大学英语教师绩效评估研究
|
摘要
本文的研究主要包括三大部分：第一部分,大学英语教师绩效评估现状研究,在这一部分里主要研究了大学英语教师绩效的概念界定,大学英语教师绩效的特殊性,高绩效大学英语教师的特征,同时采用问卷调查与访谈的方法对当前大学英语教师绩效评估的现状进行了研究。第二部分,大学英语教师绩效评估指标体系研究,在这一部分中主要研究了大学英语教师绩效评估指标体系建立的理论基础、基点、原则和功能,指标体系的具体结构和权重。第三部分,大学英语教师绩效评估的实施方法研究,包括应用数据包络分析方法和标杆管理方法对教师绩效进行排名,对绩效不佳的教师提出具体改进措施,利用增加约束的办法来平衡大学英语教师的教学、科研和服务工作。
为了进行深入研究,本论文进行了充分的准备与论证,重点针对大学英语教师绩效评估所涉及的7个方面,展开了较为全面的理论思辨和实证研究。本文研究的主要问题和观点如下：
1、大学英语教师的绩效应该包括哪些方面?教师绩效评估的功能、原则和意义是什么?
大学英语教师绩效评估是对大学英语教师在工作中的表现,包括教学、科研、服务和素质等几个方面,也就是大学英语教师的劳动过程、劳动行为和劳动结果等进行评估,通过对评估结果的反馈,提高大学英语教师的素质、教学、科研和服务水平的过程,是对教师行为的一种规范和引导。在评估的过程中和指标确立的过程中要充分考虑大学英语教师区别于其他行业及专业群体的特殊性。绩效评估要考虑到大学英语教师所占有资源(投入)的因素,即成本因素,从成本投入与产出的角度来进行绩效评价,要体现出一定的效率。开展大学英语教师绩效评估研究有利于完善外语教师评估,有利于拓展外语教师管理理论,有利于提高高校外语教学质量,有利于引入外部竞争淘汰机制,调动大学英语教师的积极性、主动性,有利于吸引优秀人才,增强外语师资力量,提高组织内部管理效率,有利于填补现有研究空白。
2、大学英语教师的绩效和其他行业人员或其他专业教师的绩效是否有差异?如果有的话,大学英语教师的特殊性(差异性)是什么?
大学英语教师有其不同于其他行业和专业的劳动特点和自身素质特征。大学英语教师行业的特殊性主要包括：教师职业对教师素质技能要求的特殊性,劳动手段、过程和对象的特殊性和复杂性,劳动成果的特殊性和复杂性。大学英语教师专业的特殊性主要包括：英语地位的迅速提升及社会的广泛认同是其他专业学科无法比的,大学英语教师的从业群体之巨大是其他专业无法比的,全国范围内的大规模的大型统一考试,是其他专业所不具备的,较其他专业比,大学英语的大班授课现象也比较严重,从学生对某一学科的重视率和重视程度上看,大学英语要远远高于其他学科,英语的重要的工具性角色也是其他专业无法比拟的,全国范围的大学英语教学改革是其他专业无法比的,全国范围内大学英语教学政策和外语教育教学政策的多次颁布也是其他专业无法比的,作为一门学科,英语的必修实践如此之长,这时其他专业所无法比的,大学英语的学分占总学分的比重也是其他学科无法比的。
3、什么样的教师可以称为高绩效大学英语教师?其特征有哪些?
