（專題）工程及科技教育認證制度下的學生核心能力與評估：大學教師、系主任、院長的觀點
作者:林妙真(國立中央大學學習與教學研究所)、張佩芬(國立中央大學學習與教學研究所)
卷期：58卷第4期
日期：2013年12月
頁碼：37-68
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.2013.58(4).02
摘要：
歐美國家近幾年皆已建立不同程度的品質保證體系，而國內工程及科技教育認證實施9年，偏向檢視整體教育的品質，缺乏對評估機制的深度檢視。本研究旨在探究工程及科技教育認證對學生核心能力的影響，並瞭解目前國內各工程系所評估學生核心能力的方式。以問卷調查和深度訪談蒐集院長、系主任與教師意見，有效回收問卷共471份，受訪對象計20位，並以一般歸納法（a general inductive approach）分析質性資料。研究發現：工程系所教師對於學生核心能力的評估仍是陌生的，且大多數系所尚未發展適當的評估工具。本研究以其中1所學校為例，該校將評分規準（rubrics）與數位平臺運用於教學與評量中，一則減輕教師的負擔；二則充分落實學生學習成效品質保證機制，可作為國內成果導向認證提供最佳實務（best practice）。最後針對目前工程系所落實持續改善之困境與未來研究提出建議。
關鍵詞：
工程教育認證、品質保證、核心能力、評分規準
《詳全文》
參考文獻：
- 中華工程教育學會（2013）。持續改善機制【圖】。取自http://www.ieet.org.tw/Info.aspx?n= whatisac【Institute of Engineering Education Taiwan. (2013). The mechanism of continuous improvement. Retrieved from http://www.ieet.org.tw/Info.aspx?n=whatisac】
- 王保進（2011）。引導學生學習成效品質保證機制之推動與落實－論第二週期系所評鑑之核心內涵。評鑑雙月刊，32，36-40。【Wang, B.-J. (2011). Facilitating the implementation of outcomes-based quality assurance system: How the emphasis on core content for the second-cycle of program assessment could enhance students’ learning effectiveness. Evaluation Bimonthly, 32, 36-40.】
- 李紋霞（2012）。學習成果導向評量：Rubrics的運用與設計。取自 http://pdc.adm.ncu.edu.tw/tldc/activities/teacher/PPT/rubrics%20%E9%81%8B%E7%94%A8%E8%88%87%E8%A8%AD%E8%A8%88%E8%AC%9B%E7%BE%A9%E6%AA%94_1011017.pdf
【Lee, J.-W. (2012). Learning outcomes-based assessment: The implementation and design of rubrics. Retrieved from
http://pdc.adm.ncu.edu.tw/tldc/activities/teacher/PPT/rubrics%20%E9%81%8B%E7%94%A8%E8%88%87%E8%A8%AD%E8%A8%88%E8%AC%9B%E7%BE%A9%E6%AA%94_1011017.pdf】
- 張佩芬、汪島軍、張凈怡（2008）。臺灣工程及科技教育之國際化因應：合乎「華盛頓協定」認證制度的建構。教育政策論壇，11（2），1-36。【Chang, P.-F., Wang, D.-C., & Chang, C.-Y. (2008). The internationalization of engineering education in Taiwan: Accreditation approach based on Washington accord signatories’ accreditation system. Educational Policy Forum, 11(2), 1-36.】
- 許媛翔（2006）。Dr. Eaton談高教評鑑國際發展新趨勢。評鑑雙月刊，1，38-39。【Hsu, Y.-X. (2006). The new trend of globalization of higher education from Dr. Eaton. Evaluation Bimonthly, 1, 38-39.】
» 展開更多
- 中華工程教育學會（2013）。持續改善機制【圖】。取自http://www.ieet.org.tw/Info.aspx?n= whatisac【Institute of Engineering Education Taiwan. (2013). The mechanism of continuous improvement. Retrieved from http://www.ieet.org.tw/Info.aspx?n=whatisac】
- 王保進（2011）。引導學生學習成效品質保證機制之推動與落實－論第二週期系所評鑑之核心內涵。評鑑雙月刊，32，36-40。【Wang, B.-J. (2011). Facilitating the implementation of outcomes-based quality assurance system: How the emphasis on core content for the second-cycle of program assessment could enhance students’ learning effectiveness. Evaluation Bimonthly, 32, 36-40.】
- 李紋霞（2012）。學習成果導向評量：Rubrics的運用與設計。取自http://pdc.adm.ncu.edu.tw/tldc/activities/teacher/PPT/rubrics%20%E9%81%8B%E7%94%A8%E8%88%87%E8%A8%AD%E8%A8%88%E8%AC%9B%E7%BE%A9%E6%AA%94_1011017.pdf【Lee, J.-W. (2012). Learning outcomes-based assessment: The implementation and design of rubrics. Retrieved from http://pdc.adm.ncu.edu.tw/tldc/activities/teacher/PPT/rubrics%20%E9%81%8B%E7%94%A8%E8%88%87%E8%A8%AD%E8%A8%88%E8%AC%9B%E7%BE%A9%E6%AA%94_1011017.pdf】
- 張佩芬、汪島軍、張凈怡（2008）。臺灣工程及科技教育之國際化因應：合乎「華盛頓協定」認證制度的建構。教育政策論壇，11（2），1-36。【Chang, P.-F., Wang, D.-C., & Chang, C.-Y. (2008). The internationalization of engineering education in Taiwan: Accreditation approach based on Washington accord signatories’ accreditation system. Educational Policy Forum, 11(2), 1-36.】
- 許媛翔（2006）。Dr. Eaton談高教評鑑國際發展新趨勢。評鑑雙月刊，1，38-39。【Hsu, Y.-X. (2006). The new trend of globalization of higher education from Dr. Eaton. Evaluation Bimonthly, 1, 38-39.】
- 劉杏元、張家臻、于桂蘭、何英奇、曾銀貞、吳曉明（2010）。最後一哩課程對四技護生學習成效之探究。教育科學研究期刊，55（4），131-155。doi:10.3966/2073753X2010125504005【Liu, H.-Y., Chang, C.-C., Yu, K.-L., Ho, Y.-C., Tzeng, Y.-J., & Wu, S.-M. (2010). The implementation and learning effects of last-mile curriculum among nursing students of a four-year technology college. Journal of Research in Education Sciences, 55(4), 131-155. doi:10.3966/2073753X2010125504005】
- Abu-Jdayil, B., & Al-Attar, H. (2010). Curriculum assessment as a direct tool in ABET outcomes assessment in a chemical engineering programme. European Journal of Engineering Education, 35(5), 489-505. doi:10.1080/03043797.2010.483276
- Accreditation Board for Engineering and Technology. (2013). Criteria for accrediting engineering programs, 2013-2014. Retrieved from http://www.abet.org/DisplayTemplates/DocsHandbook. aspx?id=3149
- Al-Nashash, H., Khaliq, A., Qaddoumi, N., Al-Assaf, Y., Assaleh, K., Dhaouadi, R., & El-Tarhuni, M. (2009). Improving electrical engineering education at the American University of Sharjah through continuous assessment. European Journal of Engineering Education, 34(1), 15-28. doi:10.1080/03043790802710169
- Ananda, S. (2003). Rethinking issues of alignment under No Child Left Behind. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
- Anderson, L., & Krathwohl, D. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. New York, NY: Longman.
- Arter, J., & McTighe, J. (2001). Scoring rubrics in the classroom: Using performance criteria for assessing and improving student performance. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
- Baker, R. L. (2004). Keystones of regional accreditation: Intentions, outcomes, and sustainability. In P. Hernon & R. E. Dugan (Eds.), Outcomes assessment in higher education (pp. 1-14). Westport, CT: Libraries Unlimited.
- Besterfield-Sacre, M., Gerchak, J., Lyons, M., Shuman, L. J., & Wolfe, H. (2004). Scoring concept maps: Development of an integrated rubric for assessing engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 93(2), 105-115. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2004.tb00795.x
- Callison, D. (2000). Rubrics. School Library Media Activities Monthly, 17(2), 34-36.
- Chen, H. L., Lattuca, L. R., & Hamilton, E. A. (2008). Conceptualizing engagement: Contribution of faculty to student engagement in engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 97(3), 339-353. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2008.tb00983.x
- Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16(3), 297-334. doi:10.1007/BF02310555
- Dabney, C. S., Johnson, R. L., Penny, J., & Ernst, E. (2001). A comprehensive system for student and program assessment: Lessons learned. International Journal of Engineering Education, 17(1), 81-88.
- Eaton, J. S. (2003). Is accreditation accountable? The continuing conversation between accreditation and the federal government (CHEA Monograph Series, 1). Washington, DC: Council for Higher Education Accreditation.
- European Higher Education Area. (2005). Conference of European ministers responsible for higher education. Retrieved from http://www.bologna-bergen2005.no/Bergen/Conference.HTM
- Ewell, P. T. (2001). Accreditation and student learning outcomes: A proposed point of departure. Washington, DC: CHEA Occasional Paper.
