本研究旨在建構國民中小學校長評鑑指標系統，了解指標系統之權重，並提出結論與建議，以供主管教育行政機關實施校長評鑑之參考，並提供後續研究之參考。 在研究方法部分，首先，以文獻分析探討校長評鑑之理論分析，了解校長評鑑之意義、相關概念、目的與程序；探討國內校長評鑑之現況；探討國內校長評鑑之相關研究；探討校長評鑑指標系統之建構，並初擬本研究國民中小學校長評鑑指標系統。第二，以專家審查問卷調查10位專家學者對本研究初擬之指標系統之意見。第三，採模糊德菲法問卷，以18位專精於校長評鑑之專家學者以及富實務經驗之校長為研究對象，以進行本研究指標系統之篩選。第四，採層級分析法問卷，以前揭篩選之指標系統為基礎建構問卷，同樣對18位研究對象進行調查，以建構本研究指標系統之權重。 根據研究之結果與分析，歸納本研究結論如下： 一、本研究建構之國民中小學校長評鑑指標系統共三階層，計有六大領域，十二個向度，三十八項指標。 二、本研究建構之國民中小學校長評鑑指標系統之第一階層各領域相對權重，排序如下：「課程與教學領導」領域佔23.3%、「學生與教師成長」領域佔21.7%、「行政領導與管理」領域佔19.9%、「政策與校務推展」領域佔13.9%、「專業成長與素養」領域佔12.1%、「資源與公關管理」領域佔9.1%。 三、本研究建構之國民中小學校長評鑑指標系統之第二階層各向度相對權重，在「課程與教學領導」領域下，以「教學領導」向度較重要，佔65.1%；在「學生與教師成長」領域下，以「學生學習」向度較重要，佔65.3%；在「行政領導與管理」領域下，以「行政領導」向度較重要，佔66%；在「政策與校務推展」領域下，以「校務推展」向度較重要，佔70.1%；在「專業成長與素養」領域下，以「理念操守」向度較重要，佔70.6%；在「資源與公關管理」領域下，以「資源管理」向度較重要，佔54.6%。 四、本研究建構之國民中小學校長評鑑指標系統之第三階層各指標相對權重，在「教學領導」向度下，以「協助教師實施多元與適性的教學與評量」最重要，佔38.5%；在「課程管理」向度下，以「主持課程發展會議，帶領教師規劃與實施學校課程」最重要，佔41.9%；在「學生學習」向度下，以「培養品德良好、身心健康的學生」最重要，佔29.2%；「教師成長」向度下，以「鼓勵教師參與課程教學研究，促進課程教學效能與創新」最重要，佔40.9%；「行政領導」向度下，以「激勵教職員工生動機，塑造學習文化與共同領導」最重要，佔31.3%；「人力管理」向度下，以「展現知人善任能力，使教職員工適才適所」最重要，佔46.6%；「校務推展」向度下，以「依照學校背景、特性與需求，型塑共享的學校願景」最重要，佔39.5%；「政策執行」向度下，以「將重要教育政策與法令融入校務發展計畫，並落實與檢討」最重要，佔44.9%；「理念操守」向度下，以「具有良好品格操守，遵守專業倫理規範」最重要，佔36.7%；「專業成長」向度下，以「具有專業責任感與服務熱忱，以專業領導同仁」最重要，佔47.7%；「資源管理」向度下，以「妥善運用各項資源，營造優質教學環境」最重要，佔36.7%；「公共關係」向度下，以「與家長、社區維持良好關係，促進交流與資源共享」最重要，佔51.9%。 最後，本研究根據研究結果，提出相關建議，俾供教育主管機關、國民中小學校長以及後續研究之參考。 / The purpose of the study is to construct the principal evaluation indicators system for elementary and junior high schools, understand the weights of the indicators system, and provide conclusions and suggestions for education administrative institutions to implement principal evaluation and future study. As for research methods, firstly, by literature review, discussing the theory basis of the principal evaluation to understand the signification, related concepts, purposes, and procedure; discussing the domestic current status of the principal evaluation; discussing the domestic related studies of principal evaluation; discussing the construction of the principal evaluation indicators system, and preliminarily develop the principal evaluation indicators system for elementary and junior high schools. Secondly, investigating the suggestions of 10 experts by questionnaire. Thirdly, selecting the indicators system by fuzzy Delphi method questionnaire for 18 experts and principals. In the final stage, constructing the weights of the indicators system by Analytic Hierarchy Process questionnaire for the same 18 experts and principals. The main conclusions are as follow: 1. The principal evaluation indicators system for elementary and junior high schools consists with 6 areas, 12 dimensions and 38 indicators in total. 2. The weights of 6 areas are: ‘curriculum and instructional leadership’ area (23.3%), ‘student and teacher growth’ area (21.7%), ‘administrative leadership and management’ area (19.9%), ‘policy and school affair promotion’ area (13.9%), ‘professional growth and integrity’ area (12.1%), ‘resource and public relations management’ area (9.1%). 3. The weights of 12 dimensions are as follow: in ‘curriculum and instructional leadership’ area, ‘instructional leadership’ dimensionis more important( 65.1%); in ‘student and teacher growth’ area, ‘student learning’ dimension is more important( 65.3%); in ‘administrative leadership and management’ area, ‘administrative leadership’ dimension is more important( 66%); in ‘policy and school affair promotion’ area, ‘school affair promotion’ dimension is more important( 70.1%); in ‘professional growth and integrity’ area, ‘idea and moral integrity’ dimension is more important( 70.6%); in ‘resource and public relations management’ area, ‘resource management’ dimension is more important( 54.6%). 4. The weights of 38 indicators are as follow: in ‘instructional leadership’ dimension, ‘assisting teachers to implement diverse and adaptive instruction and assessment’ is most important(38.5%) ; in ‘curriculum leadership’ dimension, ‘directing curriculum development conferences, and leading teachers to plan and implement curriculum’ is most important(41.9%); in ‘student learning’ dimension, ‘training moral and healthy student’ is most important(29.2%); in ‘teacher growth’ dimension, ‘encouraging teacher to participate curriculum and instructional research, and promoting curriculum and instructional innovation and efficacy’ is most important(40.9%); in ‘administrative leadership’ dimension, ‘encouraging faculty and student motivation, and shaping learning culture and participating leadership’ is most important(31.3%); in ‘human resource management’ dimension, ‘picking the right man for the right job’ is most important(46.6%); in ‘school affair promotion’ dimension, ‘according to school background, feature and needs, establishing shared school vision’ is most important(39.5%); in ‘policy implementation’ dimension, ‘integrating important education policies into school development plans, implementing and reviewing the school development plans’ is most important(44.9%); in ‘idea and moral integrity’ dimension, ‘possessing moral integrity, and compling with profession ethics’ is most important(36.7%);in ‘professional growth’ dimension, ‘possessing professional responsibility and service enthusiasm, and leading members by profession’ is most important(47.7%); in ‘resource management’ dimension, ‘properly using resources, and shaping high quality instructional environment’ is most important(36.7%); in ‘public relations’ dimension, ‘maintaining good relation with patents and community, promoting exchange ,and sharing resources’ is most important(51.9%). In conclusion, the findings and results in hope of providing suggestions for educational administrative institutions, elementary and junior high school principals, and future study.

