Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Title: 量化指標並非學術評鑑的萬靈丹
Other Titles: Numerical Indicators are not Panacea for Research Assessment: Evidences from Several Foreign Research Assessment Methods
Authors: 賴鼎銘
Ting-Ming Lai
Issue Date: Apr-2005
Publisher: 國立台灣師範大學圖書資訊研究所
Graduate Institute of Library and Information Studies
Abstract: 術評鑑在臺灣引發不少爭論,這些爭論與教育部過度著重量化料有關:本文為了突顯學術評鑑的多元面向及國內進行評鑑所出現的盲點,將由「美國新聞與世界報導」的聲望排行、英國的Research Assessment Exercise(RAE)、美國的認證制度(Accreditation),樂加州大學博克萊校區的升等核,來分析四種方式的目的及作法,還原學術評鑑的本來面目,希望對國內進行學術評鑑,有一些澄清的作用。
Research assessment in Taiwan has raised much controversial discussion recently, the issue is related to Taiwan government pay too much attention on numerical indicators. In order to digging the multiple dimensions of the assessment, and the problems with Taiwan’s approach, this article introduces and compares four foreign research assessments, such as U.S. News and World Report’s reputation ranking, England’s Research Assessment Exercise, America’s Accreditation system, and U.C. Berkeley’s Tenure system. The author intends to clarify different assessments have their unique function and purpose, fully understand the limitation of those methods is the guarantee of successful assessment activities.
Other Identifiers: 1C5E23E5-F1B7-E9CA-CC6F-B14FA453E41A
Appears in Collections:圖書館學與資訊科學

Files in This Item:
File SizeFormat 
ntnulib_ja_A1201_3101_014.pdf368.2 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.