Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/152869
|
| Title: | 桃園市國民中小學特殊教育評鑑之後設評鑑：以2020-2023年為例
A Meta-evaluation of the Elementary and Secondary School Special Education Evaluation in Taoyuan City：Taking 2020-2023 as An Example |
| Authors: | 陳寗
Chen, Ning |
| Contributors: | 湯家偉
Tang, Chia-Wei
陳寗
Chen, Ning |
| Keywords: | 特殊教育評鑑
後設評鑑
後設評鑑標準
Special education evaluation
Meta-evaluation
Meta-evaluation standards |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2024-08-05 14:30:40 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 本研究旨在以後設評鑑觀點，探究接受桃園市特殊教育評鑑之國民中小學教育人員對評鑑實施的看法與感受，以作為未來實施精進之道。本研究採美國教育評鑑聯合委員會第三版方案評鑑標準為問卷架構，編制「桃園市國民中小學特殊教育評鑑之後設評鑑問卷」為研究工具，針對 2020至2022年間已完成桃園市國民中小學特殊教育評鑑之受評學校相關教育人員為調查對象，共發放593份問卷，回收476份有效問卷，回收率為80.26%。研究結果如下：
一、桃園市國民中小學特殊教育評鑑之實施狀況整體達中上良好程度，受到教育人員的認同與肯定，其中教育人員對於評鑑符合精確性標準的認同程度最高。
二、碩士以上學歷者對桃園市國民中小學特殊教育評鑑之實施符合後設評鑑標準程度之看法比學士更肯定。
三、任教21年（含）以上之教育人員對桃園市國民中小學特殊教育評鑑之實施符合後設評鑑標準之看法持最肯定態度。
四、所有行政人員對桃園市國民中小學特殊教育評鑑之實施符合後設評鑑標準之看法的認同程度高都於特殊教育教師，其中以校長的認同程度最高。
五、特殊教育專業背景教育人員對桃園市國民中小學特殊教育評鑑之實施符合後設評鑑標準之看法比未具特殊教育專業背景教育人員認同度低。
根據以上研究結果，本研究提出相關具體建議以供日後教育行政機關、國民中小學校教育人員及未來研究進行特殊教育評鑑工作之參考。
This study aims to explore the views and experiences of educational personnel in national primary and secondary schools in Taoyuan City who have undergone special education evaluation, from a meta-evaluation perspective, in order to provide insights for future improvement. The study used the questionnaire framework based on the evaluation standards of the third edition of the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, and developed the "Meta-Evaluation Questionnaire for Special Education Evaluation in National Primary and Secondary Schools in Taoyuan City" as the research tool. The survey targeted educational personnel from schools that underwent special education evaluation in Taoyuan City between 2020 and 2022. A total of 593 questionnaires were distributed, with 476 valid responses received, resulting in a response rate of 80.26%. The research findings are as follows:
1.The overall implementation of the special education evaluation in primary and secondary schools in Taoyuan City has reached a good level, and has been recognized and affirmed by education personnel.Among them, educators have the highest level of agreement with the accuracy standards of evaluation.
2.Those with a master's degree or above are more affirmative about the implementation of special education evaluation in elementary and junior high schools in Taoyuan City meeting the metacognitive evaluation standards than those with a bachelor's degree.
3.Educational personnel with 21 years or more of teaching experience hold the most positive attitude towards the implementation of special education evaluation in primary and secondary schools in Taoyuan City that meets the metacognitive evaluation standards.
4.The level of agreement among all administrative staff on the implementation of special education evaluation in primary and secondary schools in Taoyuan City meeting the metacognitive evaluation standards is highest among special education teachers, with the highest level of agreement coming from principals.