本研究旨在瞭解國民小學特教團隊組織與特教團隊運作之指標、內涵與現況，並且探討與預測其關係，進而建構及驗證其互動模式，並依研究結果提出建議。首先，進行初步文獻探討，作為本研究之研究架構的理論基礎；其次，進行專家審查與正式問卷調查，正式問卷對象為校長、輔導主任、特教組長與特教老師，共384位，總共回收195 份調查問卷，有效問卷195 份，以分析現況、驗證模式；最後，依據研究結果進行討論與結論建議。研究主要發現如下： 一、國民小學特教團隊組織與特教團隊運作的指標、內涵及其現況 （一） 國民小學特教團隊組織包括「特教行政機制」、「團隊人力資源」與「特教家長參與」三個指標，得分均為高程度，其中以「特教行政機制」得分最高。 （二） 國民小學特教團隊運作包括「鑑定安置輔導」、「適性教育計畫」、「推動融合教育」三個指標，得分皆為高程度，其中以「鑑定安置輔導」得分最高。 二、不同背景變項在國民小學特教團隊組織與特教團隊運作之差異情形 （一） 不同背景變項在國民小學特教團隊組織的得分方面：研究發現在性別、所屬縣市、服務年資、擔任職務上有顯著差異。 （二） 不同背景變項在國民小學特教團隊運作的得分方面：研究發現在年齡、服務年資、擔任職務有顯著差異，此外，所屬縣市在推動融合教育有顯著差異。 三、國民小學特教團隊組織與特教團隊運作之相關情形 整體國民小學特教團隊組織與特教團隊運作間呈顯著高度正相關，國民小學特教團隊運作各指標中，以推動融合教育與國民小學特教團隊組織總量表之相關程度最高。 四、國民小學特教團隊組織各指標對國民小學特教團隊運作的預測情形 即國民小學特教團隊組織之特教行政機制、團隊人力資源、特教家長參與各指標對整體國民小學特教團隊運作有顯著的預測力。 五、國民小學特教團隊組織對國民小學特教團隊運作的適配情形 各項適配度指標良好，上游潛在變項「國民小學特教團隊組織」對下游潛在變項「國民小學特教團隊運作」具有顯著的影響力。 最後，本研究根據研究發現，提出相關建議，俾提供教育行政機關、國民小學行政人員與特教老師們及後續研究參考。 關鍵字：特殊教育評鑑、特殊教育評鑑指標 / The main purpose of this study is to investigate the relationship, content and status about the elementary school organization of special education team and operation of special education team. This study included literature analysis and questionnaire survey to be the survey methods. The purpose of literature analysis was aimed to explore the elementary school organization of special education team and operation of special education team. Based on arranging related theory, document, and opinion, researcher made the questionnaires of this study. The subjects of the questionnaire included the principals, tutorship director, special education leaders and special education teachers of elementary school in Taipei city and county of Taiwan. The data of this study was analyzed 195 sampling subjects by description statistics, t-test, correlation and ANOVA, Multiple Regression and LISREL model. According to the statistics analysis of the questionnaire, we can get the following results. A. In the aspect of the elementary school organization of special education team a. The organization of special education team includes three indicators, which are (1)the organization of special education administration , (2)the human resources of team, (3)the parents participation of special education. Except for the three ndicators are high degree. For all, the best dimension is “the organization of special education administration”. b. School personnel’ sexual, region, total years of servicing, and school occupation have significant influences on organization of special education team. B. In the aspect of the elementary school operation of special education team a. The operation of special education team includes three ndicators, which are (1)identification, placement and counsel, (2) Individualized Educational Program, (3) promote inclusive education. Except for the three idicators are high degree. For all, the best dimension is “identification, placement and counsel”. b. School personnel’age, total years of servicing, and school occupation have significant influences on operation of special education team. But School personnel’region have significant influence on “promote inclusive education”. C. In the aspect of the relationship between the elementary school organization of special education team and operation of special education team a. There was positive correlation and regression existed among the elementary school organization of special education team and operation of special education team. b. The elementary school organization of special education team did promote operation of special education team. In the last part, according to the findings and results, the researcher proposed some suggestion for the educational officers, the administrative staff of elementary school and special education teachers, hoping to benefit the improvement and development of education of elementary school in the future. Key word : special education evaluation ; the indicators of special education evaluation

國民中學實施教師專業評鑑制度之研究 摘 要 本研究旨在探討國民中學教師對於實施教師專業評鑑的意見，及相關配套措施差異性之看法，並進一步探究不同背景教師對於教育部規劃的教師專業評鑑制度有何看法上的差異。所研究之結果，希冀日後對於國民中學實施教師專業評鑑有所裨益。 為獲取國民中學教師對於實施教師專業評鑑之意見資料，本研究乃針對桃園縣、新竹縣市及苗栗縣等四縣市118所學校，寄發每校十二份問卷，合計寄發1328份問卷，回收有效問卷為997份。問卷回收後，以百分比及卡方（χ2）檢定考驗統計分析及處理相關資料，茲臚列重要研究結果如下： 一、在實施教師專業評鑑目的方面：國民中學教師對於教師專業評鑑之目的，以勾選形成性之評鑑目的最多，其中有六成以上教師勾選「協助教師改進教學方法」、「提供教師瞭解專業發展方向」及「樹立教師專業形象」三項；另外有四成以上教師勾選「作為處理教師在職進修之參考依據」、「建立教師生涯發展目標」及「處理不適任教師」等。 二、在實施教師專業評鑑原則方面：國民中學教師認為評鑑的原則應該把握下列原則：（一）評鑑目的要明確；（二）評鑑制度要健全；（三）評鑑過程要公開；（四）評鑑方式要多元；（五）評鑑結果要善用等。 三、在實施教師專業評鑑方式方面：（一）就評鑑人員而言，國民中學教師最能接受的評鑑方式依序是「教師自我評鑑」、「教師同儕評鑑」及「校內評鑑小組評鑑」；較不能接受非教育專業人員的評鑑。（二）就蒐集評鑑教師資料而言，國民中學教師最樂意接受「觀察教師教學及班級經營」，其餘依次是「檢視教師行政配合、獎懲、品德、勤惰及進修等文件紀錄」、「瞭解學生的學習成就」、「檢閱教師的教學檔案」、「查核教師自我評鑑資料」、及「審查批改學生作業情形」等。就實務面來說，唯有多元化蒐集評鑑資料，才能達到評鑑的客觀性。（三）就評鑑教師資料的處理方式而言，國民中學教師對於實施教師專業評鑑之後，提醒教師缺點的方式中，以「書面通知」及「面談」較受歡迎；而較不能接受以「不予通知只做年終總結性評鑑參考」及「公佈週知教師」的處理方式。（四）就評鑑教師的時機而言，國民中學教師對於實施教師專業評鑑較傾向於形成性的教師評鑑；均期待能透過評鑑之方式，以協助教師隨時改進教學方法，並促進教師專業成長。 四、在教師專業評鑑指標方面：國民中學教師認為評鑑指標的訂定，最符合學校需求的人員依序是「全校教師」、「學校各學習領域教師代表」及「學校行政人員」等；而指標的配分比例依序是「教學實務表現」佔20﹪，「訓導輔導表現」佔20﹪，「品德操守表現」佔20﹪，「專業成長表現」佔20﹪，「人際關係表現」佔10﹪，「行政紀錄表現」佔10﹪。 