教育評鑑人員專業發展之研究

A Study on Professional Development for Educational Evaluators

黃曙東;蘇錦麗
Shu-Tung Huang;Jin-Li Su


所屬期刊: 第6卷第3期 「教育政策與制度」
主編:國立高雄師範大學副校長
蔡培村
系統編號: vol022_05
主題: 教育政策與制度
出版年份: 2010
作者: 黃曙東;蘇錦麗
作者(英文): Shu-Tung Huang;Jin-Li Su
論文名稱: 教育評鑑人員專業發展之研究
論文名稱(英文): A Study on Professional Development for Educational Evaluators
共同作者:
最高學歷:
校院名稱:
系所名稱:
語文別:
論文頁數: 32
中文關鍵字: 教育評鑑;教育評鑑人員;專業發展
英文關鍵字: educational evaluation; educational evaluator; professional development
服務單位: 黎明技術學院資訊管理系助理教授;國立新竹教育大學教育學系教授
稿件字數: 20011
作者專長: 經濟學、行銷管理、品質管理、物流管理
投稿日期: 2010/9/21
論文下載: pdf檔案icon
摘要(中文): 由於評鑑涉及評鑑人員對評鑑資訊與結論之價值判斷,故評鑑人員之專業表現如同社會科學研究工具之信、效度,是影響評鑑工作品質最重要的因素。為確保評鑑學成為一門專業,以提升其專業地位與形象,評鑑人員表
現績效之要求益顯得格外重要。
我國自1975年起,陸續推動各級各類學校評鑑,其作法堪稱穩健,亦頗見成效。然多位學者在實施各類學校評鑑之後設評鑑研究後,皆認為若干影響教育評鑑人員表現之因素,例如:養成教育、在職訓練、遴選方式、職涯發展機會及倫理行為規範等評鑑人員專業發展議題,除應給予格外重視以滿足評鑑預期目的及重要利害關係人需求外,亦應尋求改進之道。
爰此,本研究旨在探討美國教育評鑑人員專業發展之理論與實務,並針對我國教育評鑑人員專業發展政策,提出具體建議。為達成目的,本研究採文獻探討、專家訪談及焦點團體法。研究結果可供政府機構、評鑑專業團體及大學,未來規劃、實施及評鑑教育評鑑人員專業發展相關政策時之參考。
摘要(英文): An evaluation is the systematic process of valuing the descriptive and judgmental information of an object by evaluators’ viewpoints. Consequently, the evaluators’ performances affect the quality of evaluation results. In order to make the educational evaluation into a profession, the quality of evaluators’ performance has been crucial to the development of evaluation profession.
Since the mid 70s, Taiwanese government has promoted different kinds of school evaluation and some positive results were seen. However, numerous local meta-evaluation reports have indicated that the evaluators’ training programs, relevant professional guidelines, job options as an educational evaluator, as well as the establishment of a professional organization have not yet met the criteria to qualify as a profession.
The aim of this study was to explore the theory and practice of professional development of educational evaluators in the United States. The methods of literature review, interviews, and focus group were employed in the study to construct the feasible programs of professional development for educational evaluators. The results of the study may provide the useful information and advice for Taiwanese government, higher educational institutions, and educational evaluation society when making professional development programs for Taiwanese educational evaluators.
參考文獻: 徐昊杲、曾淑惠(2008)。高職學校評鑑人員評鑑能力與角色之研究。當代教育研究,16(2),101-131。
陳嘉彌、鍾文郁、楊承謙、柯瓊惠、謝元(譯)(2000)。T. R. Guskey著。專業發展評鑑(Evaluating professional development)。臺北市:五南。
曾淑惠(1996)。我國專科學校後設評鑑之研究。國立台灣師範大學工業教育研究所博士論文,未出版,臺北市。
曾淑惠(2002)。教育方案評鑑。臺北市:師大書苑。
黃政傑、李隆盛、游家政(1994)。國民小學教育評鑑之研究。國科會專題研究報告。臺北市:師範大學教育研究中心。
黃炳煌(1996)。教育改革-理念、策略與措施。臺北市:心理。
黃曙東(2007)。教育評鑑規劃人員能力內涵之研究。新竹教育大學教育學報,24(1),109-126。
黃曙東、蘇錦麗(2005)。後設評鑑研究:以九十年度大學校院實施自我評鑑計畫成果報告書為例。教育研究集刊,51(2),31-65。
楊國賜(1985)。教育專業精神之內涵與策進。台灣教育,41,45。
歐用生(1996)。教師專業成長。臺北市:師大書苑。
簡茂發(2003)。國民中小學教師教學專業發展之研究。臺北市:李連教育基金會。
蘇錦麗(1997)。高等教育評鑑:理論與實際。臺北市:五南。
蘇錦麗(譯)(2005)。G. F. Madaus, & D. L. Stufflebeam 著。方案評鑑:歷史的回顧。載於蘇錦麗(審訂),評鑑模式:教育及人力服務的評鑑觀點(Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation)(頁3-22)。臺北市:高等教育。
蘇錦麗、黃曙東(2007)。世界重要國家評鑑專業標準與原則發展對我國之啟示。高教評鑑,1(1),51-82。
蘇錦麗、黃曙東(2009)。美國大學教師評鑑制度之探討。教育政策論壇,12(2),1-44。
蘇錦麗、楊瑩、王偉中、呂鴻德、詹惠雪(2000)。大學後設評鑑研究。臺北市:揚智。
Altschuld, J. W. (1999). The case for a voluntary system for credentialing evaluators.
American Journal of Evaluation, 20(3), 507-518.
Altschuld, J. W., & Austin, J. T. (2005). Certification. In S. Mathison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation, (pp. 49-50). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
American Evaluation Association (2006). Affiliates. Retrieved April 20, 2010, from
http://www.eval.org/Affiliates/affiliates.htm1.
Bickman, L. & Reich, S. (2005). Profession of evaluation. In S. Mathison Encyclopedia of evaluation (pp. 331-334). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
Canadian Evaluation Society (2008). Annual report 2007-2008. Retrieved May 29, 2009, from http://evaluationcanada.ca/txt/annual_report_2007-2008.pdf
Commission on Collegiate Nursing Education (2008). Accreditation standards for baccalaureate and graduate degree nursing programs. Retrieved May 2, 2009, fromhttp://www.aacn.nche.edu/Accreditation/pdf/standards.pdf.
Cronbach, L. J., Ambron, S. R., Dornbusch, S. M., Hess, R. D., Hornik, R. C., Phillips, D. C., Walker, D. F., & Weiner, S. S. (1980). Toward reform of program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Datta, L. (2001). Coming attractions. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 403-408.
Fetterman, D. M. (2001). The transformation of evaluation into a collaboration: A vision of evaluation in the 21st century. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 381-385.
Henkelman, J. (2003). The person matters: The importance of the evaluator in evaluation. Crossing Boundaries-an Interdisciplinary Journal, 1(3).
Higher Learning Commission of the North Central Association (2003). Expectation of the commission’s consultant – Evaluators, Retrieved Jan. 20, 2006, from
http://www.ncahigherlearningcommission.org/.
Jackson, G. (2002). Evaluation ethics considerations, Retrieved April 20, 2010, from
