權重體系建構之研究
書刊名:教育學刊
作者:鄭彩鳳 引用關係吳慧君
作者(外文):Cheng, Tsai-fengWu, Huei-chun
出版日期:2008
卷期:31
頁次:頁1-44
主題關鍵詞:技專校院階層程序分析法德懷術標竿管理權重體系Analytic hierarchy processBenchmarkingDelphi surveyTechnical universities and collegesWeights system
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(3) 博士論文(7) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:3
  • 共同引用共同引用:18
  • 點閱點閱:55
本研究之主要目的在瞭解標竿管理的理論內涵;分析國內外標竿管理在企業界與教育界之應用情形;整合標竿管理之理論與應用,研擬標竿管理應用在技專校院校務管理之核心要素草案,進而透過統計分析建構技專校院校務標竿管理之指標與程序,以提供技專校院運用。為了達成以上目的,本研究由文獻分析建構指標與程序草案,採二次德懷術調查問卷及相對權重問卷,透過階層程序分析法建構技專校院校務標竿理論之指標與程序暨權重體系。本研究之主要結論為:一、標竿管理主要核心要素包含「支援功能」、「工作流程」與「組織績效」三大領域。二、標竿管理應包括指標內涵及實施程序等輸入、過程與結果之架構。三、在本研究所建構的校務標竿管理之三大領域中,以「組織績效」最具適切性;12項層面中,適切性最高者為「教育滿意度」;39個指標中,適切性最高者為「執行行動計劃」。四、本研究所建構技專校院校務指標內容權重體系中以「組織績效」最為重要,佔58%;12項層面內容權重,以「學習表現」最具重要性權重為24.36%;39個指標內容權重,以「畢業生完整技術水準」最具重要性權重為8.53%。
The main purposes of this study are first to realize the theory of benchmarking and its concept used in the education; secondly, to analyse operational process and policies of benchmarking and its application used in the areas of enterprise and education; thirdly, to draft benchmarking core factors for technical universities and colleges by intergrading the theory and application of benchmarking, and then to construct benchmarking indicators and process applied in technical universities and colleges with statistic analysis. To accomplish the goal of this study, literature review and the execution of surveys of Delphi, relative weights, and analystic hierarchy process are conducted to construct benchmarking indictors and process. The conclusions of this are listed as follows: 1. Three domains include supportive function, work procedure, and organizational performance. 2. Benchmarking should possess the frameworks of indicators and implement of procedure, and input, process and outcome are contained as well. 3. Organizational performance is the most proper domain in the constructed benchmarking for universities and colleges. Among twelve dimensions, the sixths of the most proper ones include educational satisfaction, human resource, implementation, plan, academic performance, and research development. And plan implementation, ratio of teacher and student, drafting of items for benchmarking, enterprisers’ satisfaction, ratio of license obtainment, and students’ satisfaction are regarded as highly adequate indicators. 4. Organizational performance is also very important domain (58%) in the indicator weights system of this study. Among the dimensions, academic performance is the most important (24.36%), and graduated students with good standard for operating techniques is considered as the leading indicator(8.53%) in the weight system of thirty-nine indicators. Based on the above conclusions, some suggestions of this study are provided for references in the future study and application of impeletment.
期刊論文
1.Patricia, W.(2000)。Benchmarking in Higher Education: An Australian Case Study。Innovations in Education and Training International,37(1),59-67。  new window
2.劉祥得(20000300)。「標竿學習法」之研究--政府再造的新策略。中國行政評論,9(2),91-134。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Welsh, J. F.、Metcalf, J.(2003)。Cultivating faculty support for institutional effectiveness activities: Benchmarking best practices。Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,28(1),33-45。  new window
4.湯堯(20021000)。論述高等教育經營策略分析:以內部品保系統與外部標竿系統之建立為例。教育研究資訊,10(5),1-27。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.吳清山、林天祐(2004)。教育名詞:標竿學習。教育研究,117。  延伸查詢new window
6.Jarrar, Y.、Zairi, M.(2001)。Future Trends in Benchmarking for Competitive Advantage: A Global Survey。Total Quality Management,12(7/ 8),906-912。  new window
7.Manuso, S.(2001)。Adult-centered Practices: Benchmarking Study in Higher Education。Innovative Higher Education,25(3),165-181。  new window
8.Hagelund, B.(1999)。Benchmarking in Administration: A Case Study From the University of Copenhagen。Perspective,3(2),89-93。  new window
會議論文
1.McGregor, F.(2000)。Performance Measures, Benchmarking and Value。0。  new window
2.Losh, C.(1994)。A Benchmarking Model: Benchmarking Quality Performance in Vocational Technical Education。0。  new window
研究報告
1.Copa, G. H.、Ammentorp, W.(1998)。Benchmarking New Designs for the Two-year Institution of Higher Education。Berkeley, CA。  new window
學位論文
1.陳惠釧(2003)。我國技專校院成本效益指標與標竿比較之分析:以四所學校為例,0。  延伸查詢new window
2.蔡俊旭(2004)。標竿學習在國民中學應用之研究,0。  延伸查詢new window
3.Lee, T. J.(2001)。Benchmarking academic key performance indicators for higher education,St. Paul, MN。  new window
4.賈靜嫻(2002)。利用標竿管理創造競爭優勢研究--以鉅明股份有限公司為例(碩士論文)。國立中山大學。  延伸查詢new window
5.謝惠雯(2001)。標竿管理關鍵成功因素與績效之研究(碩士論文)。國立成功大學,台南。  延伸查詢new window
6.廖艾倫(2003)。廣告效率之標竿管理研究:以臺灣化妝品廣告為例,0。  延伸查詢new window
7.李承烯(2001)。服務業如何導入標竿管理活動改善服務品質之研究,0。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.(American Productivity、Quality Center)(1993)。The Benchmarking Management Guide。Portland, OR:Productivity。  new window
2.Saaty, T. L.(1998)。The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation。New York:McGraw-Hill International Book Co.。  new window
3.李建華、方文寶(1995)。企業績效評估理論與實務。臺北:超越企管顧問公司。  延伸查詢new window
4.Spendolini, M. J.(1992)。The Benchmarking Book。NY:AMACOM。  new window
5.Camp, Robert C.(1995)。Business Process Benchmarking: Finding and Implementing Best Practices。Milwaukee, WI:ASQC Quality Press。  new window
6.Alstete, J. W.(1995)。Benchmarking in higher education: Adapting best practices to improve qual­ity。Washington, DC:George Washington Univer­sity。  new window
7.Andersen, Bjørn、Pettersen, Per-Gaute(1996)。The Benchmarking Handbook: Step-by-Step Instructions。London:Chapman and Hall。  new window
8.McKinnon, K. R.、Walker, S. H.、Davis, D.(2000)。Benchmarking: A Manual for Austrailian Universities。Benchmarking: A Manual for Austrailian Universities。0。  new window
9.馮曌(2004)。標竿管理。標竿管理。北京。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.教育部(2007)。教育統計摘要,臺北市。  延伸查詢new window
2.Bridgland, A.,Goodacre, C.(2005)。Benchmarking in Higher Education: A Framework for Benchmarking for Quality Improvement Purposes,0。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關書籍
 
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE