期刊目錄列表 - 59卷(2014) - 【教育科學研究期刊】59(3) 九月刊

臺灣地區大專院校教師對學校評價的影響機制:學校屬性與教師分級的區隔作用 作者:林俊瑩(國立東華大學幼兒教育學系)、謝亞恆(仁德醫護管理專科學校幼兒保育科)、陳成宏(國立東華大學教育行政與管理學系)

卷期:59卷第3期
日期:2014年9月
頁碼:29-58
DOI:10.6209/JORIES.2014.59(3).02

摘要:
    在高等教育經營環境日趨嚴苛的情形下,如何讓所屬教職員能認同於學校,並給予高評價,願意努力付出,增進學校榮譽,提高競爭力,當是高等教育經營管理重要的課題。然而,在如何促進大專院校教師對任教學校有高度正面評價的重要問題上,卻仍少有研究關注於不同職場屬性(如公/私立、綜合/科技),與教師分級制度所可能導致的差異性,並深入探討造成差異性的因素。基於此,本研究以臺灣高等教育整合資料庫的大專教師調查資料,對上述重要的研究議題進行分析。研究結果顯示:相較於私立技職院校,公立大學教師在教師聘用、專業發展、待遇福利,職場氛圍等工作環境之滿意度較低,而使其對所任教的學校評價較低。其次,公立技職教師,對於教師任用、專業發展、待遇福利等方面的滿意度都低於私立技職院校,因而對所任教學校的評價也就明顯較低。另外,教授與副教授對學校設備、人力資源、教師任用、專業發展、待遇福利與職場氛圍等,明顯比助理教授有較高的滿意度,因而對所任教的學校也就有較高的評價,而助理教授覺得學校較不夠友善,給的評價也就最低。

關鍵詞:工作環境、高等教育、教師分級、學校評價、學校屬性

《詳全文》 檔名

參考文獻:
  1. 大學法(2011)。【University Act (2011).】 
  2. 宋玫玫、張德勝(2008)。大學校院教師對學校工作環境滿意度之研究。花蓮教育大學學報26,155-178。【Song, M.-M., & Chang, T.-S. (2008). University faculty satisfaction toward work environment. Journal of National Hualien University of Education, 26, 155-178.】 
  3. 李威儀(2011)。有錢趕快撈的彈性薪資制度。臺灣社會研究季刊82,289-294。【Lee, W.-I. (2011). The crazy chase for adjustable salaries in higher education institutions of Taiwan. Taiwan: A Radical Quarterly in Social Studies, 82, 289-294.】
  4. 杜娟娟(2002)。教學與研究-大學教師的工作投入時間。屏東師院學報17,135-174。【Du, J.-J. (2002). Teaching and research–Time involvement of university professors. Journal of Pingtung Teachers College, 17, 135-174.】 
  5. 林大森(2002)。高中/高職的公立/私立分流對地位取得之影響。教育與心理研究25(1),35-62。【Lin, T.-S. (2002). The effect of academic/vocational public/private tracking in status attainment. Journal of Education & Psychology, 25(1), 35-62.】
» 展開更多
中文APA引文格式
林俊瑩、謝亞恆、陳成宏(2014)。臺灣地區大專院校教師對學校評價的影響機制:學校屬性與教師分級的區隔作用。教育科學研究期刊59(3),29-58。doi:10.6209/JORIES.2014.59(3).02
APA FormatLin, C. -Y., Hsieh, Y. -H., & Chen, C. -H. (2014). Taiwanese College Instructors’ Evaluation of Their Schools: The Differences Among School Attributes and Instructor Ranks. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 59(3), 29-58. doi:10.6209/JORIES.2014.59(3).02
 

Journal directory listing - Volume 59 (2014) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【59(3)】September

Taiwanese College Instructors’ Evaluation of Their Schools: The Differences Among School Attributes and Instructor Ranks Author:
Chunn-Ying Lin(Department of Early Childhood Education, National Dong Hwa University),Ya-Heng Hsieh(Department of Early Childhood Care and Education, Jen-Teh Junior College of Medicine, Nursing and Management),Cheng-Hung Chen(Department of Educational Administration & Management, National Dong Hwa University)

Vol.&No.:Vol.59, No.3
Date:September 2014
Pages:29-58
DOI:10.6209/JORIES.2014.59(3).02

Abstract:

    Managing higher education is becoming increasingly difficult. How to strengthen the identifications, evaluations, and dedications of faculties to the reputation and competitiveness of their institutions is a critical issue in managing higher education. Little research on how to promote the identification of college instructors with their institutions has focused on differences among job attributes (e.g., public/private, general/technological, and science) and instructor ranks as well as the factors contributing to the differences. This study attempted to answer these questions by using a sample of college instructors obtained from the Taiwan Integrated Postsecondary Education Database. The results showed that compared with instructors at private vocational colleges, instructors at public universities were less satisfied with employment, professional development, salary and benefits, and workplace atmosphere of their institutions and tended to assign relatively lower ratings to their schools. In addition, instructors at public vocational colleges were less satisfied with employment, professional development, and the salary and benefits of their institutions compared with their counterparts at private vocational colleges, which lead to the low rating of their institutions. Analysis of differences according to rank revealed that professors and associate professors were significantly more satisfied than assistant professors with their schools in the aspects of facilities, human resources, employment, professional development, salary and benefits, and workplace atmosphere. Thus, they assigned higher ratings to their schools. Associate professors tended to identify their schools as insufficiently friendly, and thus, their ratings of their schools were the lowest.

Keywords:work environment, higher education, instructor ranks, evaluations of the school, school attributes