:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:一所國立大學之教師教學評鑑多元化指標建構
書刊名:教育政策論壇
作者:李琪明 引用關係
作者(外文):Lee, Angela Chi-ming
出版日期:2015
卷期:18:3=55
頁次:頁73-103
主題關鍵詞:科目評鑑教師升等教師評鑑教學評鑑教學績優獎勵Course evaluationTeacher promotionTeacher evaluationTeaching evaluationExcellent teaching award
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(2) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:70
  • 點閱點閱:89
本研究希冀就科目評鑑、教師評鑑(教學構面)、教師升等(教學構面)及獎勵教師教學績優等四者,凸顯大學教師教學評鑑的重要性,並在既有制度與法規透過民主的溝通歷程,研擬兼其理念基礎與實施可行性的大學教師教學評鑑多元化指標。研究者乃以整體理念與實踐經驗為範疇,但聚焦一所國立大學為研究對象,研究方法包括理論探討與文獻剖析、專家諮詢座談、問卷調查,以及公民審議會議等。研究結果分就理想與實踐兩方面論述:就相關理念與國外大學實施情形,若與我國諸多大學的現況相較,其對於教學理念的詮釋較為廣義、教學評鑑的指標與來源較為多元,而且評鑑項目的數量較為豐富,甚值我國參考。其次,為使理想落實大學,乃以問卷調查該所大學教師、學生與校友的意見,並進一步召開該校首次的公民審議會議進行溝通,決議增加些許教師教學評鑑指標以彰顯其多元性:不過,該些指標多被評定為選擇項口而非必備,顯示參與者在現有環境下傾向對現況的微幅調整。本文最後提出若干結論與建議,以供教育界與學界參考。
The purpose of this paper is to construct multi-dimensional indicators for university faculty’s teaching evaluation, including course evaluation, teacher evaluation (teaching dimension), teacher promotion (teaching dimension) and the excellent teaching award to reveal the importance of teaching evaluation indicators and grass-roots communication in higher education. Research methods include literature review, symposia, questionnaire and a meeting of citizen deliberation. After a close comparison between several universities abroad and certain universities in Taiwan, it was found that the former had a broader definition of teaching, more pluralistic indicators and sources of teaching evaluation, and more diversified items of evaluation than the latter. A national university in Taiwan was chosen as a case study for the feasibility of the practice of foreign universities. Based on a questionnaire of the university’s students, faculty, and alumni, and a following meeting of citizen deliberation, it was found that respondents to the questionnaire all opted for a slight revision of the current teaching evaluation system of the university. They recommended that more indicators of teaching evaluation should be used though they considered most of the added indicators to be optional instead of obligatory. Several conclusions were made and several recommendations were proposed to educators and academia for reference.
期刊論文
1.曾正宜、陳舜芬(20081000)。網路彈性化學生評鑑教師教學系統對評鑑行為與結果的影響。課程與教學季刊,11(4),213-236。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Kulik, J. A.、Mckeachie, W. J.(1975)。The evaluation of teacher in higher education。Review of Research in Education,3,210-240。  new window
3.何希慧(20070900)。做好教學評鑑配套措施。評鑑雙月刊,9,24-27。  延伸查詢new window
4.吳志偉、邱燕松(20111200)。從教學評量系統構件分析模式探討經營教學策略的卓越性。運籌與管理學刊,10(2),41-50。new window  延伸查詢new window
5.施宏彥(20091200)。大學學生評鑑教師教學量表編製之研究--以南部某科技大學為例。嘉南學報.人文類,35,790-804。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.侯雅雯(20100400)。「學生評鑑教師教學」可能成為一種規訓機制嗎?。教育研究學報,44(1),133-151。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.潘靖瑛(20120200)。探析影響大學生評鑑教師教學結果之因素--以慈濟大學為例。慈濟大學教育研究學刊,8,175-214。  延伸查詢new window
8.鄭瑞棠(20080100)。科技大學以教學績效作為教師升等的可行性。評鑑雙月刊,11,44-45。  延伸查詢new window
9.Tran, N. D.(2015)。Reconceptualization of approaches to teaching evaluation in higher education。Issues in Educational Research,25(1),50-61。  new window
10.張德勝(20051000)。臺灣地區大學校院「學生評鑑教師教學」制度之研究。師大學報. 教育類,50(2),203-225。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.孫志麟(20070900)。績效控制或專業發展?--大學教師評鑑的兩難。教育實踐與研究,20(2),95-128。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.Chalmers, D.(200809)。Teaching and learning quality indicators in Australian Universities。Institutional Management in Higher Education 2008 General Conference。Paris, France。  new window
研究報告
1.彭森明、施俊名(2006)。大學教師評鑑機制之研究 (計畫編號:94A1004EI)。新竹市:國立清華大學高等教育研究中心。  延伸查詢new window
學位論文
1.陳琦媛(2007)。我國公立大學教師教學評鑑之研究(博士論文)。國立政治大學。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.Hénard, Fabrice、Leprince-Ringuet, S.(2008)。The path to quality teaching in higher education。Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development。  new window
2.Huntley-Moore, S.、Panter, J.(2006)。A practical manual for evaluating teaching in higher education。Dublin, Republic of Ireland:All Ireland Society for Higher Education。  new window
其他
1.林國明(2012)。專題講座簡報檔案:什麼是公民審議會議?,http://2012surrogacydd.blogspot.tw/。  延伸查詢new window
2.American Association of University Professors(1990)。Statement on teaching evaluation,http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/pubsres/policydocs/contents/evalstatement.htm。  new window
3.Center for Research on Learning and Teaching, University of Michigan(2014)。Guidelines for evaluating teaching,http://www.crlt.umich.edu/tstrategies/guidelines。  new window
4.Cornell University(1992)。Teaching evaluation handbook,http://www.cte.cornell.edu/documents/Teaching%20Evaluation%20Handbook.pdf。  new window
5.Derek Bok Center for Teaching and Learning, Harvard University(2010)。Feedback for students, feedback for teachers,http://bokcenter.harvard.edu/icb/icb.do?keyword=kl985&pageid=icb.page29701。  new window
6.Higher Education Academy(2001)。UK professional standards framework (UKPSF),https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/professional-recognition/uk-professional-standards-framework-ukpsf。  new window
7.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(2007)。The path to quality teaching in higher education,http://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/44150246.pdf。  new window
8.Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development(2007)。Supporting quality teaching in higher education,http://www.oecd.org/edu/imhe/qualityteaching。  new window
9.NYU Center for the Advancement of Teaching, New York University(2009)。Resources for faculty,http://www.nyu.edu/cte/Faculty.html。  new window
10.UCLA Academic Personnel Office, University of California(2012)。Appendix 5: Instructions to review & appraisal committees,https://www.apo.ucla.edu/policies/thecall/appendices-1/appendix-5-instructions-to-review-appraisal-committees。  new window
11.University of Sydney(2012)。Evaluating your teaching,http://sydney.edu.au/staff/fye/during_semester/teachingjpractice/evaluating_teaching.shtml。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE