發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-03-22 00:10

  本文選題：大學(xué)社會(huì)評(píng)價(jià)　切入點(diǎn)：評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)　出處：《湖南大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文　論文類型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：隨著高等教育的發(fā)展，社會(huì)作為第三方的評(píng)價(jià)主體對(duì)大學(xué)的評(píng)價(jià)作用也日益凸顯。大學(xué)的社會(huì)評(píng)價(jià)主要包括認(rèn)證和排行兩方面，為了更好地對(duì)大學(xué)教育質(zhì)量進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)，需要設(shè)置全面、公平、合理及科學(xué)的評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是否客觀、公正、合理決定了大學(xué)社會(huì)評(píng)價(jià)的科學(xué)性和公正性，決定了其被社會(huì)接受和認(rèn)可的程度。美國(guó)作為當(dāng)今高等教育最發(fā)達(dá)的國(guó)家之一，其高等教育認(rèn)證和排行是美國(guó)高等教育質(zhì)量保障體系中的重要組成部分，而我國(guó)的高等教育認(rèn)證和排行發(fā)展稍顯滯后，因而，，筆者選取了中美兩國(guó)的大學(xué)社會(huì)評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中具有典型代表的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)進(jìn)行比較研究。 在認(rèn)證標(biāo)準(zhǔn)方面，美國(guó)選取新英格蘭學(xué)校和學(xué)院協(xié)會(huì)認(rèn)證標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為例，中國(guó)選取普通高等學(xué)校本科教學(xué)工作水平評(píng)估為例，在排行標(biāo)準(zhǔn)方面，美國(guó)以《美國(guó)新聞與世界報(bào)道》為例，中國(guó)以武漢大學(xué)中國(guó)科學(xué)評(píng)價(jià)研究中心發(fā)布的中國(guó)高�！案�(jìng)爭(zhēng)力評(píng)價(jià)”為例。在相同點(diǎn)方面：認(rèn)證標(biāo)準(zhǔn)分別從辦學(xué)目的、辦學(xué)條件或辦學(xué)資源、教育過(guò)程以及教育質(zhì)量的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)分別進(jìn)行論述；排行標(biāo)準(zhǔn)分別從教育投入、教育過(guò)程及教育產(chǎn)出的指標(biāo)體系進(jìn)行論述。在不同點(diǎn)方面：認(rèn)證標(biāo)準(zhǔn)分別從注重學(xué)校的自我評(píng)估、定性與定量、多樣性和個(gè)性化及學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)結(jié)果方面進(jìn)行論述；排行標(biāo)準(zhǔn)分別從教育質(zhì)量、科研條件及校友捐贈(zèng)的指標(biāo)體系進(jìn)行論述。同時(shí)從政治、文化和技術(shù)方面闡述了評(píng)價(jià)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)產(chǎn)生的原因。最后，在此基礎(chǔ)上，筆者得出了幾點(diǎn)啟示及建議。相關(guān)啟示有：轉(zhuǎn)變政府職能，成立專業(yè)性認(rèn)證中介機(jī)構(gòu)；立足國(guó)情，建立合理的大學(xué)分類標(biāo)準(zhǔn)和分類評(píng)估；增加排行的信度，擴(kuò)大數(shù)據(jù)來(lái)源渠道。具體建議有：強(qiáng)調(diào)自評(píng)為主，重視外部考察與自評(píng)相結(jié)合；注重定量與定性指標(biāo)體系相結(jié)合；建立一般性指標(biāo)與個(gè)性化指標(biāo)相結(jié)合的指標(biāo)體系；重視對(duì)學(xué)生學(xué)習(xí)結(jié)果的評(píng)估以及對(duì)排行具體指標(biāo)的設(shè)置建議。
[Abstract]:With the development of higher education, the social evaluation of universities, as a third party, is becoming more and more important. The social evaluation of universities mainly includes certification and ranking, in order to better evaluate the quality of university education. It is necessary to set up comprehensive, fair, reasonable and scientific evaluation criteria. Whether the evaluation criteria are objective, fair and reasonable determines the scientific nature and fairness of the university social evaluation. As one of the most developed countries in higher education today, the certification and ranking of higher education in the United States is an important part of the quality assurance system of higher education in the United States. However, the development of higher education certification and ranking in China lags behind. Therefore, the author chooses the representative standard of university social evaluation between China and America to carry on the comparative research. In terms of certification standards, the United States selects the New England School and College Association Certification Standards as an example, China selects the undergraduate teaching level assessment of ordinary institutions of higher learning as an example, and ranks the standards. The United States takes "American News and the World report" as an example, and China takes the "Competitiveness Evaluation" issued by the China Science Evaluation and Research Center of Wuhan University as an example. The conditions or resources for running a school, the educational process and the standards for the quality of education are discussed separately. The index system of educational process and educational output is discussed. In different aspects: certification standards are discussed from the aspects of self-assessment, qualitative and quantitative analysis, diversity and individuation, and students' learning results; The criteria of ranking are discussed from the aspects of education quality, scientific research conditions and the index system of alumni donation. At the same time, the causes of the evaluation criteria are expounded from the political, cultural and technical aspects. Finally, on this basis, The author has obtained several enlightenments and suggestions. The relevant revelations are as follows: transforming government functions, establishing professional certification intermediary organizations; establishing reasonable classification standards and classification evaluation of universities based on national conditions; increasing the reliability of ranking. The concrete suggestions are: emphasizing self-assessment, emphasizing the combination of external inspection and self-assessment, focusing on the combination of quantitative and qualitative index system, establishing the index system of combining general index and individualized index; Attach importance to the evaluation of students' learning results and suggestions for setting up specific indicators for ranking.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：湖南大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號(hào)】：G649.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 李守福;論大學(xué)的社會(huì)評(píng)價(jià)[J];比較教育研究;2003年05期

2 熊耕;試析美國(guó)高等院校認(rèn)證標(biāo)準(zhǔn)演變的邏輯——以中北部地區(qū)大學(xué)與中學(xué)協(xié)會(huì)的認(rèn)證標(biāo)準(zhǔn)為例[J];比較教育研究;2004年07期

3 熊耕;美國(guó)高等教育認(rèn)證制度的功能分析[J];比較教育研究;2005年02期

4 李守福;;論大學(xué)評(píng)價(jià)的價(jià)值取向[J];比較教育研究;2005年12期

5 高新柱;韓映雄;;美國(guó)高等教育認(rèn)證制度分析——兼議我國(guó)高等教育認(rèn)證制度的走向[J];大學(xué)(研究與評(píng)價(jià));2009年02期

6 康宏;;美國(guó)院校認(rèn)證標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的價(jià)值研究——基于中北部協(xié)會(huì)的分析[J];中國(guó)高等教育評(píng)估;2011年01期

7 施雨丹;;中國(guó)高等教育評(píng)估的問(wèn)題及其對(duì)策[J];高教探索;2007年02期

8 韓芳;李維U

本文編號(hào)：1646175