http://www.gwu.edu/~gjackson/281_EthicsConsid.PDF.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (2009). The personnel evaluation standards: How to assess systems for evaluating educators. Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.
Jones, S. C. & Worthen, B. R. (1999). AEA members’ opinions concerning evaluator certification, American Journal of Evaluation, 120(3), 495-507.
King, J. A., Stevahn, L., Ghere, G., & Minnema, J. (2001).Toward a taxonomy of essential evaluator competencies. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(2), 229-247.
King, A. J. (2004). The roots of participatory evaluation. In M. C. Alkin (Ed.),
Evaluation roots (pp. 331-342). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Love, A. J. (2001). The future of evaluation: Catching rocks with cauldrons. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 437-444.
Middle States Association of Colleges and Schools (2003). MSACHE evaluator training
and support. Retrieved Jan. 24, 2006, from http://www.msache.org.
Morris, M. (2003). Ethical considerations in evaluation. In T. Kellaghan, D. Stufflebeam, & L. A. Wingate (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation. (pp. 302-327). The Netherlands: Kluwer.
National Association of Industrial Technology (2009). ATMAE accreditation team chair & team member documents. Retrieved March. 24, 2009, http://www.nait.org/accred/TeamInfo.html.
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (2003). NCATE handbook, Retrieved April 24, 2010, fromhttp://www.ncate.org/documents/handbook/handbook.pdf..
Newcomer, K. E. (2001). Tracking and probing program performance: Fruitful path or blind alley for evaluation professionals? American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 337-341.
North Central Association of College and Schools (2003). Consultant-evaluator crops applications, Retrieved Jan. 4, 2007, from http://www.ncahigherleaningcommission.org/cecorps/docs/index.htm1.
Patton, M. Q. (1996). Utilization-focused evaluation (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Russon, C. (2005). Evaluation associations. In S. Mathison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation, (pp. 22-23). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Scriven, M. (1976). The intellectual dimensions of evaluation research. Paper presented at the 4th annual Pacific Northwest Evaluation Conference, Seattle, WA.
Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Beverly Hill, CA: Sage.
Scriven, M. (1994). Evaluation is a discipline. Studies in educational evaluation, 20, 147-166.
Scriven, M. (1996). Types of evaluation and types of evaluator, Evaluation Practice, 17(2), 151-161.
Scriven, M. (1999).The nature of evaluation. Part II: Training. Practical assessment,
Research & evaluation, 6(12). Retrieved April 14, 2010, from http://edresearch.org/pare/getvn.asp?v=6&n=12.
Shadish, W. R., Newman, D.L., Scheirer, M. A., & Wye, C. (1995). Guiding principles for evaluators, New Directions for Program Evaluation, 66.
Smith, M. F. (2001). Evaluation: Preview of the future#2. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3). 281-300.
Smith, M. F. (2003). The evaluation profession. In T. Kellaghan, D. Stufflebeam, & L. A. Wingate (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 269-277). The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Smith, M. F. (2005). Evaluator. In S. Mathison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation, (pp. 146). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Spangehl, S. (1998). Preparing the team report: Suggestions for team members consultant-evaluator professional development program. Retrieved April 24, 2010, from
http://www.ncahigherleaningcommission.org.
Stake, R. E. (2001). A problematic heading. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 349-354.
Stevahn, L., King, J. A., Ghere, G., & Minnema, L. (2005). Establishing essential competencies for program evaluators. American Journal of Evaluation, 26(1), 43-59.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2001a). Guiding principles checklist for evaluating evaluators.
Retrieved March 24, 2010, from http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2001b). Interdisciplinary Ph. D. programming in evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(20). 445-455.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2003). Professional standards and principles for evaluation. In T. Kellaghan, D. Stufflebeam, & L. A. Wingate (Eds.), International handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 279-302). The Netherlands: Kluwer.
Torres, R. T., & Preskill, H. (2001). Evaluation and organization learning: Past, present, and future. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 387-395.
Wholey, J. S. (2001). Managing for results: Role for evaluators in a new management era. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(3), 343-347.
Worthen, B. R. (1994). Is evaluation a mature profession that warrants the preparation of evaluation professionals? New Direction for Program Evaluation, 62, 3-15.