1 |
國民中學校長資料導向決策指標建構之研究:ANP的應用 / Constructing indicators for the data-driven decision making of principals at public junior high schools: applying analytical network processing游麗容 Unknown Date (has links)
本研究旨在建構國民中學校長資料導向決策指標,做為國民中學校長進行資料導向決策之參考依據,以提升學校行政效率及教學效能,並根據研究結論,提出建議供有關單位參考。為達上述研究目的,本研究採用模糊德懷術及分析網路程序法,以具備資料導向決策理念與實務的專家學者及國民中學校長為研究對象,共寄發問卷14份,回收有效問卷14份,有效回收率為100%。本研究採用統計軟體Super Decision 2.0.8 beta進行分析,獲得以下結論:
一、國民中學校長資料導向決策指標體系由「學校願景領導」、「學校教學領導」、「學校組織運作與道德觀點領導」、「合作夥伴關係與區域政治領導」4個向度和20個決策指標構成。
二、國民中學校長資料導向決策向度以學校願景領導最重要,其次為學校教學領導、學校組織運作與道德領導、合作夥伴關係與區域政治領導。
三、各向度下最重要指標分別為:「1-1我能運用資料發展學校的學習願景,以促進所有學生學習的成功。」、「2-1我能運用資料界定並確認學生學習上所面對的問題。」、「3-1我能運用資料配置人力資源,以提升學生的學習成就。」、「4-1我能運用資料發展有效的溝通計畫。」。
四、國民中學校長資料導向決策指標體系最重要指標中,以「學校願景領導」最為重視,其次為「學校教學領導」。
最後依據上述研究結論,提出具體建議,以做為教育行政機關、國民中學校長參考運用。
|
2 |
教育學門系所評鑑指標體系建構之研究 / Research on the evaluation indicators of educational departments and graduate schools of educational discipline林筠諺, Lin, Yun Yan Unknown Date (has links)
本研究旨在探討教育學門系所評鑑的理論和執行相關課題,並建構教育學門系所評鑑指標權重體系,提供執行教育學門系所評鑑之參考。經由文獻分析,初擬教育學門系所評鑑指標,選取系所評鑑委員和系所主管共計16人為研究對象,使用模糊德懷術建構教育學門系所評鑑指標體系架構,再以網絡分析法建立評鑑指標的相對權重體系。研究結果指出,教育學門系所評鑑指標體系包含行政管理、環境設備、課程規劃、教師教學、學生學習、專業表現、經營成效等七個向度和17個次向度與65項評鑑指標。最後,本研究針對主管教育行政機關、辦理教育學門系所評鑑單位、教育學門系所及後續研究者提出具體建議。 / The study explored the relevant theoretical foundation and practical issues about the evaluation for educational departments and graduate schools. The study also proposed an evaluation indicator weighting system for educational departments and graduate schools in higher education. By reviewing relevant academic literature, the preliminary evaluative indicators were proposed. Sixteen experts who are university program evaluators or chairpersons of departments and graduate schools were the testing samples. This study adopted the Fuzzy Delphi method to build a framework of the evaluation indicator system. In addition, the relative weight of each evaluation indicator was assessed by the Analysis Network Process. The results showed that the conceptual framework of the evaluation indicator system containing 7 dimensions, 17 sub-dimensions, and 65 indicators. The seven dimensions are administrative management, environment and equipments, curriculum planning, faculty’s teaching, student’s learning, professional performance, and operative outcomes. Finally, suggestions were proposed to educational authority, institutions of program evaluation, educational departments and graduate schools, and further researchers.
|
Page generated in 0.0253 seconds