- Genesee, F., & Upshur, J. (1996). Classroom-based evaluation in second language education. Cambridge, NY: Cambridge University Press.
- Goodrich, H. (1997). Understanding rubrics. Educational Leadership, 54(4), 14-17.
- Gray, P. J., & Patil, A. (2009). Internal and external quality assurance approaches for improvement and accountability: A conceptual framework. In A. S. Patil & P. J. Gray (Eds.), Engineering education quality assurance: A global perspective (pp. 299-308). New York, NY: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-0555-0_22
- Lambert, A. D., Terenzini, P. T., & Lattuca, L. R. (2007). More than meets the eye: Curricular and programmatic effects on student learning. Research in Higher Education, 48(2), 141-168. doi:10.1007/s11162-006-9040-5
- Lattuca, L. R., Terenzini, P. T., & Volkwein, J. F. (2006). Engineering change: A study of the impact of EC2000. Philadelphia, PA: ABET.
- Maassen, P. A. M. (1997). Quality in European higher education: Recent trends and their historical roots. European Journal of Education, 32(2), 111-127.
- McGourty, J., Sebastian, C., & Swart, W. (1998). Developing a comprehensive assessment program for engineering education. Journal of Engineering Education, 87(4), 355-361. doi:10.1002/j. 2168-9830.1998.tb00365.x
- Miller, R. L., & Olds, B. M. (2002). Lessons learned in developing and implementing a program assessment plan. International Journal of Engineering Education, 18(2), 217-224.
- Popham, W. J. (2005). Classroom assessment: What teachers need to know (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
- Resnick, L. B., Rothman, R., Slattery, J. B., & Vranek, J. L. (2004). Benchmarking and alignment of standards and testing. Educational Assessment, 9(1&2), 1-27. doi:10.1080/10627197.2004. 9652957
- Rose, M. (1999). Make room for rubrics. Instructor, 108(6), 30-31.
- Smith, J. L., & Yokota, M. (2009). UCLA report for the WASC educational effectiveness review. Retrieved from http://www.wasc.ucla.edu/EER_Final.pdf
- Soundarajan, N. (2002). Preparing for accreditation under EC2000: An experience report. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(1), 117-123. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2002.tb00680.x
- Thomas, D. R. (2006). A general inductive approach for analysing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237-246. doi:10.1177/1098214005283748
- Volkwein, J. F., Lattuca, L. R., Harper, B. J., & Domingo, R. J. (2007). Measuring the impact of professional accreditation on student experiences and learning outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 48(2), 251-282. doi:10.1007/s11162-006-9039-y
- Volkwein, J. F., Lattuca, L. R., Terenzini, P. T., Strauss, L. C., & Sukhbaatar, J. (2004). Engineering change: A study of the impact of EC2000. The International Journal of Engineering Education, 20(3), 318-328.
- Whitcomb, R. (1999). Writing rubrics for the music classroom. Music Educators Journal, 85(6), 26-32. doi:10.2307/3399518
- Wiggins, G. P. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessments to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Journal directory listing - Volume 58 (2013) - Journal of Research in Education Sciences【58(4)】December (Special Issue: Quality management and assurance in education)
(Special Issue) A Study of Students’ Core-Competence Evaluation in Engineering Education Quality Assurance: The Perspectives of Faculty Members, Program Chairpersons, and Deans
Author: Miao-chen Lin(Graduate Institute of Learning and Instruction, National Central University), Pei-Fen Chang(Graduate Institute of Learning and Instruction, National Central University)
Vol.&No.：Vol. 58, No. 4
Date：December 2013
Pages：37-68
DOI：10.6209/JORIES.2013.58(4).02
Abstract：
The purpose of this study is to illustrate the impact of engineering education accreditation on evaluations of students’ core competences in Taiwan. The data were collected using a questionnaire survey and in-depth interviews. 471 valid questionnaires were analyzed and twenty engineering faculties, program chairpersons, and deans were interviewed afterwards. The results indicated that engineering faculties are unfamiliar with methods of core-competence evaluation. Therefore, the outcomes-based teaching and assessment approach of one university was used to demonstrate how rubrics can be implemented to maintain continuous improvement in curriculum planning and to minimize the workloads of teachers while they prepared for the self-study report during the accreditation process. This study is the pioneer to explore a best practice for the outcome-based accreditation approach in Taiwan. Finally, the implications and future directions of this study are discussed.
Keywords：
engineering education accreditation, quality assurance, core competences, rubrics