本研究旨在建構優質學校校園營造指標及其指標細目，並研究指標及指標細目之相對權重、整體權重，以提供各校進行校園營造之具體明確方向。為達上述研究目的，首先本研究以文獻分析為基礎，初擬優質學校校園營造指標，接著採專家審查、模糊德懷術及層級分析法進行調查。
專家審查問卷以學者專家、臺北市優質學校校園營造及新北市卓越學校環境營造獲獎校長為對象，共發出16份問卷，回收有效問卷16份；模糊德懷術問卷共發出16份，回收有效問卷16份，經統計分析刪除未達門檻值之指標細目，建構出優質學校校園營造指標架構。另以前揭調查結果為基礎編製層級分析法問卷，共發出16份問卷，回收有效問卷13份，以調查各指標項目、指標及指標細目之相對權重與整體權重。
本研究主要研究結論如下：
一、以模糊德懷術建構之優質學校校園營造指標分為4個項目、16個指標和59個指標細目。
二、優質學校校園營造指標項目以「安全健康」最重要。
三、優質學校校園營造指標「安全健康」項目以「1.1安全無虞的環境設施」最重要、「人文藝術」項目以「2.1人文的學校建築風格」最重要、「自然科技」項目以「3.1 自然的綠色建築環境」最重要、「學習資源」項目以「4.1 可操作學生學習資源」最重要。
四、指標下之相對權重分別以「1.1.1 校地安全，校舍建築結構良好（如耐震性等），設施堅固安全」、「1.2.1 辦公室配置鄰近教學區，能有效督導校安，並達緊急應變之效」、「1.3.2 能依課程教學需求設置體能活動設施，並有效提升學生體能、促進健康」、「1.4.2 提供數量適足、情境優雅、舒適通風、整潔的廁所及安全衛生的飲用水」…等指標細目最重要。
五、優質學校校園營造指標整體權重以「1.1安全無虞的環境設施」、「1.2整合的安維管理資源」、「1.3健康的體能活動設施」、「1.4舒適的生活休憩環境」、「4.1可操作學生學習資源」等指標最重要。
六、優質學校校園營造指標細目整體權重以前20名指標最重要，占整體權重47.82%。
最後，本研究依據研究結果提出建議，提供未來教育行政機關、學校及未來研究有關優質學校校園營造指標評估及使用之參考。 / This research was aimed to construct the indicators of campus management and their corresponding priority weights, in order to provide the concrete directions for shools. To achieve those research purposes above, this research first based on the analysis of documents to establish relevant indicators about campus management, and adopted three methods: Expert Survey, Fuzzy Delphi and the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to survey.
The samples of Expert Survey contained 11 experts and school principals who aquired the award of campus management of Quality School in Taipei city or the award of Excellent School in New Taipei city, and 11 valid samples were collected. In order to select the applicable indicators, individual answers of 16 experets and principals are analyzed by “Fuzzy Delphi” method. Through the statistical analysis, the indicators which were lower than the threshold value were eliminated, and the outline of the indicators of campus management of Quality School was established. Based on the result of Fuzzy Delphi survey, the questionnaire of AHP was compiled, and 13 out of 16 samples were collected.
The main conclusions obtained were as follows:
1. The indicators of campus management of Quality School included 4 dimensions, 16 indicators, and 59 subordinate indicators.
2.“Security and health” is the most important dimesion.
3. “1.1 safe environments and facilities” was the most important indicator in the dimension of “security and health”; “2.1 humane school building style” was the most important one in the dimension of “humanities amd art”; “3.1 natural green building” was the most important one in the dimension of “nature and science”; “4.1 operable sduty resources for students” was the most important one in the dismension of “study resources”.
4. “1.1.1 safe school lands, nice structure of school buildings, and solid facilities”, “1.2.1 office near the teaching area”, “1.3.2 Setting up physical activity facilities according to the need of curriculum and teaching”, “1.4.2 providing sufficient, ventilative, and tidy restrooms and healthy drinking water ”, and … were the most important subordinate indicators in each indicator.
5. Regarding the overall priority weights of the indicators, “1.1 safe environments and facilities”, “1.2 intergrated resources of security maintenance”, “1.3 healthy physical activity facilities”, “1.4 comfortable living environments”, “4.1 operable sduty resources for students” , and … are the most important ones.
6. As for the overall priority weights of the subordinate indicators, the top 20 are the most important ones, and they accounted for 47.82% in the overall priority weights。
Finally, according to the research results, the suggestions are provided the education authorities, schools, and future researches to review and to use the indicators of campus management of Quality school.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0096171004 |
| Creators | 楊佳娟, Yang, Chia Chuan |
| Publisher | 國立政治大學 |
| Source Sets | National Chengchi University Libraries |
| Language | 中文 |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | text |
| Rights | Copyright © nccu library on behalf of the copyright holders |
Page generated in 0.0026 seconds