五、在教師專業評鑑結果的運用方面：國民中學教師對於評鑑優良教師的獎勵方式，其意向之優先順序是「給予獎金、晉俸、或年功俸之獎勵」、「給予嘉獎或獎章」、「給予休假機會」及「給予進修機會」等；而對於表現欠佳教師的處理方式，則認同之意向依序是「提供改進意見，限期實施複評」、「強制參加專業進修」及「留原俸級」等。 六、對於教育部規劃中的教師專業評鑑制度之看法方面：（一）國民中學有七成以上教師認為所有教師應該接受評鑑；然而就「以教師評鑑取代現行教職員考核方法」的贊成百分比例而言，校長群有85.7﹪贊成，教師兼行政人員有69.3﹪表示同意，至於一般教師則有52.7﹪表示認同；可見目前考核教師的辦法有待檢討修訂。（二）國民中學有七成以上教師贊成「教師只要通過教師評鑑就可以晉薪一級，並領取一個月薪給總額百分之九十至九十五的獎金」；至於「將全校教師一個月薪給總額的百分之五至十作為評鑑表現優異教師的獎金」方面，只有五成以上的教師認同；可見國中教師對於獎金發給之意見尚不一致，有待溝通建立共識。（三）國民中學約有七成左右教師對於「教師之晉薪與獎金之發給，乃依據教師評鑑結果而分開處理」表示認同；至於限制晉薪或獎金人數比例，則有七成以上教師非常反對；可見國中教師對於考核限制人數持不同看法。 七、不同背景教師對於實施教師專業評鑑制度相關配套措施之議題，多數呈現顯著差異之看法。 八、國民中學教師對於實施教師專業評鑑的作法，有七成以上教師認同能執行，唯對於評鑑的配套措施更殷切企盼能訂定健全的制度。因此，願教育界前輩除了能對後學的研究及建議加以斧正外，並祈能就此議題繼續探究以貢獻卓見。 關鍵詞：教師專業評鑑、教師成績考核、學校本位管理、教師專業評鑑指標、教師分級制、績優給付制、國民中學 / A Study on the Practice of Teacher Performance Evaluation of Junior High Schools ABSTRACT The purpose of this study was to explore the junior high school teachers’ opinions about teacher evaluation as well as the supporting measures. It would further look into the discrepancies on the viewpoints of the Teacher Performance Evaluation System being mapped out by the Ministry of Education. The findings and results so yielded are to benefit future teacher evaluation in junior high schools. In order to hear junior high school teachers’ voices on the teacher evaluation, the study handed out a total of 1,328 copies of twelve questionnaires to 118 schools in Taoyuan County and Hsinchu County. A total of 997 copies successfully were collected and processed by means of percentage and Chi-square Test (x2). The major findings were listed below : 1. In the aspect of the enforcement of the teachers performance evaluation: In the purposes of the teachers performance evaluation in junior high schools, as appraised through checkmarks, over 60% of the respondents ticked three items, i.e., “helping teachers upgrade the teaching methods”, “providing sound orientations for teachers to make sure of the specialized development” and “building up the professional image of teachers”. Besides, over 40% of the teachers ticked “providing grounds to teachers in their on-the-job education”, “setting up goals of career development for both faculty and students” and “settling problems of incompetent teachers”. 2. In the aspect of the principles of enforcement of teachers performance evaluation: The junior high school teachers believed that the evaluation should firmly hold the following principles:(1) Definite and express objectives of evaluation; (2) Sound and wholesome evaluation systems; (3) Open evaluation process; (4) Multifaceted evaluation methods; (5) Maximum possible uses of the evaluation results. 3. In the aspect of the methods for enforcement in the teachers performance evaluation: (1) In terms of assessing personnel, the evaluation methods most acceptable to junior high school teachers are: “evaluation by teachers themselves”, “evaluation by peers themselves” and “evaluation by in-school evaluation task forces” in that order; and the less acceptable one is evaluation by non-educators. (2) In terms of data collection, the best acceptable one is “observation of teachers’ teaching and class management”, followed by “inspecting teachers’ coordination in administration, awards & punishment, conduct, attendance and higher education”; “looking into students’ achievement in learning”, “looking into teachers’ teaching archives”, “checking teachers’ self-evaluation files” and “review of teachers’ marking & correction on students’ homework”. In practice, only the multifaceted collection of evaluation will make possible detached and neutral evaluation. (3) In processing of evaluation over teachers, the junior high school teachers, after enforcement of the teacher performance evaluation, among those methods to remind teachers of shortcomings, “documented notices” and “interviews” are more popular. Those unpopular ones include notably “no notice, used for reference in the year-end conclusive evaluation only”, “keeping teachers informed through public announcement”. (4) In terms of evaluation timing, junior high school teachers are more inclined to formality evaluation over teachers in the hope to help teachers enhance the teaching methods and to boost expertise to grow. 4. In terms of the indices in teachers performance evaluation: In the evaluation indices in the mind of junior high school teachers, the best meeting school needs are “entire faculty”, “leading representatives of teachers in various fields” and “administrative staff at schools”. The indices are in such ratios of “performance of practical teaching” 20%; “discipline guidance” 20%; “performance in conduct” 20%; “performance in expertise growth” 20%, “performance in interpersonal relationships” 10%; “performance in administrative records” 10%. 