英國研究評鑑制度的省思：以RAE制度為例

Reflaction on the Research Assessment Exercise in England

10.6423/HHHC.200707.0206

湯家偉

英國研究評鑑RAE ； 學術卓越 ； 大學評鑑 ； Research Assessment Exercise RAE ； academic excellence ； University Evaluation

學校行政

50期（2007 / 07 / 01）

206 - 218

繁體中文

由於知識經濟和全球化帶來了高度競爭的市場，大學在知識創發方面所扮演的角色更形重要。為了厚植研發能力及強化國家競爭力，世界各國的高等教育政策在1980年代之後有了明顯的改變，均等的考量逐漸被卓越的追求所取代，自從1990年以來，亞太地區國家的高等教育政策也反映了這股品質掛帥、卓越優先的浪潮（戴曉霞，2005）。英國的研究評鑑制度(RAE)施行近20年，可謂英國追求卓越之重要高教政策，雖然尚有爭議之處，但其成果亦有目共睹，而其成功的一個關鍵原因即是評鑑結果直接作為中央研究補助撥款的重要依據，但這樣的做法也對英國大學造成許多的衝擊。是以，本文先就英國高等教育經費撥款制度作一概覽，再進一步對RAE制度之內涵作探討，並就其前兩次評鑑結果對英國大學學術生態之影響與問題作一綜合了解，據以歸納出幾點作為國內近來追求大學卓越之另類思考。

As globalization intensifies the international competition in many aspects, the role of the university as the powerhouse for production of knowledge and innovative human resources has regained attention. For the sake of improving national competitiveness in strategic fields, Western countries have been shifting their higher education policy from concern for equity to excellence since the 1980s. A similar policy approach has been adopted by Asian-Pacific countries since the 1990s, and the pursuit of academic excellence as well as the building of world-class universities has become a national aspiration. (Tai, 2005). RAEs have been held in the UK for almost 20 years and did have promoted the overall research quality. The key factor for its success is the binding of the RAE outcomes with research funding which also pose great impact on higher education institutions. The present research would start by a brief review of the funding system. The RAE system and the consequences of last two assessment activities are then discussed. Suggestions are also made in the last part for Taiwan higher education authorities.

1. Hare, P. G.(2003).The United Kingdom`s Research Assessment Exercise: Impact on Institutions, Departments, Individuals.Higher Education Management and Policy,15(2),43-62.
2. Harley, S.(2002).The Impact of Research Selectivity on Academic Work and Identity in UK Universities.Studies in Higher Education,27(2),187-205.
3. Section 1: overview of the research assessment exercise
4. Section 1: Criteria and working methods
5. Criteria and working methods
6. Annex
7. Changes since the RAE 2001
8. Quality profiles
9. №den, P.,Nieminen, M.,Kaukonen, E.,West, A.(1999).External evaluation and the funding of universities: A comparison of the UK and Finland.European Journal of Education,34(3),357-371.
10. Shattock, M.(1999).The Impact of the Dearing Report on UK Higher Education.Higher Education Management,11(1),7-17.
11. 胡悅倫、陳漢強主編(1997)。大學評鑑。台北:五南。
12. 發展中心研究動態
13. 楊瑩(2004)。英國高等教育品質保證制度的建構與改革。高等教育品質管理與國際競爭力國際學術研討會，嘉義:
14. 賴鼎銘、成露茜主持人(2004)。量化指標並非學術評鑑萬靈丹：以國外幾種代表性的學術評鑑為例。海外及台灣目前學術評鑑的做法說明。反思台灣（人文與社會）高教學術評鑑研討會，國家圖書館國際會議廳
15. 戴曉霞(2005)。學術卓越的追求與世界級大學之特質。大學評鑑進退場機制提昇國際競爭力學術研討會，台北: