本研究主要目的有五：一、釐清大學教師的角色與任務；二、探討教師資格審查制度在大學的定位與規準；三、剖析國外大學教師資格審查制度概況；四、探究國內大學教師資格審查制度現況；五、對大學及主管教育行政機關提供未來改進之建議。本研究採文獻分析（literature review）、文件分析（document analysis）及半結構式訪談（semistructured interview），期望能藉由對大學教師資格審查之理論面與實務面的分析來達到上述目的。
本研究重要發現有八：
一、大學的理念與功能的轉變影響大學生態與制度運作。
二、教師的角色與任務的改變影響教師資格審查制度之內涵。
三、學術自由與大學自主的理念有助於釐清政府、大學與教師之關係。
四、教育評鑑概念有利於探究教師資格審查制度的定位。
五、理想的教師資格審查制度至少包括自主性、適切性、精確性、效用性及回應性等五項規準。
六、主要國家或地區教師資格審查制度受其歷史、文化背景及高等教育環境不同而有差異。
七、從整體性角度來看我國大學教師資格審查制度仍有改進空間。例如政府在制度規劃層面的彈性仍嫌不足、學校在執行層面仍欠缺多元性及多樣性。
八、從校際角度來看大學因其背景因素如定位、設校理念、校務發展、特殊學風及競爭優勢等不同，在延聘教師及教師資格審查制度上有相當差異。
本研究之主要結論有：
一、 教師資格審查制度的理念分析方面
（一） 回歸大學主體性。
（二） 全面關照教師整體表現。
（三） 尊重大學內部事務運作。
（四） 建立多元評量及回饋機制。
（五） 教師資格之審查應符合理想的評鑑規準。
二、主要國家或地區教師資格審查制度所得到的啟示方面
（一）教師資格審查制度宜考量歷史文化因素。
（二）教師聘期規劃宜符合世界潮流。
（三）教師資格條件宜力求嚴謹。
（四）學術倫理及責任宜加速強化。
三、目前國內大學教師資格審查制度所面臨的整體性問題方面
（一） 政府與大學的關係宜再調整。
（二） 政府宜明確區隔大學、技術校院及專科學校的差異性。
（三） 大學內部教師評鑑制度及文化宜速建立。
（四） 大學外部衝擊應妥善因應。
四、目前國內大學教師資格審查制度在校際間之差異方面
（一）政府在制度規劃時應兼顧國、私立大學屬性差異。
（二）大學在執行層面應考量特色以創新思維突破限制。
本研究的建議如下：
一、對主管教育行政機關的建議
（一） 政府應持續調整對大學的角色並加速鬆綁。
（二） 政府應區分大學校院與技專校院送審機制，取消發放教師證書制度。
二、對一般大學校院的建議
（一） 大學應儘速建立完整的教師評鑑制度。
（二） 大學應儘速發展學術自律及倫理規範。
（三） 大學應加強學校定位與選聘教師的連結以建立特色。
（四） 大學應活化並創新教師資格審查機制。 / There are five main purposes in this dissertation: 1.to clarify the roles and tasks of faculty of universities; 2.to investigate the principles and standards of the faculty qualification assessment process in the universities; 3.to examine the assessment process in other countries; 4.to analyze the current situations of the assessment process in Taiwan; 5.to provide suggestions for future improvement to the universities and the Ministry of Education.
This research contains literature review, document analysis, and semi-structured interviews in order to achieve the five aims mentioned above through both theoretical and practical analysis of the assessment process for faculty qualification.
The important research findings include the following:
1.The change of concepts and functions of university has influenced the school culture and the way the system operates.
2.The change of faculty roles and tasks has affected the substance of the faculty qualification assessment process.
3.The ideas of academic freedom and university autonomy have helped to clarify the relations among the government, the university and the faculty.
4.The concept of educational evaluation contributes to the investigation of right position for the faculty qualification assessment process.
5.The ideal faculty qualification assessment process should carry at least five standards: independence, propriety, accuracy, effectiveness, and responsiveness standards.
6.The faculty qualification assessment processes in the main countries and areas are different because of their histories, cultures, and environment of higher education.
7.From a comprehensive perspective, the faculty qualification assessment process in Taiwan still need to improve. For instance, the government is not flexible enough in terms of the planning of systems; the school lacks of variety and diversity in terms of implications.
8.Analyzing the recruitment processes and the faculty qualification assessment processes in various universities, the differences are determined by some background factors such as the school's position, educational ideas, development of school affairs, school culture and style, competition advantages, etc.
The main conclusions of this dissertation are as follows:
1.Analyzed from the concepts of the faculty qualification assessment process:
（1）Return to the autonomy of the university.
（2）Take the comprehensive performance of the faculty into account.
（3）Respect the operations of affairs inside the university.
（4）Build a system of varied evaluations and feedbacks.
（5）The assessment of the faculty qualification must accord with proper standards of evaluation.
2.Analyzed from the faculty qualification assessment processes in other countries:
（1）The faculty qualification assessment process should consider the factors of history and culture.
（2）The regulations for the terms of the faculty should keep with the world stream.
（3）The qualification of the faculty should be well-regulated and strict.
（4）The ethics and responsibilities of scholarship should be enforced faster.
3.The general problems of the faculty qualification assessment process in Taiwan:
（1）The relation between the government and the university needs to readjust.
（2）The government should make clear the differences between universities, colleges of technology, and vocational junior colleges.
（3）Universities should accelerate to build the teacher evaluation system inside the school.
（4）Universities should react properly to strikes from outside the school.
4.The differences of the faculty qualification assessment process between schools:
（1）As setting the regulations, the government should consider the basic differences between national and private universities.
（2）As implementing the process, each university should consider its specialty and style so as to be creative and not confined.
The suggestions this research makes include:
1.Suggestions to the Ministry of Education:
（1）The government should keep adjusting the role it plays in relation to the university and accelerate to pass its power to the later.
（2）The government should differentiate the assessment process for universities' teachers from the one for vocational colleges' teachers and abolish the teacher certificate system.
2.Suggestions to the universities:
（1）Universities should create a complete procedure for evaluating their faculty.
（2）Universities should develop the self-disciplines and ethics of scholarship.
（3）Universities should make more efforts on connecting the school specialties to teacher recruitment in order to create their own reputations.
（4）Universities should vitalize and recreate the process of the faculty qualification assessment.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:CHENGCHI/A2002000237 |
| Creators | 劉曉芬, Liu, Hsiao Fen |
| 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 0.0129 seconds