5. Utilization of the results yielded in teachers performance evaluation: As to the methods to award outstanding teachers, the junior high school teachers responded with the view in such priority order: “encouragement of incentive, advance or annual award”, “conferment of citations or medals”, “chances for vacation days”, “chances for higher education”. Toward teachers of unsatisfactory performance, the preferred measures include “offering advice and rechecking within the specified time limit”; “compulsory higher training” and “no-raise”. 6. Viewpoints about the schoolteacher evaluation system being mapped out by the Ministry of Education: (1) In junior high schools, over 70% of the teachers uphold that teachers should receive evaluation. Over the idea of “taking schoolteacher evaluation instead of the current evaluation method”, 85.7% of school principals said yes, 69.3% of administrative staff & faculty said yes while 52.7% of general teachers backed the idea. Such results suggest that the current evaluation or rating systems leave much room to reassess. (2) In junior high schools, over 70% of the teachers back the idea that “teachers should be upgraded by one degree plus incentive at 90~95% of one month’s salary as long as they successfully pass evaluation”; only over 50% of them backed the idea of “taking 5%~10% of the payroll of the entire faculty of the school as an incentive to outstanding teachers” These findings suggest that junior high school teachers are still in discrepancies in terms of incentives to teachers. (3) In junior high schools, approximately 70% of the teachers back that “teachers should receive salaries and incentives only based on the results of evaluation over teachers but over 70% of them objected to the idea of restricting the quotas for advancement or incentives”. These factors found in the questionnaire survey suggest that junior high school teachers have discrepancies in terms of negative measures against teachers on the grounds of evaluation results. 7. Over the supporting measures related to teacher evaluation on good performances, teachers of different backgrounds showed significant discrepancies in the responses. 8. Over the teachers performance evaluation of junior high schools, over 70% of the teachers agreed and hoped that the evaluation would be put into enforcement. They further expect to see wholesome systems about the coordinating measures. It is, therefore, hoped that those veteran and senior educators would kindly offer advice and comments with continuing studies on these issues. Key words: Teachers performance evaluation; performance rating for teachers; school-based management; indicators of teachers performance evaluation; Career ladder program of teacher ; merit-pay for outstanding performance, junior high schools.

本研究旨在建構大學系所自我評鑑之後設評鑑指標－以JCSEE方案評鑑標準為基礎，並提出結論與建議，以供大學實施系所自我評鑑之參考。 研究方法上，先以文獻分析初擬出大學系所自我評鑑之後設評鑑指標，接著以專家問卷進行指標的刪修和確定，再利用模糊德菲術問卷整合專家學者對指標重要性之看法，最後以歸一化方式求得各指標的權重，完成我國大學系所自我評鑑之後設評鑑指標。根據研究之結果與分析，歸納主要結論如下： 一、本研究建構之大學系所自我評鑑之後設評鑑指標，計有五大類，三十個標準，六十項指標。 二、參考「JCSEE方案評鑑標準」建構大學系所自我評鑑之後設評鑑指標，其方法可行。 三、本研究建構之大學系所自我評鑑之後設評鑑五大類標準中，以「適切性標準」較為重要。 四、大學系所自我評鑑之後設評鑑各類別標準中，分別以「有意義的過程和結果」、「脈絡的可行性」、「回應與包容導向」、「可靠的資訊」、「評鑑檔案化」較重要。 最後，本研究根據研究結果，提出相關建議，俾供教育主管機關、大學系所以及後續研究之參考。 / The purpose of the study is to construct of meta-evaluation indicators of university departmental self-evaluation - based on the JCSEE program evaluation standards, in order to provide conclusions and suggestions for the university to implement the departmental self-evaluation. According to the research methods, first, through the analysis of literature review, it preliminarily develops the meta-evaluation indicators of university departmental self-evaluation. Second, the expert’s questionnaires modified the preliminary indicators. Third, by using the Fuzzy Delphi questionnaire about important indicators evaluated by experts are integrated. Final, normalization of fuzzy number’s total score determined the weight of each indicator, establishing the meta-evaluation indicators of university departmental self-evaluation. The main conclusions follow: 1. The meta-evaluation indicators of university departmental self-evaluation consist with five major categories, 30 standards, 60 indicators in total. 2. The method is feasible that constructing the meta-evaluation indicators of university departmental self-evaluation based on the JCSEE program evaluation standards. 3. The meta-evaluation indicators of university departmental self-evaluation consist of five major categories, the ‘propriety standards’ is the most important. 4. The meta-evaluation indicators of university departmental self-evaluation consists with 30 standards, ‘meaningful processes and products’ in utility standards, ‘contextual viability’ in feasibility standards, ‘responsive and inclusive orientation’ in propriety standards, ‘valid information’ in accuracy standards, and ‘evaluation documentation’ in evaluation accountability standards are the most important. In conclusion, the findings and results in the hope of providing suggestions for educational administrative institutions, university departments, and future studies.

本研究旨在建構一套適用當前教育環境的「國民小學學校效能評鑑指標與權重體系」，以作為未來有效評鑑國民小學辦學績效的基礎。 研究者透過推薦程序，選定教育學者、教育行政人員、小學校長及小學教師等合計138名為參與評定專家，以進行指標可用性及相對權重分配之調查及訪談，並應用卡方考驗、階層分析程序法(AHP) 等進行考驗分析，最後建構完成「國民小學學校效能評鑑指標與權重體系」。研究結果顯示： 一、「國民小學學校效能評鑑指標與權重體系」中，一級指標包含了「教育輸入」、「教育歷程」與「教育產出」。其相對權重分配，「教育輸入」指標為26％，「教育歷程」指標為41％，「教育產出」指標則為33％。 二、一級指標中之教育輸入指標，下轄「發展目標與計畫」、「經費與教學設備」、「教師能力素質」與「學校環境品質」等四個二級指標。其相對權重分配，依序為20％、17％、43％與20％，其下並分別下轄數個三級評鑑指標。 三、一級指標中之教育歷程指標，下轄「校長領導作為」、「學校行政管理」、「學校組織氣氛」與「教師教學品質」等四個二級指標。其相對權重分配，依序為23％、12％、23％與42％，其下並分別下轄三到四個三級評鑑指標。 四、一級指標中之教育產出指標，下轄「發展目標與計畫達成」、「學生成就表現」、「教師專業成長」與「學校社區聲望」等四個二級指標，其相對權重分配，依序為24％、34％、28％與14％，其下並分別下轄二到四個三級評鑑指標。 五、三級評鑑指標項下，並建構有評估細目指標，惟並無相對權重之設計，以符合實務應用時客觀具體與因地制宜之平衡需求。 此外，本研究也針對「學校效能評鑑模式」、「評鑑指標的有效選擇」與「相對權重的理想建構」等進行分析討論。文末並針對實務應用與未來之研究方向等提出具體之建議。 / The purpose of this study aims to establish the evaluation indicators and the weight system of school effectiveness in elementary education. Total of 138 experts were recommended to help developing the evaluation indicators. The subjects consisting of educators, administrators, principals, teachers in elementary schools are implemented with questionnaires and interviews. The main work of these experts was to judge the availability of indicators and the ratio of weights. The results are analyzed by Chi-square test and Analytic Hierarchy　Process（AHP）. The conclusion manifests as follows: 1) the first-order indicators in the weight system for elementary school effectiveness include educational input, educational process, and educational output. The weight for each inidicator is 26%, 41% and 33% respectively. The second-order inidicators and their weights are stated as follows: a.) the "educational input" comprises four second-order indicators: developing goals and planning (20％), expenditure and equipment（17％）, teachers' competence（43％） and environmental quality（20％）. There are three third-order indicators under these second-order indicators. b.) the "educational process" encompasses four second-order indicators: principal's leadership（23％）, administration and management（12％）, school climate (23％) and teaching quality (42%). Each of these indicators contains three or four third-order indicators. c.) the "educational output" contains of four second-order indicators: the developing and achieving goals（24％）, students' performance（34％）, teachers' professional development（28％）, and school's reputation in community (14％). Each of these indicators also contains 2 to 4 third-order indicators. 2.) the reason for the fourth-order indicators not given any weight is to keep the flexibility of this system in various education settings. Besides, this study also discusses the evaluation model of school effectiveness, the effective choice of indicators and the ideal construct of indicator weight. At the end of the study also proposes some concrete suggestions for practice and further study.

