Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/87148
Title: 我國高等教育餐旅學門評鑑指標建構之研究
A Study of Specialized Program Evaluation Indicators for Undergraduate Hospitality Program
Authors: 洪久賢
Jeou-Shyan Horng
周敦懿
Tun -Yi Chou
Keywords: 評鑑
評鑑指標
認可制度
餐旅高等教育
evaluation
evaluation indicator
accreditation
undergraguate hospitality program
Issue Date: 2007
Abstract: 我國高等教育餐旅學門評鑑指標建構之研究 摘 要 追求大學卓越,並提升高等教育品質,已為目前高等教育發展之主流與趨勢。為發展我國合宜的餐旅高等教育評鑑指標內涵,本研究之主要目的為:一、探討先進國家教育評鑑與評鑑指標之理論。二、分析比較美、英與我國餐旅學門評鑑制度之發展與指標內涵。三、建構我國餐旅高等教育合宜之學門評鑑指標架構內涵與權重分配。 四、比較不同背景之專家對於餐旅學門評鑑指標看法之差異。 本研究採質量兼備之研究方法。探討高等教育評鑑理論、教育評鑑指標理論、英國、美國等先進國家之餐旅高等教育評鑑制度發展與指標內涵,以作為建構我國合宜餐旅高等教育學門評鑑指標之重要參考,並據以發展餐旅學門評鑑指標架構與內涵之初稿。以焦點訪談法,召開北、中、南各ㄧ場之焦點團體會議,邀請教育評鑑專家、餐旅教育學者、餐旅業界代表共37人,透過意見表達與對話,以分析比較不同區域之學者專家,對於評鑑指標內涵意見上之差異,據以修正並研擬餐旅高等教育評鑑指標架構與內涵。量化研究方面,則依焦點團體之研究結果,據以發展層級分析(Analytic Hierarchy Process)問卷,進行專家意見調查,以建構我國餐旅高等教育學門評鑑指標層面之權重分配。 夲研究主要發現:建構餐旅高等教育評鑑指標共分評鑑標準(standards)、評鑑層面(dimensions)以及評鑑指標(indicators)等三個層級。其中,評鑑的標準項目有7項,評鑑層面(dimensions)共有20項,評鑑指標項目共有99項。七大項評鑑標準中所涵蓋之評鑑層面項目,以及評鑑層面間的權重百分比結果,敘述如下: 一、第一層級七項評鑑標準,經層級分析問卷發現,其權重百分比依序為:系所設立目標與自我改善:24.5%,教師:17.2%,教學與學習:15.6%,課程:14.7%,學生:12.7%,資源:12.2%,行政管理3.2%。 二、 第二層20項評鑑層面權重百分比,層级分析結果分述如下: 1.系所設立目標與自我改善(Objectives and self-improvement)之評鑑標準中,共包括系所願景、任務及目標,預期學習成果,自我改善, 發展計劃與特色等四項評鑑層面,其下涵蓋16項評鑑指標。四項評 鑑層面之權重分配分別為:42%、28.3%、17.3%、與12.4%。 2.課程(Curricula) 之評鑑標準中,共包括課程設計、課程內涵等二項評 鑑層面,其下涵蓋10項評鑑指標。二項評鑑層面之權重分配分別為: 53.9%、46.1%。 3.教學與學習(Teaching and learning) 之評鑑標準中,共包括教學方法與教學活動、學習輔導、評量等三項評鑑層面,其下涵蓋15項評鑑指 標。三項評鑑層面之權重分配分別為:61.5%、23.4%、15.1%。 4.資源(Resources) 之評鑑標準中,共包括教學與研究資源、教學與研 究空間、資源管理等三項評鑑層面,其下涵蓋15項評鑑指標。三項 評鑑層面之權重分配分別為:67.4%、17.7%、14.9%。 5.教師(Faculty) 之評鑑標準中,共包括師資、推廣服務、學術研究、 專業表現等四項評鑑層面,其下涵蓋20項評鑑指標。四項評鑑層面 之權重分配分別為:46.5%、9.7%、18.2%、25.6%。 6.學生(Student)之評鑑標準中,共包括在校生成就、畢業生表現等 二項評鑑層面,其下並涵蓋16項評鑑指標。其權重分配分別為:56.1%、43.9%。 7.行政管理(Administrative management) 之評鑑標準中,共包括行政運 作、行政電腦化等二項評鑑層面,其下並下轄14項評鑑指標。二項 評鑑層面之權重分配分別為:72.9%、27.1%。 根據研究結果,對相關單位與後續研究提出建議。 關鍵字:評鑑、評鑑指標、認可制度、餐旅高等教育
A Study of Specialized Evaluation Indicators for Undergraduate Hospitality Programs ABSTRACT The purpose of higher education is to develop professional talent and create knowledge. Thus, the quality of higher education determines a nation’s development and competitiveness. This study aims to develop a framework for evaluating higher education hospitality programs and create indicators. By adopting documental analysis, focus-group method, and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), the researchers established indicators for assessing higher education hospitality programs, anddetermined the weightings of each indicator. The major findings of this study as followings: According to the result of the three focus groups, the study constructs the evaluation indicator framework of undergraduate hospitality program. The results showed that there are three levels of evaluation indicators, including 7 standards, 20 dimensions and 99 indicators. 