從教學評量系統構件分析模式探討經營教學策略的卓越性

Investigating the Management Strategies of Teaching Excellence by Analyzing the Structural Elements of Student Ratings of Instruction

10.7047/JLM.201112.0041

吳志偉(Chih-Wei Wu)；邱燕松(Yen-Sung Chiu)

教學評量 ； 教學卓越策略 ； 構件分析 ； 教學策略 ； Student evaluation of teaching (student ratings of instruction) ； teaching excellence ； structural elements analysis ； teaching strategies

運籌與管理學刊

10卷2期（2011 / 12 / 01）

41 - 50

繁體中文

教學策略是教師如何使學生學習最佳化的策略，而教學卓越策略則應擴充為校或系之經營最佳化。很多學校運用教學評量作為達成教學卓越之重要策略，通常以教學評量結果作為優良教師判斷的準則或教師升等之參考，但很少透過教學評量分析校、系經營教學的問題，我們認為從評量結果除了回饋教師教學策略外也應有效回饋至校、系的經營策略，這種系統結構思考產生的策略才能將現有的狀態推進至更高的境界。為能表達現有系統結構的問題與需要解決的優先順序，我們必須建立一套較客觀之方法，作為校、系問題選擇與決策判斷之依據，使我們在追求卓越策略上作較佳之連結，並將有限之資源運用在最有效的地方。因此本文以系統變異的角度，對構成系統元件進行分析，以獲得元件變異的大小，並以某大學某系3 學期資料，對曾經施行的策略做比對，我們發現比對的效果甚佳，可驗證策略是否有效；同時也發現有些元件變異的降低在短期內有很高的難度。因此運用結構分析得到元件變異的方法，可作為短、長期校、系決策規劃的重要依據，對於追求卓越教學策略的制定或實施將有極大之助益。同時透過此方式的運作，將可逐漸降低以績效、排名等作為卓越指標的消極性思考模式，進而提升以校、系為中心追求卓越之經營能力。

Evaluation survey on teacher's instruction done by the students is used as one of the important strategies of teaching excellence in many schools. The gained average score and its ranking among the school faculty are generally employed as a guideline for selecting teacher of excellent teaching performance and a credit for promotion. Since the evaluation survey contains several elements, the average score can be biased and unfair due to sample variance effect. Few studies focus on analyzing the influence of the structural elements on the score of variance. To investigate the problems of variance reduction in present evaluation system and figure out the priority of problem solving, we need to set up an objective and fair analysis system that can be used as a basis for problem-selecting and policy-making for the department to see the better way of excellence teaching. With such systematic analysis, we will be able to use the limited resource in the most needed area to improve teaching. In this study, we analyzed the composing elements of the survey by way of system variance to gain the variance of each element. The survey results obtained in the previous three semesters of a class in one university in Taiwan were used as fundamental data. After careful analysis and compare department related to teaching strategies, we found that the reduction variance is structure element related and not just using credit performance can be solved. Furthermore, we also found that in a short period of time it is difficult to shorten the variance of certain elements. This can be used as a road map for an effective reference in making short-term or long-term policies of improving teaching. In addition, such kind of analysis provides optional data for grading teacher's performance instead of relying solely on student ratings of instruction average score and ranking. It is obvious such kind of systematic analysis contributes to the establishment and implementation of strategies for teaching excellence.

1. 張德勝(2005)。台灣地區大學校院“學生評鑑教師教學”制度之研究。師大學報：教育類，203-225。
   連結：
2. 詹震寰(2007)。政府學校機關實施品質管理可能產生弊端與診斷建議－以某校教學評量業務為例。品質月刊，43(4)，65-68。
   連結：
3. Aleamoni, L. M.(Ed.)(1987).Techniques for evaluation and improving instruction.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
4. Arreola, R. A.(1995).Developing a comprehensive faculty evaluation system: A handbook for college faculty and administrators on designing and operating a comprehensive faculty evaluation system.Bolton:Anker Publishing Co..
5. Deming, W. Edwards(1993).The New Economics for Industry, Government, Education.
6. Dick, W.,Carey, L.(1985).The systematic design of instruction.Glenview, IL:Scott. Foresman and Company.
7. Dowdy, Shirley,Weardon, Stanley,Chilko, Daniel(2004).Statistics for Research.A John Wiley & Sons, Inc..
8. Fadia, D.,Barbara, F.(2002).Faculty Views of Student Evaluation of College Teaching.Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education,27(2),187-198.
9. Feldman, K. A.(1984).Class Size and College Students' Evaluations of Teachers and Courses: A Closer Look.Research in Higher Education,21(1),45-116.
10. Marsh, H. W.(1984).Students' Evaluations of University Teaching: Dimensionality, Reliability, Validity, Potential Biases and Utility.Journal of Educational Psychology,76(5),707-754.
11. Marsh, H. W.(1987).Students' Evaluations of University Teaching: Research Findings, Methodological Issues, and Directions for Future Research.International Journal of Educational Research,11(3),253-388.
12. Marsh, H. W.,Hocevar, D.(1991).Students Evaluations of Teaching Effectiveness: The Stability of Mean Ratings of the Same Teachers Over a 13-Year Period.Teaching & Teacher Education,7(4),303-314.
13. Marsh, H. W.,Roche, L. A.(1997).Making Students' Evaluations of Teaching Effectiveness Effective: The Critical Issues of Validity, Bias and Utility.American Psychologist,52(11),1187-1197.
14. Marsh, H. W.,Ware, J. A.(1982).Effects of Expressiveness, Content Coverage and Incentive on Multidimensional Student Rating Scales: New Interpretations of the DR. Fox Effect.Journal of Educational Psychology,74(1),126-134.
15. Seymour, E.,Wiese, D.,Hunter, A.,Daffinrud, S. M.(2000).Creating a Better Mousetrap: On-line Student Assessment of their Learning Gains.National Meeting of the American Chemical Society,San Francisco:
16. 吳志偉、陳瓊怜(2009)。學生教學評量特徵分析－以某大學為例。大學追求卓越的理論與實務國際學術研討會
17. 黃政傑編(1997)。大學的課程與教學。台北市:漢文書局。

1. (2015)。一所國立大學之教師教學評鑑多元化指標建構。教育政策論壇，18(3)，73-103。