基於教育指標客觀而精簡的特性，本研究嘗試建立一套適合當前教育環境的「我國高級中學後設評鑑指標權重體系」。其方法首先經由文獻探討，分析國內外關於教育指標及後設評鑑的相關研究，並以此建立我國高級中學後設評鑑指標調查問卷初稿。再利用得懷術，結合專家學者智慧修正指標。最後則以臺灣區公、私立高級中學校長為對象寄發問卷，有效樣本123位，並以因素分析法計算後設評鑑指標權重。據此，本研究建構完成之「我國高級中學後設評鑑指標之權重體系」，其結果顯示： 一、「我國高級中學後設評鑑指標之權重體系」中，一級指標包括「評鑑規劃階段」，權重值.204、「評鑑設計階段」，權重值.226、「評鑑實施階段」，權重值.233、「評鑑結果階段」，權重值.220、「結果利用與檢討階段」，權重值.228。 二、一級指標中之「評鑑規劃階段」，下轄「評鑑目的」、「評鑑計畫」、「規劃人員」等三個二級指標，其權重值依序為.391、.402、.379，二級指標下共有11個三級後設評鑑指標，亦各有其權重。 三、一級指標中之「評鑑設計階段」，下轄「評鑑方式」、「評鑑表與評鑑標準」、「評鑑組織及人員」等三個二級指標，其權重值依序為.373、.378、.371，二級指標下共有12個三級後設評鑑指標，亦各有其權重。 四、一級指標中之「評鑑實施階段」，下轄「溝通與協調」、「評鑑資料蒐集方法」、「學校自評過程」、「訪視評鑑過程」等四個二級指標，其權重值依序為.286、.298、.280、.296，二級指標下共有17個三級後設評鑑指標，亦各有其權重。 五、一級指標中之「評鑑結果階段」，下轄「評鑑資料分析」、「評鑑報告」、「評鑑結果公佈」等三個二級指標，其權重值依序為.358、.362、.359，二級指標下共有13個三級後設評鑑指標，亦各有其權重。 六、一級指標中之「結果利用與檢討階段」，下轄「評鑑結果的利用」、「評鑑結果的檢討」等二個二級指標，其權重值皆為.523，二級指標下共有10個三級後設評鑑指標，亦各有其權重。 此外，本研究也針對得懷術及因素分析方法的運用進行分析與檢討，最後並針對實務應用及未來後續研究方向等提出具體的建議。 / The purpose of this study is to establish the meta-evaluation indicators and the weight system of senior-high school in Taiwan.First,we used document analysis to establish the primary scales of meta-evaluation indicators of senior-high school in Taiwan(M.E.I.S.T.).Then,we used the delphi technique to improve the primary scales.Finally, 123 principles of senior-high school in Taiwan were investigated, and we used factor analysis to calculate the weights of M.E.I.S.T.. The main conclusion of this study are as follows: (1)The first-order indicators of M.E.I.S.T. include “the stage of evaluation formulation”,” the stage of evaluation design”, “the stage of evaluation implementation”, “the stage of evaluation results”,“the stage of use and discussion of results”. The weights for each indicator is .204,.226,.233,.220,and.228. (2)There are 3 second-order indicators under“The stage of evaluation formulation”.They are “The evaluation purpose”, “The evaluation plan”, “The staff of planning”. The weights for each indicator is .391, .402, .379.There are 11 third-order indicators under them. (3) There are 3 second-order indicators under“The stage of evaluation design ”.They are “The evaluation ways”, “The evaluation scales and criterias ”, “The organizations and staff”. The weights for each indicator is .373, .378, .371. There are 12 third-order indicators under them. (4) There are 4 second-order indicators under“The stage of evaluation implementation”.They are “The communication and negotiation”,“The data collection”,“The self-evaluation process”, “ The external evaluation process”.The weights for each indicator is .286, . 298, .280, .296. There are 17 third-order indicators under them. (5) There are 3 second-order indicators under“The stage of evaluation results”.They are “The data analysis”, “The evaluation report ”,“The disclosure of results”. The weights for each indicator is .358, .362, .359. There are 13 third-order indicators under them. (6) There are 2 second-order indicators under“The stage of use and discussion of results.”.They are “The use of results ”, “The discussion of results ”. Both of the weights are .523. There are 10 third-order indicators under them. Besides,this study also discusses the implementation of delphi technique and factor analysis. At the end of the study also proposes some concrete suggestions for practical and further study.

本研究旨在建立高級中等學校校務基金績效評鑑系統， 並以「模糊德菲法」蒐集政策利害關係人意見，共建立5項構面29項指標。 本研究結論如下： 一、本研究共建立五大構面， 以構面權重高低排序分別為： 「財務收支及財產管理績效」（21.28%）、 「基金運用、預算編製及執行績效」（20.52%）、 「學校經營目標及經營計畫」（19.72%）、 「基金管理及學校組織運作」（19.51%）、 「學習品質及滿意度」（18.96%）。 二、依照各構面內指標權重高低，依序如下： （一）「財務收支及財產管理績效」構面內最重要者為「教學研究及訓輔費 用占業務成本與費用比率」。 （二）「基金運用、預算編製及執行績效」構面內最重要者為「建立預算編 製與執行作業程序」。 （三）「學校經營目標及經營計畫」構面內最重要者為「學校校務發展定位 與特色」。 （四）「基金管理及學校組織運作」構面內最重要者為「內部審核執行成效」。 （五）「學習品質及滿意度」構面內最重要者為「建立歷年校務基金報表公 開專區」。 最後，依據研究結論分別給予教育主管機關、學校以及後續研究相關建議。 / The purpose of this study is to establish a system about the performance evaluation indicators for the school funds of high schools in Taiwan. By using the fuzzy delphi method with opinions of stakeholder, the study consists of 5 dimensions and 29 indicators in total. According to priority of 5 dimensions, the conclusions are as follows： 1.“performance of financial receipts, expenditures and property management”(accounts for 21.28%) 2.“performance of funds, budget planning and execute”(accounts for 20.52%) 3.“performance of school management goal and planning ”(accounts for 19.72%) 4.“performance of fund management and school organization operation ”(accounts for 19.51%) 5.“performance of learning quality and satisfaction degree”(accounts for 18.96%) According to priority of intra-dimension indicators ,the conclusions are as follows： 1.In the dimension “performance of financial receipts, expenditures and property management”, the indicator “the ratio for teaching, research ,discipline and counseling cost to operation cost ” accounts for the most part. 2.In the dimension “performance of funds, budget planning and execute”, the indicator “establishing standard of procedure for budget planning and execute” accounts for the most part. 3.In the dimension“performance of school management goal and planning ”, the indicator “status and feature for school development” accounts for the most part. 4.In the dimension “performance of fund management and school organization operation ”, the indicator “performance of internal auditing” accounts for the most part. 5.In the dimension“performance of learning quality and satisfaction degree”, the indicator “establishing school-fund statements website over the years” accounts for the most part. According the conclusions, some suggestions had been proposed: 1. suggestions for ministry of education 2. suggestions for school administrators 3. suggestions for further study