5.Special education professionals believe that the implementation of special education evaluation in primary and secondary schools in Taoyuan City meets the meta-evaluation standards, compared to those without a special education background, who have a lower level of agreement. |
| Reference: | 壹、中文文獻
王天苗、黃俊榮、邱筑君（2009）。中央對地方政府特殊教育行政績效評鑑實施之後設評鑑與改進意見研究。特殊教育學報，(30)，1-27。
http://dx.doi.org/10.6768/JSE.200912.0001
王慧君（2011）。宜蘭縣國民中小學校長辦學績效評鑑之後設評鑑研究（系統編號：099NDHU5576032）〔碩士論文，國立東華大學〕。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
吳美君（2011）。桃園縣特殊教育白皮書介紹。桃竹區特殊教育，(301)，36。
吳清山、王湘栗（2004）。教育評鑑的概念與發展。教育資料集刊，(29)，1-26。
吳清山、林天祐（2005）。教育名詞：後設評鑑。教育研究月刊，(137)，159。
朱欣穎、林政逸（2019）。我國大學後設評鑑研究-以第二週期系所評鑑為例。高等教育研究紀要，(11)，1-24。
李忠霖（2011）。桃園縣國民中學特殊教育評鑑之後設評鑑研究（系統編號：099CYCU5331003）〔碩士論文，中原大學〕。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
林劭仁（2007）。師資培育後設評鑑標準發展之研究。國立編譯館館刊，(35:2)，41-54。
林劭仁（2008）。教育評鑑：標準的發展與探索。心理出版社。
林劭仁（2012）。大學通識教學評鑑的後設評鑑研究。課程與教學，(15:3)，53-73。
林海清（2017）。臺中市國民中小學校務評鑑後設分析。教育行政與評鑑學刊，(21)，43-73。
林進材（2008）。教學評鑑理論與實施。五南。
林漢庭（2003）。桃園縣國民小學校務評鑑之後設評鑑研究（系統編號：
102NCCU5626003）〔碩士論文，國立政治大學〕。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
邱慧芳、曾淑惠（2010）。Scriven 評鑑理論創新觀點之省思。東海教育評論，(4)，1-19。
許韡穎（2001）。特殊教育後設評鑑指標之建構（系統編號：090NKNU0284017）〔碩士論文，國立高雄師範大學〕。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
陳文彥、潘慧玲、鄭淑惠、張素貞（2013）。教師專業發展評鑑的改進性後設評鑑：以國立附設實驗小學為例。教育學刊，(41)，49-85。
陳美如、郭昭佑、曾莉婷（2023）。國際課程評鑑研究課題與趨勢分析：2000-2020年。教育研究與發展期刊，(19:1)，107-140。
https://doi.org/10.6925/SCJ.202303_19(1).0004
陳盛賢、楊思偉、許筱君（2015）。四代評鑑觀論述中小學校務評鑑之發展趨勢-以臺中市國中小校務評鑑為例。教育理論與實踐學刊，(32)，23-41。
https://doi.org/10.7038/JETP.201512_(32).0002
陳菁徽（2015）。屏東縣身心障礙特殊教育評鑑之後設評鑑研究（系統編號：103NPTU0284016）〔碩士論文，國立屏東大學〕。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
游家政（1994）。國民小學設評鑑標準之研究（系統編號：082NTNU3331001）〔博士論文，國立臺灣師範大學〕。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
游家政、曾祥榕（2004）。教育評鑑的後設評鑑。教育資料集刊，(29)，53-94。
黃曙東、蘇錦麗（2005）。後設評鑑研究：以2001年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。
https://doi.org/10.6910/BER.200506_(51-2).0002
葉連棋、楊家榆（2010）。國中小校務評鑑之後設評鑑指標及其影響關係模式。教育學刊，(35)，167-202。https://doi.org/10.6450/ER.201012.0167
潘慧玲、陳文彦（2011）。中小學試辦教師專業發展評鑑全國診斷性後設評鑑之研究。中等教育，(62:3)，70-88。https://doi.org/10.6249/SE.2011.62.3.04
潘慧玲、王麗雲、張素貞、吳俊憲、鄭淑惠（2007）。試辦中小學教師專業發展評鑑之方案評鑑。教育部。
潘慧玲、王麗雲、張素貞、鄭淑惠、林純雯（2007）。高級中等以下學校試辦教師專業發展評鑑之後設評鑑規劃研究。教育部。
潘慧玲（2005）。教育評鑑回顧與展望。心理出版社。
蔡麗華（2011）。國民小學教師評鑑後設評鑑標準與權重體系建構之研究（系統編號：099NTPTC576160）〔博士論文，國立臺北教育大學〕。臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統。
蘇錦麗、楊瑩、王偉中、呂鴻德、詹惠雪（2001）。八十六學年度大學綜合評鑑試辦計畫成效評估之研究，新竹師院學報，(14)，127-162。
貳、外文文獻
Cooksy, L. J., & Caracelli, V. J. (2009). Metaevaluation in Practice: Selection and Application of Criteria . Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 6(11), 1–15.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v6i11.211
Hansen, J. B., & Patton, M. Q.(1994).The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation's" The program evaluation standards:How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs". Educational and Psychological Measurement,54(2), 550-567.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1981). Standards for evaluations of educational programs, projects, and materials. McGraw-Hill.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1988). The Personnel Evaluation Standards. Sage.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation.(2007). The personnel evaluation standards(2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Lennie, J., Tacchi, J., & Wilmore, M. (2012). Meta-evaluation to improve learning, evaluation capacity development and sustainability: Findings from a participatory evaluation project in Nepal. South Asian Journal of Evaluation in Practice, 1(1), 13-28.