高绩效大学英语教师的特征是指具有高水平的教学、科研和服务的大学英语教师区别于教学科研水平低或毫无教学或科研的大学英语教师的独特差异或不同点。高绩效大学英语教师应具备如下特征：(1)有丰富的教育知识和语言知识,包括：外语学科内容知识、一般教育学知识、教学法内容知识；(2)充满问题意识和批判性思维,包括：善于探寻教学现象,用批判性的眼光看待教学,善于与教学实践紧密联系；(3)具备优秀的教学能力和信息化素养,具备主动性、敏锐性、灵活性和创造性；(4)注重教师的个人发展,具备终身发展的意识,包括经常进行反思性教学,经常进行协作发展,经常利用网络进行学习,经常进行教学行动研究；(5)具有较强的教学自主能力和很高的自我效能感,包括：具有较强的专业承诺力,具备较强的自主工作动机的内在原动力,可以产生更好的教育有效性；(6)有较强的人格魅力、影响力和沟通能力；(7)突出的外语教学、科研和服务成就,包括圆满完成外语教学任务,承担科研项目,发表科研论文和专著等,积极参加校内外的服务工作与活动,为外语学科建设贡献力量。
高绩效大学英语教师可以从教师行为和教师成就两方面去判断,行为(如教师综合素质等)是成就产生的基础或条件,成就(如教学、科研和服务等)是特定行为的逻辑结果。一般而言,高绩效大学英语教师的教学行为高度合理,教学成果显著有效。具体来说大致包括四个方面：素质、教学、科研和服务。它们是一个整体,共同构成高绩效大学英语教师的特征。
4、大学英语教师绩效评估的现状是什么?此问题又可以分为如下子问题：1)目前各个学校大学英语教师绩效评估的方式和方法是什么?所采取的评估指标都包括什么?2)各个大学对评估结果的反馈和利用情况如何?3)大学英语教师对现行的评估体系满意么?他们持什么态度?4)目前大学英语教师绩效评估体系合理么?存在哪些问题?如何解决这些问题?
通过对全国23所高校的108名一线大学英语教师进行问卷调查与访谈,发现目前各个学校大学英语教师绩效评估有的采用定量方法,有的采用定性方法,有的是定量和定性相结合的方法；评估指标主要包括教学工作量和科研工作量,理工科院校更加重视科研；对于评估结果有些学校给予了反馈,有些学校根本没有反馈；大学英语教师对于现行的评估体系和实施是不太满意的。现行的绩效评估中存在很多问题：绩效评估制度中存在的问题,包括“重量轻质”的思想,“走过场”的做法；绩效评估体系中存在的问题,包括评估体系仅考虑产出绩效而没有考虑投入成本,缺少统一的评估标准,绩效评估结果没有促成改进等；绩效评估指标中存在的问题,包括评估指标不全面,导向不合理,评估指标内涵有交叉,评估指标缺乏科学分析,没有体现差异性。因此,在绩效评估指标体系的设计中应该考虑英语学科差异性,从而确保大学英语教师绩效评估的公平性、科学性。
5、如何建立一个合理的大学英语教师绩效评估体系?一个合理的体系究竟应该包括哪些具体指标?建立一个合理的评估体系的基点、程序和步骤是什么?
建立一个合理的绩效评估指标体系是需要理论支撑的,一个有效的大学英语教师绩效评估指标体系应该建立在以下理论基础之上：教学过程理论、教师评估理论、价值观理论、人力资源管理理论、系统理论和激励理论。建立大学英语教师绩效评估指标体系要遵照以下基点：评估中要以人为本,评估要全面,评估要着眼于提升教师素质,重视评估中的教学方法、教学模式指标。同时要充分考虑到以下几个原则：局部服从整体的原则,理论与实践相结合的原则,普遍性与特殊性相结合的原则,系统优化原则,可行性原则等。按照发散阶段、收敛阶段和试验修订阶段等三个步骤来设计指标体系
由于各大学的外语学院都肩负着外语教学、科研、服务三大任务,依据高校的发展目标、人才培养的客观要求以及大学英语教师工作的具体特点,本文对大学英语教师的评估从以下4个方面进行,即素质,教学,科研,服务。(1)素质。以师德为首,包括是否能够为人师表,教学的态度、科研的道德操守、团队合作精神以及教师的专业素质等等。(2)教学,包括教学工作量、教学质量、教学创新、学生对教师的评分等。教学分为质和量两个方面,量的方面主要通过统计教学时数、学生人数、教学手段等数据,质的方面是通过学生评估、听课组专家评估及主管教学院长评估等来衡量。(3)科研,包括具原创水平的科研成果、科研项目的数量和质量、论文的数量和质量,等等；在科研方面不仅有量的要求,而且还有质的要求。(4)服务,包括参与学校和社会的各种公益活动,在学术界的地位等等。如社会兼职、党政职务、学术兼职等。在现有的教师绩效评估研究的基础上,通过对一百多名大学英语教师和近十名外语教育专家的调查,以及对来自17所大学的担任外语学院行政职务且同时从事大学英语教学的教师们进行了访谈,反复筛选、讨论,最后形成了大学英语教师绩效评估指标结构。
6、用什么方法来对大学英语教师的绩效做出评估更为合理?为何要选取数据包络分析方法?其具体模型如何设计?如何应用数据包络分析方法和标杆管理思想来对大学英语教师的绩效做出科学合理的评估?
进行绩效评估的方法有很多,借于数据包络分析方法在大学英语教师绩效评价中的优越性和可行性,本文采用了数据包络分析方法。DEA方法的优点是：同类教师既可以横向作多个教师间比较,也可以纵向做DEA分析；不需要预先知道投入产出指标之间的显性函数关系；不用预先计算投入产出综合比率指标,不必无量纲化处理,输入与输出指标的量纲可以不统一。DEA法将投入和产出分开考虑,计算量较小；也不用事先确定各指标的权重,因此把DEA方法应用在大学英语教师绩效评估上有较强的客观性和实用性。但是,DEA只能用于相对有效性评价,对于存在多个DEA有效单元的情况,无法对每个有效决策单元进行分析,因此本文将引入标杆管理的思想来弥补DEA方法的缺点。
根据本文所构建的大学英语教师绩效评估的DEA模型和指标体系大学英语教师绩效的投入主要包括人力投入、财力投入和物力投入三种形式,产出主要包括教学产出、科研产出和服务产出。
7、在大学英语教师绩效评估中,如果有些教师评估结果不理想,应该如何利用数据包络分析模型对其提出改进方案?针对有些教师教学和科研发展不平衡的状况应该如何应用数据包络分析方法进行评判?
本研究把DEA模型和标杆管理思想结合起来,不但可以对大学英语教师的绩效做出评估,还可以针对绩效不佳的教师提出具体改进策略,如适当增加教学工作量和科研工作量,增加整体绩效满意度等方法来使这些绩效不佳的大学英语教师变成绩效良好的教师；可以通过引入标杆教师的方法,对绩效都是良好的教师进行再排名,在本文的研究中,有三位教师为DEA有效,通过引入标杆管理方法,对这些教师的有效性进行了再区分；此外,可以通过施加约束的办法,来解决当前大学外语教师的教学、科研和服务三者发展不平衡的问题,解决部分教师教学工作质量和教学工作数量发展不平衡的问题。
针对大学英语教师的特点,引入了教学科研平衡发展约束和教学内部平衡发展约束,随着约束数量的不断增加,每个大学英语教师的DEA有效性的数值和具体排名也随之发生变化,这说明学院的导向对于教师的绩效评估结果有着非常重要的影响,我们可以通过给指标施加不同约束的方法,来有效地引导外语教师的教学、科研和服务工作。在外语教师的绩效评估工作中,学院可以根据自己的发展目标有目的的增加或改变不同的约束,使得教师向着学院引导的方向发展,同时还可以把就某一方面存在问题的外语教师找出来,提出针对性的措施。
领导者们也应该有意识的引导大学英语教师在教学、科研和服务三方面的平衡发展,使得大学英语教师平衡好教学工作量和教学质量的关系。
本研究由九个章节组成。
第一章,介绍了论文选题的背景,包括教师评价研究的缘起以及大学英语教师评价的法律政策背景；从理论角度和现实角度介绍了本文的研究意义；整体介绍了本文的研究问题、研究变量、研究对象、研究内容、研究方法、研究范围和研究框架。
第二章,对大学英语教师绩效评价的概念逐级加以界定,分析了大学英语教师教学现状,大学英语教师绩效的特殊性和高绩效大学英语教师的特征；阐述了大学英语教师绩效评价的功能,原则和意义。
第三章,对我国大学英语教师绩效评价研究现状进行了汇总分析,包括国外高校教师绩效评价研究发展历程及其绩效评价实践和国内高校教师绩效评价研究发展历程及其绩效评价实践；对国内现有的教师绩效评价研究进行了分析归类与总结,指出了当前研究中存在的问题与不足；在对国内外相关研究进行文献检索的基础上,总结了高校组织层面的调查分析结果；针对大学英语教师绩效评估,从教师层面进行了问卷调查与统计分析,分析了大学英语教师绩效评估中目前存在的问题及其影响因素,并提出了消除影响因素的对策。
第四章,具体论述了大学英语教师的绩效评估的理论基础。包括教学过程理论、教师评价理论、价值观理论、人力资源管理理论、激励理论和系统理论。
第五章,详细介绍了大学英语教师绩效评估指标体系建立的基点和原则,评估指标设计的程序和步骤,以及大学英语教师绩效评估指标设计的具体结构和评分标准,另外还对大学英语教师绩效评价指标权重设计提出了建议。
第六章,对大学英语教师绩效评估的方法,即数据包罗分析方法进行了概述,首先介绍了DEA方法的含义、基本原理、基本分析功能、基本模型和具体意义,对DEA模型作为业绩评价方法的特点做了详细阐述,分析了将DEA方法应用于大学英语教师绩效评价的可行性和优越性,同时也指出了DEA方法的不足。另外引入了标杆管理方法,来弥补DEA方法的不足,尽量做到对教师绩效评估的科学化。
第七章,具体分析了大学英语教师的投入和产出的含义和内容,建立了大学英语教师绩效的DEA模型及评价指标体系。
第八章,是大学英语教师绩效评估的实证分析。给出了一个具体例子。应用之前介绍的DEA方法,对该学院的十几名大学英语教师进行了绩效评估,得出了具体排名,对评估结果的具体数据进行了详细的分析,证明了DEA方法的可行性。同时对于绩效评估结果中效果不理想的教师,利用数据包络分析模型的还原功能,进行了再次运算和求解,提出了具体改进办法。对于绩效较高的教师即DEA的值全部为1的教师,通过引入标杆教师的方法,对他们进行了再排名和重新评价,以发现他们的不足。最后通过添加约束的方法,融入学院的导向,来引导大学英语教师在教学、科研和服务等几方面平衡发展。
第九章,
对整个论文的研究工作做了总结。总结了论文的主要工作和创新点。展望了有待进一步研究的问题。
21st century is an international era of high-tech; this age is facing the conversion from industrial society to informational society. It expands cultural exchange and cooperation among different countries with the rapid technological advancement, the rising of interdisciplinary, the blending between the scientific culture and the literary culture, the developing of information society. The opportunity and challenge to foreign language teacher'education would be realized. Plan Outline for Medium and Long Term Education Development and Reform (2010—2020) points out that high-quality teacher staff should be built. Teachers are the essentials in the education. Qualified teachers can lead to qualified students. Education evaluation should be improved. A scientific and diverse assessing rubric should be established according to talent objective and conception. Teacher evaluation and selection system should be improved, so that a better education environment can be created. With scientific talent concept, scientific and socialized teacher evaluation and development system should be established. And this system is based on job responsibilities, is oriented to morality, ability and performance. College English teacher performance evaluation is a key session of foreign language teacher education; college English teacher performance evaluation will be studied in this paper.
This dissertation includes three parts. Part 1 is research status. In this part, the definition and the particularities of college English teacher performance are made clear, it is a kind of conceptual refinement; The characteristics of high performance college English teacher is analyzed; the status quo of college English teacher performance evaluation is studied by the way of questionnaires and interview. Part 2 is the study of index system of college English teacher performance evaluation. In this part, the theoretical basis, guidelines, principles and function of the index system are illustrated; the concrete structure and weight scales of the assessment index system are constructed. Part 3 is actualization (or implementation method) study of college English teacher performance evaluation. It includes:ranking 15 teachers using data envelopment analysis method and bench-marking method; bringing forward betterment measures to non-valid (or poor performance) teachers; balancing teaching, scientific research and service work of college English teacher by adding constraints.