本研究旨在瞭解臺北市優質學校評鑑指標─以行政管理向度為例之內涵。研究方法為文獻分析、問卷調查與專家訪談，其中問卷調查之樣本為臺北市公私立國民中小學學校行政人員共630位，可用問卷471份，可用率為74.76%；專家訪談對象為臺北市參與優質學校評選，並已獲獎之學校校長共4位。研究工具包含自編之「臺北市優質學校評鑑指標之研究─以行政管理向度為例調查問卷」及「臺北市優質學校評鑑指標之研究─以行政管理向度為例訪談大綱」。本研究之統計方法為描述性統計、t考驗、單因子變異數分析與Scheffé事後比較、Pearson積差相關、線性結構關係分析(SEM)等方式。根據研究結果與分析後歸納之研究結論如下： 壹、優質學校行政管理向度中的知識管理、e化管理、品質管理、績效管理 四項指標之現況 一、臺北市公私立國民中小學學校行政人員在知識管理指標量表及其分向度 的現況得分程度中上，並以「建置利於知識管理的校園環境」及「建立 學校知識庫及分享應用平台」分向度得分最高。 二、臺北市公私立國民中小學學校行政人員在e化管理指標量表及其分向度 的現況得分程度中上，並以「達成具體的e化管理的層級廣度」分向度 得分最高。 三、臺北市公私立國民中小學學校行政人員在品質管理指標量表及其分向度 的現況得分程度中上，並以「建立以需求與滿意為導向的服務」分向度 得分最高。 四、臺北市公私立國民中小學學校行政人員在績效管理指標量表及其分向度 的現況得分程度中上，並以「建立績效管理制度落實績效管理執行」分 向度得分最高。 貳、不同背景變項在知識管理、e化管理、品質管理、績效管理四項指標得分 之差異情形 一、學校行政人員背景變項中，年齡、現任職務、服務年資、學校類別於知 識管理指標得分之差異達顯著水準，但性別、最高學歷、學校屬性、學 校規模則未達顯著差異。 二、學校行政人員背景變項中，性別、年齡、現任職務、服務年資、學校類 別於e化管理指標得分之差異達顯著水準，但最高學歷、學校屬性、學 校規模則未達顯著差異。 三、學校行政人員背景變項中，年齡、現任職務、服務年資於品質管理指標 得分之差異達顯著水準，但性別、最高學歷、學校屬性、學校類別、學 校規模則未達顯著差異。 四、學校行政人員背景變項中，性別、年齡、現任職務、服務年資、學校類 別於績效管理指標得分之差異達顯著水準，但最高學歷、學校屬性、學 校規模則未達顯著差異。 參、知識管理、e化管理、品質管理、績效管理四項指標量表及其分向度得分 之相關分析 一、整體知識管理指標量表與整體e化管理指標量表間呈顯著正相關，且在e 化管理指標量表各分向度中，以「建立學校e化管理的組織制度」與知 識管理指標量表之相關程度最高。 二、整體知識管理指標量表與整體品質管理指標量表間呈顯著正相關，且在 品質管理指標量表各分向度中，以「建立學校全面品質管理的計畫或方 案」與知識管理指標量表之相關程度最高。 三、整體知識管理指標量表與整體績效管理指標量表間呈顯著正相關，且在 績效管理指標量表各分向度中，以「規劃績效管理程序訂定相關管理辦 法」與知識管理指標量表之相關程度最高。 四、整體e化管理指標量表與整體品質管理指標量表間呈顯著正相關，且在 品質管理指標量表各分向度中，以「建立學校全面品質管理的計畫或方 案」與e化管理指標量表之相關程度最高。 五、整體e化管理指標量表與整體績效管理指標量表間呈顯著正相關，且在 績效管理指標量表各分向度中，以「建立績效管理制度落實績效管理執 行」與e化管理指標量表之相關程度最高。 六、整體品質管理指標量表與整體績效管理指標量表間呈顯著正相關，且在 績效管理指標量表各分向度中，以「建立績效管理制度落實績效管理執 行」與品質管理指標量表之相關程度最高。 肆、驗證知識管理、e化管理、品質管理、績效管理四項指標之適配度 一、本研究具有良好的整體適配度，符合判斷值＜0.05的規準。 二、本研究具有良好的比較適配度，符合判斷規準。 三、本研究具有良好的精簡適配度，符合可能值域為0~1之判斷規準。 四、本研究具有良好的基本適配度，符合判斷規準。 五、本研究具有良好的內在適配度，符合判斷值須為正的實數之規準。 最後，本研究根據研究結果分別提出以下建議： 壹、對主管教育行政機關之建議 一、透過學校現場資訊瞭解，改進優質學校行政管理的評選歷程。 二、依據評選實際情況及各校建議與需求，不斷充實及修正評鑑指標。 三、學校行政管理之課程應嵌入知識分享的理論與實務。 四、挹注足夠的經費與資源，以充實優質的e化管理基礎環境。 五、落實統計資料庫之建置與參賽成果之匯整的績效管理。 貳、對學校行政人員之建議 一、擬定彈性的品質管理計畫及標準作業流程。 二、優質學校行政管理之運作須結合各校願景。 三、領導者須整合行政團隊之共識與向心力。 四、善用激勵原則，提高參與評選之動機及意願。 五、資料呈現與方案撰寫須以創意取勝。 / The main purpose of this research is to study the indicators of evaluating the quality school in Taipei city: an example of the dimension for administration management. The research methods included literature analysis, questionnaires investigation, and interviews. The research instrument was distributed to 630 school administrative personnel of public or private elementary and middle schools in Taipei city. There are 471 valid samples which were used in this study. The purpose of survey method with 4 specialists was aimed to explore the opinions of specialists. The data obtained was interpreted using descriptive statistics, t-test, one-way ANOVA, Scheffé posteriori comparison, Pearson’s product-moment correlation, and SEM through the use of LISREL 8.71. The conclusions drawn from the study were as follows : A.The existing situation in the dimension for administration management of quality school 1.The perception of school administrative personnel were above average agreement of the knowledge management indicators. For them, the best items are “establish the campus environment which favors knowledge management” and “establish the school knowledge base and the shared or applied platform.” 2.The perception of school administrative personnel were above average agreement of the e-management indicators. For them, the best item is “achieve the concrete level and breadth of e-management.” 3.The perception of school administrative personnel were above average agreement of the quality management indicators. For them, the best item is “establish the services which take the demand and satisfaction as the guidance.” 4.The perception of school administrative personnel were above average agreement of the performance management indicators. For them, the best item is “establish the system of performance management and carry out the execution of performance management.” B.The difference of each examinee in different background variable of making scores of knowledge management, e- management, quality management, and performance management indicators 1.School administrative personnel’s age, position of service, years of service, and school category have significant influences on knowledge management indicators. But School administrative personnel’s sex, highest educational degree, school attribute, and school size do not have any significant influences. 2.School administrative personnel’s sex, age, position of service, years of service, and school category have significant influences on e-management indicators. But School administrative personnel’s highest educational degree, school attribute, and school size do not have any significant influences. 