量化指標並非學術評鑑的萬靈丹
No Thumbnail Available
Date
2005-04-??
Authors
賴鼎銘
Ting-Ming Lai
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
國立台灣師範大學圖書資訊研究所
Graduate Institute of Library and Information Studies
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.
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.