The purpose of this research is adopting IPP evaluation mode to construct the evaluation indicators of elementary schools and its weight system. By way of studying documents and analyzing the evaluation indicators of school affairs already done by 9 counties and cities, there are 3 evaluation fields, 14 evaluation items and 84 evaluation indicators generalized. The researcher chooses the Delphi expert members through recommendations and from finding the scholars who have acquired specialties related to school evaluation . The 28 members include administrative staffs from education bureaus of county and city governments, specialists from teachers training institutes, parent organization, teacher organization, school executives, and schoolteachers. The Delphi members¡¦ main task is to make a judgment about the fitness of evaluation indicators and its weight system. After 3 times of Delphi questionnaires, the fitness of evaluation indicators are acquired. In the mean time, there¡¦s one relative weight questionnaire at the third time, and AHP is adapted to construct its weight system. The research results indicate: I. The main connotations and the evaluation indicators of elementary school evaluation . II. The ¡§Delphi Questionnaires" construct the fitness of evaluation indicators contents of elementary school affairs. III. The ¡§relative weight questionnaires¡¨ construct the weight system of evaluation indicators contents of elementary school affairs. Part 1. Large evaluation fields This includes three evaluation levels, and the titles and weights are as follows: ¡§B Process indicator ¡¨ Weight 37.65% ¡§A Input indicator¡¨ Weight 32.13% ¡§C Product indicator ¡¨ Weight 30.22% Part 2. 14 evaluation Items (1) ¡§A Input indicator¡¨ includes 4 evaluation indicators , and the titles and weights are as follows: ¡§A-2 Teachers¡¦ Ability Quality" Weight 13.20% ¡§A-1 Plans and Goals¡¨ Weight 8.74% ¡§A-3 Teaching Resource Facilities¡¨ Weight 6.15% ¡§A-4 School Environment Plan¡¨ Weight 4.04% (2) ¡§B Process indicator¡¨ includes 6 evaluation indicators, and the tit 1000 les and weights are as follows: ¡§B-1 Principal Leadership¡¨ Weight 10.29% ¡§B-4 Teaching Execution¡¨ Weight 6.37% ¡§B-3 School Atmosphere¡¨ Weight 6.04% ¡§B-2 School Executive Administration" Weight 5.37% ¡§B-6 Students¡¦ Affairs and Counseling¡¨ Weight 4.08% ¡§B-4 Curriculum Design and Execution¡¨ Weight 4.78% (3) ¡§C Product indicator¡¨ includes 4 evaluation indicators, and the titles and weights are as follows: "C-1 Students¡¦ Learning Performance¡¨ Weight 15.77% ¡§C-2 Teachers¡¦ Professional Growth¡¨ Weight 7.63% "C-3 Relationship of School and Community¡¨ Weight 3.26% Part 3. 84 evaluation indicators Concerning the weights of 84 evaluation indicators are not devised in this research. The goal is to leave the right to those government education organizations to decide whether to add or subtract the evaluation indicators according to their own backgrounds and flexible application of reality. IV. The evaluation indicators of assessing elementary school affairs are construct upon ¡§Investment-Process-Production¡¨ mode, and they bear connotations of equivalent importance. V. The evaluation indicators of assessing elementary school affairs construct by this research VI. constructing the evaluation indicators of assessing elementary school affairs, the three are equally important, IPP ¡§Investment-Process-Production¡¨. VII. Based on the constructing weight order, the prior indicators may be chosen to implement evaluation if necessary. VIII. Students are the main part of education. Emphasize students' learning performance. IX. Based on the most important indicator order, the prior indexes may be chosen to implement evaluation if necessary. X. Suggestions to follow-up research