3.School administrative personnel’s age, position of service, and years of service have significant influences on quality management indicators. But School administrative personnel’s sex, highest educational degree, school attribute, school category and school size do not have any significant influences. 4.School administrative personnel’s sex, age, position of service, years of service, and school category have significant influences on performance management indicators. But School administrative personnel’s highest educational degree, school attribute, and school size do not have any significant influences. C.In the aspect of relationships among the indicators and items of knowledge management, e-management, quality management, and performance management 1.There are positively correlation existed among knowledge management indicators, e-management indicators, quality management indicators, and performance management indicators. 2.There are positively correlation existed among items of knowledge management indicators, e-management indicators, quality management indicators, and performance management indicators, too. D.Confirm the model of the dimension for administration management of quality school 1.The dimension for administration management of quality school contains four indicators : knowledge management indicators, e-management indicators, quality management indicators, and performance management indicators. 2.The model of the dimension for administration management of quality school for school administrative personnel of public or private elementary and middle schools in Taipei city is proper. In the last part, based on the research results, the researcher proposed some suggestions for “educational administrative agencies”, “school administrative personnel”, and “other researchers”, hoping to benefit the improvement of indicators of evaluating the quality school in Taipei, especially in the dimension for administration management in the future.

本研究旨在建構國民小學教育空間品質評鑑指標。研究方法部分，先以文獻分析歸納出國民小學教育空間品質評鑑之初擬指標，再以專家問卷以及模糊德菲術問卷進行調查。模糊德菲術調查樣本為22位對國民小學的校園規劃、空間環境相當了解的校長、學者及教育行政機關主管為對象，透過三角模糊數整合專家對指標重要性之看法並篩選指標項目，最後以歸一化之方式求得各構面以及各項指標權重，完成國民小學教育空間品質評鑑指標體系。根據研究之結果與分析，歸納主要結論如下： 一、本研究建構之國民小學教育空間品質評鑑指標，含兩層指標，第一層指標有 6項，第二層指標有35項。 二、本研究建構之國民小學教育空間品質評鑑之第一層指標，依權重排序分別為「安全與管護」（18.41％）、「舒適與健康」（17.51％）、「特色與美感」（16.59％）、「節能與永續」（16.40%）、「充足與彈性」（16.28%）及「社交與休憩」（14.80%）。 三、本研究建構之國民小學教育空間品質評鑑之第二層指標依權重排序，在安全與管護方面，應特別重視校舍建築耐震防災、避難空間與動線的規劃，以及校園死角的監控管護；在舒適與健康方面，應特別重視校園環境的乾淨與整潔，且教室應有良好的照度以及通風；在特色與美感方面，應特別重視教育空間應富有寓教於境的教育情境、具有美感，以及能展現學校重要精神；在節能與永續方面，應特別重視教育空間能維持生態多樣性以及節水減碳的規畫與設計；在充足與彈性方面，應特別重視特殊需求的學生使用，並有足夠的各式教學與活動及多目的使用的空間；在社交與休憩方面，應特別重視學生交流互動、師生對話，以及與社區資源共享的空間。 最後，本研究依研究結果分別就對教育主管機關、對學校及對後續研究提出建議。 / The purpose of this study is to construct the evaluation indicators for quality of educational space in elementary schools. As for research methods, by means of literature review, and then 35 indicators within 6 main dimensions had been organized as a raw model of quality of educational space in elementary schools indicators based on which the Fuzzy Delphi questionnaire was developed and the survey was conducted with the sample size of 22 experts. Symmetric triangular fuzzy number then was used to analyze experts’ opinion on the importance of each indicator and to help indicator selection. At last stage, normalization of fuzzy number’s total score determined the weight of each dimensions and indicators; accordingly, the quality of educational space in elementary schools indicator system was constructed. The main conclusions are as follows： 1. The quality of educational space in elementary schools indicator system consists with 6 dimensions and 35 indicators in total. 2. The 6 dimensions are:safety and security（18.41％）, comfort and health（17.51％）, characteristics and aesthetic（16.59％）, energy efficiency and sustainability（16.40%）, adequate and flexible（16.28%）,social and leisure（14.80%）. 3. The second layer indactors for the quality of educational space in elementarty school are : in “safety and security”, should be the building seismic disaster, asylum space and the route planning, and monitoring of management and protection of the campus corner ; in the “comfort and health”, with special attention to the campus environment clean and tidy, and the classroom should have good illumination and ventilation; in the “characteristics and aesthetic” context, special attention should be full of educational space education through environmental education context, the aesthetic , as well as important to show school spirit; in “energy efficiency and sustainability”, and the particular importance of education to maintain the ecological diversity and space saving and carbon reduction planning and design; in “adequate and flexible” in regard, special attention to students with special needs, and there is enough variety of teaching and activities and multi-purpose use of space; in “social and leisure” aspects, special attention should be student interaction, teacher-student dialogue and resource sharing with the community space. According to the conclusions, some suggestions had been proposed : 1..suggestions for education administrators,2.suggestions for schools, and 3.suggestions for further study.