7 standards by means of which the various “indicators” will be assessed. These standards are: (1) aims and strategies for self-Improvement; (2) curricula; (3) teaching and learning; (4) resources; (5) faculty; (6) students; and (7) administrative. According to AHP result, the weight of the 7standards and the 20 dimensions are as follows: A. The weight of the standards The result of the research constructs seven evaluation standards, and the weight and order are as follow: (1) aims and strategies for self-Improvement 24.5%;(2) faculty:17.2%;(3) teaching and learning:15.6%;(4) curricula:14.7%,(5)students:12.7%;(4) resources:12.2%;(7) administrative. 3.2%。 B. The weight of the dimensions The result of the research constructs twenty evaluation dimensions, and the weight and order are as follow: 1. Aims and strategies for self-Improvement:there are 4 evaluation dimensions and 16 indicators,and the weight and order of these 4 dimensions are as follow: (1)vision, mission and objectives:42%;(2)expected learning outcomes:28.3%;(3)self-improvement:17.3%;(4)Development planning and distinguishing features:12.4%. 2.Curricula:there are 2 evaluation dimensions and 10 indicators,and the weight and order of these 2 dimensions are as follow: (1) curriculum design :53.9%;(2)curriculum content:46.1%. 3.Teaching and learning:there are 3 evaluation dimensions and 15 indicators,and the weight and order of these 3 dimensions are as follow: (1)teaching methods and activities:61.5%;(2)learning guidance:23.4%;(3)assessment:15.1%. 4.Resource:there are 3 evaluation dimensions and 15 indicators,and the weight and order of these 3 dimensions are as follow: (1) instruction and research resources:67.4%;(2)spaces:17.7%;(3)resource management:14.9%. 5.Faculty:there are 4 evaluation dimensions and 20 indicators,and the weight and order of these 4 dimensions are as follow: (1)faculty:46.5%;(2)services:9.7%;(3)Research:18.2%;(4)professional achievement:25.6% 6.Students:there are 2 evaluation dimensions and 16 indicators,and the weight and order of these 2 dimensions are as follow: (1) student achievement:56.1%;(2)graduate performance:43.9%. 7.Administratives: there are 2 evaluation dimensions and 14 indicators,and the weight and order of these 2 dimensions are as follow: (1)administrative management: 72.9%(2)student management:27.1% Keywords:evaluation, evaluation indicator, accreditation, undergraduate hospitality program
URI: http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=%22http://etds.lib.ntnu.edu.tw/cgi-bin/gs32/gsweb.cgi?o=dstdcdr&s=id=%22GN0890060030%22.&%22.id.&
http://rportal.lib.ntnu.edu.tw:80/handle/20.500.12235/87148
Other Identifiers: GN0890060030
Appears in Collections:學位論文

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
n089006003001.pdf33.06 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
n089006003002.pdf217.04 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
n089006003003.pdf79.27 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
n089006003004.pdf210.78 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
n089006003005.pdf44.13 kBAdobe PDFView/Open
n089006003006.pdf17.3 MBAdobe PDFView/Open


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