Limiansi, K., & Pratama, A. T. (2023). The Application and Modification of Goal-Based Evaluation as a Multifunctional Evaluation Method:A Systematic Review and Meta-Evaluation Study. Journal of Elementary School Education,117-123.
Sanders, J. R. (Ed.). (2013). Handbuch der Evaluationsstandards: die Standards des" Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation". Springer-Verlag.
Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. In R. W. Tyler, R. M. Gagné & M. Scriven (Eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (vol. 1, pp. 39-83). Rand McNally & Company.
Scriven, M. (1968). Evaluation as a main aim of science: Comments on Professor Bloom’s paper entitled toward a theory of testing which includes measurement-evaluation-assessment [CSE Report 10]. University of California, Los Angeles,
Center for the Study of Evaluation.
Scriven, M. S. (1969). An introduction to meta-evaluation.Educational Product Report,2(5),36-38.
Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Sage.
Scriven, M. (1994). Duties of the teacher. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 8(2),
151-184. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00972261
Scriven, M. S. (2007). Key Evaluation Checklist, Evaluation Checklists Project, University of Michigan.
Scriven, M. S. (2008). Meta-evaluation revisited.Journal of multidisciplinary evaluation,6(11), 3-8.
Scriven, M. (2011). Evaluating evaluations: A meta-evaluation checklist. Consultado em, 9, 1-7.
Scriven, M. (2016). Roadblocks to recognition and revolution. The American Journal of Evaluation, 37(1), 27-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214015617847
Straw, R. B. & Cook, T. D. (1990) . Meta-evaluation. In H. J. Walberg& G. D. Haertel (eds.) , The International Encyclopaedia of Educational Evaluation, 8-98. Pergamon
Press.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1971). The Relevance of the CIPP evaluation model for educational accountability. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 5(1), 19-25.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1974). Meta-evaluation. Occasional Paper Series,3.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1978). Meta evaluation: An overview. Evaluation & the Health Professions, 1(1), 17-43
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Madaus, G. F. (1983). The standards for evaluation of educational programs, projects, and materials. In G.F. Madaus, M. S. Scriven, & D. L.Stufflebeam
(Eds.), Evaluation models: Evaluation in education and human services (vol. 6, pp. 395-404).Springer.
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6669-7_23
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1991). An introduction to the Center for Research on Educational Accountability and Teacher Evaluation (CREATE). Journal of Personnel Evaluation in
Education, 5(1), 85–92.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00117289
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (1994). About this issue. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 8(2), 103–108. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00972257
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1999). Program evaluations metaevaluation checklist. Retrieved March,14,2006.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2000). The methodology of metaevaluation as reflected in metaevaluations by the Western Michigan University Evaluation Center. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 14(1), 95–125. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008198315521
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2000). Personnel evaluation system metaevaluation checklist.Kalamazoo, MI: The Evaluation Center. Retrieved on January, 16, 2008.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2000) . Personnel evaluations metaevaluation checklist (Based on the personnel evaluation standards) . Retrieved Oct 25, 2009.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2001). Evaluation checklists: Practical tools for guiding and judging
evaluations. American Journal of Evaluation, 22(1), 71-79.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2001). The metaevaluation imperative. American journal of evaluation, 22(2), 183-209.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2004). A note on the purposes, development, and applicability of the Joint Committee Evaluation Standards. American Journal of Evaluation, 25(1), 99-102.
Stufflebeam,D.L.,Madaus,G.F.,&Kellaghan,T.(Eds.).(2000).Evaluation models:Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (Vol. 49). Springer Science & Business Media.
Yarbrough, D.B., Shula, L.M., Hopson, R.K., & Caruthers,F.A. (2010). The Program Evaluation Standards : A guide for evaluators and evaluation users (3rd. ed).Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.https://evaluationstandards.org/program/ |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
學校行政碩士在職專班
110911007 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110911007 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [學校行政碩士在職專班] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 100701.pdf | | 9266Kb | Adobe PDF | 0 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