In order to make an in-depth study or an intensive study, an adequate preparation and a substantial argument are made. Especially to the 7 aspects involved in college English teacher performance evaluation, a comprehensive theoretical speculativeness and empirical research are developed. The questions and viewpoints are as follows:
1. What kind of aspects should be included in college English teacher performance? What are the functions, principles and significance of college English teacher performance evaluation?
College English teacher performance evaluation is the assessment to the work performance of college English teacher, including teaching, scientific research and service. In other words, it refers to the evaluation to labor process, labor behavior and labor results of college English teacher. It can regulate and guide the teachers'behavior according to the evaluation feedback so that the teachers'qualities, teaching level, scientific research level and service level can be improved. The particularities of college English teacher as distinguished from other groups should be considered in the process of evaluation and process of establishing the index system. To some extent, performance evaluation means efficiency evaluation, so that the cost factor or the input factor should be taken into consideration. The evaluation can be made from the aspect of cost input and performance output, to reflect the efficiency. Developing college English teacher performance evaluation will benefit foreign language teacher performance evaluation system, will contribute to the development of foreign language teacher management theories, will be helpful to improve college foreign language education quality, will be favorable to bring in competition mechanism, will be good to stimulate or motivate teacher enthusiasm and initiative, will be beneficial to attract talent, enlarge faculty force, improve the organizational efficiency, will be conductive to fill the gap of current studies.
2. Are there any differences between the performance of college English teacher and that of other industries or other professions? If there are, what are the particularities of college English teacher performance?
College English teacher have their own particularities as distinguished to other groups, such as industrial characteristics and professional features. Industrial particularities cover:the particular teacher quality skill required by teacher vocation; the specialty and complexity of teacher labor method, labor process, labor object and labor fruits. Professional particularities comprise:rapider development and wider affirmation of English major; larger population of English teacher; nation-wide unified examination; larger class teaching; more significant status in students'mind; the tool role of English; nation-wide college English teaching reformation; many times foreign language education policies promulgation; the longest time as obligatory course; more credits than other subjects, etc.
3. What kind of teacher can be called high-qualified college English teacher? What are their characteristics?
The characteristics of high-qualified college English teacher refer to the differences of high-level college English teacher as distinguished to low-level teachers, in the respects of teaching, scientific research and service. The characteristics are as follows:(1) abundant education knowledge and language knowledge, including foreign language knowledge, general education knowledge, and pedagogy knowledge etc; (2) problem consciousness and critical thinking, containing exploring teaching phenomena, making a critical thinking in teaching and studying, integrating theory with practice; (3) excellent teaching ability and information accomplishment, flexibility, initiative and creativeness;(4) all-around development value, individuality development belief and lifelong development belief, covering reflective teaching, cooperation development, network studying, teaching action research; (5) better teaching autonomy and higher sense of self-efficacy, such as great profession promise ability, automatic working motivation, better education validity; (6) stronger personality, influence, communication capability; (7) outstanding achievement on foreign language teaching, scientific research and service, embracing finishing teaching task successfully, publishing scientific research papers, taking active part in service activities inside school and outside school, contributing their share to foreign language subject development etc.
High-performance college English teacher can be judged from two sides:teacher behavior and teacher achievement. Teacher behavior, such as teacher synthetic quality which is the base and condition of teacher achievement, teacher achievement, such as teaching, scientific research and service is the logical result of teacher behavior. Generally speaking, the teacher behavior of high-performance college English teacher is highly reasonable, teacher achievement is highly effective.In details, there are four fields, i.e. quality, teaching, scientific research and service. They are an entirety; they constitute the characteristics of high-performance college English teacher.
4. What is the status quo of college English teacher performance evaluation? This question can be divided into the following subquestions:1) What are the methods of college English teacher performance evaluation? What has been included in the evaluation indexes? 2) How do colleges feedback and use the performance results? 3) Are college English teacher satisfied with the current evaluation system? What are their attitudes? 4) Is the current evaluation system reasonable? What kind of problems are in the present evaluation system? How to solve the problems?
