本研究旨在運用資料包絡法(data envelopment analysis, DEA)分析「教育部公私立大學校務資訊評鑑系統」中90至92學年度我國50所大學校院在研究與教學上之經營效率。研究問題有四：(1)國內大學校院教學與研究之投入與產出性指標系統分別為何？(2)國內各大學校院之相對效率值為何？改進策略為何？(3)國內各大學校院之發展類型為何？(4)國內各大學校院之發展趨勢為何？本研究考量投入項與產出項之重要性，編製「評估我國大學校院之發展策略指標權重專家調查問卷」以國內30位高等教育行政主管為調查對象進行層級分析取得指標相對權重，並套用於確定區域模式進行效率值之估算。指標係依據文獻探討與積差相關的同向性檢定，在研究效率上選擇6個投入項及5個產出項；在教學效率上選擇7個投入項及2個產出項。所使用之統計分析包括：積差相關、層級分析法、資料包絡法(效率分析、差額變數分析、參考集合分析、Malmquist 生產力指數)、Kruska-Wallis H檢定、Mann-Whitney U檢定、Tobit迴歸。
本研究得到以下六項結論：
一、本研究依大學生產關係架構所擬定之20項指標經相關分析、專家權重以及資料包絡法三種層面之分析，可作為以效率觀點評估我國經營效率的指標系統。
二、研究投入資源重專任副教授以上人數，研究產出重專任教師發表重要期刊論文篇數；教學投入資源重專兼任教師人數，然而，授課時數與約當畢業生人數在教學產出上同等重要。
三、三個學年度間，研究面向中有5校均為整體技術有效率，40校均為整體技術無效率；教學面向中有1校均為整體技術有效率，48校均為整體技術無效率。研究與教學無效率之原因均導因於純技術無效率，分別約浪費22.4%-27.2%以及26%-27.3%的投入資源，規模無效率影響較小。
四、不同權屬別對於整體技術效率之影響，主要源自於純技術效率；不同學校規模對於整體技術效率無影響，其係綜合學校規模越大純技術效率越差，但相對規模效率越佳的結果。
五、國內各大學校院發展，研究型大學以國立大學與醫學校院為主；教學型大學以師範校院與私立大學為主。
六、就三個學年度發展趨勢，整體而言研究效率提升，教學效率衰退，而各大學發展趨勢除整體技術效率略有消長外，35校在三個學年度發展類型均為一致。 / The purpose of this study is to assess the research and teaching productivities of 50 Taiwanese universities and colleges over the period of academic years 2001-2003. Research questions include: (1)What is the index system to assess school performance? (2)How many efficiency scores do these schools get? Inefficient units can implement what kinds of improvement to achieve efficiency? (3)What are their development styles? (4)What are their development tendencies? In order to consider weight restriction on inputs and outputs, author compiles “the expert questionnaire of assessing development strategy in Taiwanese universities and colleges”, and invites 30 specialists to answer, including 15 principals in higher education institutes and superintendents from Ministry of Education and 15 professors majoring in this field. Assurance region model with weigh indexes is used to calculate the whole efficiency scores. According to the result of literature reviewing and isotonicity test, author picks out 6 inputs and 5 outputs in research dimension and 7 inputs and 2 outputs in teaching dimension. Some statistic methods are used, including Pearson correlations, analytic hierarchy process, data envelopment analysis, Kruska-Wallis H test, Mann-Whitney U test and Tobit regression.
Results based on data show as follows:
1. Through statistic analysis, those indexes the author drafts can be used to assess the productivity of Taiwanese higher education institutes practically.
2. In research dimension, the most important input is the number of assist professor, output is academic paper accepted by prestigious journals. Besides, in teaching dimension, the most important input is the number of faculty; however, the amount of class hours is equal to the amount of graduates on output part.
3. In research dimension over three academic years, 5 schools were efficient in each year; however, 40 schools were inefficient in each year. Furthermore, in teaching dimension, only 1 school was efficient in each year; in contrast, 48 schools were inefficient. Both of research and teaching inefficiency mainly came from pure technical inefficiency, wasted 22.4%-27.2% and 26%-27.3% separately.
4. The effect of different authorities upon the efficiency mainly came from the pure technical efficiency. In addition, because of the effect mixed pure technical efficiency (PTE) with scale efficiency (SE) the effect of the different school scale upon the efficiency was non-significant.
5. Research universities are mostly from national universities and medical colleges. In contrast, teaching universities are mostly from private universities and normal colleges.
6. As a whole, research efficiency score grows but declines in teaching. Beside of some fluctuations on efficiency score, there are 35 schools maintain their development styles stably.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/G0921520141 |
| Creators | 傅遠智, Fu,Yuan Chih |
| 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 0.0025 seconds