自Zadeh(1965)提出模糊集合論，將集合論之二值邏輯擴充至多值邏輯後，使得集合論更為完善，能更精確地描述實際問題之特性。由於教師評鑑的規準建構與測量方法皆深具模糊性，因此有必要針對評鑑問題之模糊特性，選擇適當之模糊理論。本研究以模糊德菲法以整合專家意見以建構評鑑指標，續以模糊層級分析法計算各指標間的相對權重。教師評鑑除考量量化指標外，由於質化指標常以語意詞句(linguistic terms)表達，故採取Chen和Hwang (1992)所提之轉換法將模糊評語集轉換為明確得點值(crisp score)。並利用模糊綜合評估以從事實際教師評鑑之結果分析，其中涉及不同運算算子間的差異比較。 本研究結果發現：教師評鑑指標體系包括教師評鑑指標共可區分為九大類主指標四十一項次指標。其主指標分別為「專業知識」、「教學準備能力」、「教學策略與實施能力」、「教學評量能力」、「運用教學資源能力」、「班級經營能力」、「專業責任」、「校務參與及服務績效」與「人際溝通能力」等九類；「專業知識類」次指標包括「任教科目的專門知識（含提供完整的知識架構）」、「教學方法的專業知識（含清楚教導概念）」、「課程與教材方面的知識（包括清楚目前的學習內容與先前的學習內容及未來的學習內容之間的關連）」、「教學情境的專業知識」、「輔導方面的知識（包括了解學生的心理）」與「學習與發展方面的知識（包括精熟學生背景知識和經驗）」等六項，「教學準備能力類」次指標包括「訂定教學計畫，妥善準備教具」、「根據學生學習需求及課程標準，訂定適合的教學目標」等兩項，「教學策略與實施能力類」次指標包括「教導認知、情意及動作技能的學習與遷移」、「教材展示精確又清楚」、「運用適當教學方法的技巧」、「對教學內容的解釋、舉例之能力」、「教學內容組織能力」、「引起並維持學生的學習動機與注意力」、「教學表達能力」、「傾聽兒童說話的技巧」、「促使學生延展其思考」等九項，「教學評量能力類」次指標包括「評量兒童表現並提供回饋與指導」、「根據評量結果改進教學歷程」、「適時而正確地評估學生進步情形」等三項，「運用教學資源能力類」次指標包括「妥善佈置教學環境」、「運用多樣教學資源」等兩項，「班級經營能力類」包括「輔導學生的能力（包括輔導學生因學業及日常生活所產生的困擾）」、「指導學生遵守生活常規，養成良好行為習慣」、「教室管理的技巧（包括建立愉快的班級氣氛、建立教室常規和程序）」、「有效運用獎懲手段」、「訂定適切的班級規範」與「創造適當的學習環境」等六項，「專業責任類」次指標包括「關懷與瞭解學生」、「工作勤惰」、「教學認真」、「教育信念」、「研究進修」與「敬業精神」等六項，「校務參與及服務績效類」次指標包括「主動積極協助校務推展」、「配合學校行政詳建各項學生檔案」、「對學校活動積極參與」等三項，「人際溝通能力類」包括「同儕教師溝通交流分享互動之能力」、「和家長保持溝通互動以維持良好的親師關係」、「建立和維持師生關係」、「教師能公平、公正地對待全部學生」等四項，合計四十一項次指標。 / Since Zadeh(1965) proposed the fuzzy sets theorem and further developed the theorem from　two-value logic to continues multi-value logic, the assembly theorem had become more completed and was capable of depicting the characteristics of real problem more specifically. Because the standard structure and measuring method of teacher appraisal are both ambiguous, it is necessary to adopt an suitable fuzzy theorem for this ambiguous characteristic of teacher appraisal. The study incorporated the opinions of specialists into structural evaluation indicator based upon Fuzzy Delphi and further calculated the relative weights among each indicator by Fuzzy Analytic Hierarchy Process. The teacher appraisal not only need to quantify the indicator but also to qualify them using linguistic terms to express. Therefore, the study adopted the Chen-Hwang (1992) transfer method to transform the ambiguous evaluation terms into specific crisp scores and used the composite of fuzzy evaluation to engage the analysis of real teacher appraisal involving differentiated comparison among individual operants. The outcomes of the study demonstrated that the indicator system of teacher appraisal including teacher appraisal indicator consist of 9 major indicator and 41 minor indicator. The 9 major indicator were professional knowledge, capability of teaching preparation, teaching strategy and implementation ability, capability of teaching assessment , capability of employing teaching resource, capability of class management, professional duty, involvement of school managing and service achievement, and capability of interpersonal communication. The 6 sub-indicator in the professional knowledge category includes professional knowledge of the specific discipline with a comprehensive knowledge structure, professional knowledge of teaching methods included a lucid teaching concept, professional knowledge of class and teaching material included understanding of the connection between the current and future learning contents. professional knowledge of teaching situations, professional knowledge of consulting included understanding of student psychology and professional knowledge of learning and developing included awareness of student background knowledge and experiences. There were two sub-indicator in the capability of teaching preparation (making a teaching agenda and preparing teaching tools, and planing a proper teaching goal based upon student learning need and class standard. The 9 sub-indicator in the teaching strategy and implementation ability were, understanding of guidance and learning and transferring of mental and physical skills, demonstration of teaching material precisely and clearly, employment of proper teaching skills, the interpretation of teaching contents and exemplification faculty, ability to organize teaching contents, inspire and maintain learning motivation and attention of student, faculty of teaching expression, listening skills concerning the child talk, and stimulate the extension of student thinking. The 3 sub-indicator in capability of teaching evaluation were, evaluation of child perfor-mance in order to render guidance and feedback, rescheduling the teaching agenda according to the evaluation outcomes, and accurately and timely evaluating student progression . The capability of employing teaching resource category consisted of implementing teaching environment congruently and adopting diversified teaching resources. The 6 sub-indicator in capability of class management were faculty of student guidance (consulting the student problems causing by class-learning and everyday activities), lead students to fellow the normal rules and to keep righteous behavior habits, class room managing skills ( establish an amicable classroom atermosphere and the classroom guidelines and procedures), proper employing award/ punish system, making the proper classroom paradigm, and create suitable learning environment. The 6 subindicator in professional duty were concerning and understanding students, working habits, teaching sincerity, teaching believe, advancing research, reverence to occupation, The 3 subin-dicator in involvement of school administration and service achievement were, actively assisting the school administration to implement, cooperating the school administration to establish the student records, actively engaging the school activities. The capability of interpersonal communication category composed of 4 subindicator, capability of communicating and interacting with teaching colleagues, capability of communicating and interacting with student parents and maintain a good teacher-parent relationship, establishing and keeping the teacher-student relationship, treating all student with equality and fairness. The grand total of sub-indicator were 41.

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.