The questionnaires and interviews to 108 college English teacher coming from 23 universities are made to find problems in the current evaluation system. Some colleges take quantitative method, some take qualitative method, others take both; evaluation indexes mainly include teaching hours and scientific research tasks, science and technology colleges make more emphasis on the scientific research tasks; some universities make feedback to the assessment result, but others do not; most of the college English teacher are not satisfied with the current evaluation system and execution process. There are a lot of problems in the present performance evaluation system. Firstly, there are some problems in the performance evaluation mechanism, such as stressing quantity but not quality, making evaluation as a mere formality. Secondly, there are some problems in the performance evaluation system, like lacking unified rubrics; emphasizing the outputs of teachers but not inputs; the evaluation results do not make for teachers'improvement. Thirdly, there are some problems in the performance evaluation indexes, such as the indexes themselves are incomplete and lack of scientific analysis, are short of differences between different indexes; indexes'orientation is unreasonable; the interpretation of the indexes are overlapping. Therefore, the differences of college English teacher should be taken into consideration when designing the performance evaluation system, so that the equity and scientificity of performance evaluation to college English teacher can be guaranteed.
5. How to establish a reasonable college English teacher performance evaluation system? What should be included in this system? What are the guidelines and stages of the reasonable evaluation system?
Theoretical supporting is necessary for a reasonable evaluation system. There are many theories to support college English teacher performance evaluation system, such as teaching procedure theory, teacher evaluation theory, values theory, human resource management theory, system theory and motivation theory. There are many guidelines for the evaluation system:principle of people-oriented or people foremost, principle of subordinating the interests of the part to those of the whole, principle of combining theory with practice, principle of unifying universality with particularity, comprehensive principle, operative principle, objective principle, feasible principle systematic and dynamic principle, the principle of emphasizing promoting teacher's quality, stressing teaching methods and teaching modes indexes. There three stages of designing the evaluation system:divergent phase, convergent phase and experimental stage.
As most of the foreign language departments of universities undertake three tasks, i.e. foreign language teaching, scientific research and service, in accordance with college developing targets and talents cultivating requirements, there are four aspects involved in college English teacher performance evaluation:quality, teaching scientific research and service. (1) Quality, headed by virtue, covers teaching attitude, scientific research morality, team-work spirits, and professional quality, being a paragon/model of virtue and learning for others, etc. (2) Teaching includes teaching hours, teaching quality, teaching innovation and students'impression. From the quantitative respect, teaching means teaching hours, student numbers and teaching method, etc. From the qualitative respect, teaching means the students'impression, the experts'impression and marks. (3) Scientific research contains original scientific research fruits, the quantity and quality of scientific research projects and articles, etc. (4) Service consists of inside-school and outside-school socially useful activities, the teacher's status in the academic world, like social position, government position and other professional contributions, and so on. On the base of existing research on the teacher performance evaluation, questionnaires and interviews are made to more than 100 college English teacher and 10 foreign education experts, in-depth interviews are made to the college English teacher with administrative post coming from 17 universities. The college English teacher performance evaluation system structure is constructed after repeated siftings and discussions.
6. What is the appropriate evaluating method to college English teacher performance? Why the data envelopment analysis (DEA) method is adopted? How to use DEA method and bench-marking method to make an evaluation to college English teacher performance?
There are many methods to make performance evaluation. After comparing, DEA is adopted for its advantages and feasibility. The chief advantages of DEA are:horizontal comparison and longitudinal comparison among different teachers can be made; the dominant functional relationship between input indexes and output indexes does not to be calculated beforehand; the comprehensive rate parameters do not need to be calculated in advance; the non-dimensional quantities treatment do not need to be done; dimension of the input and output indexes do not need to unified; DEA deals with the input and output indexes separately with less computation amounts; so it is more objective and feasible to use DEA method in college English teacher performance evaluation. However, DEA can only deal with relative efficiency evaluation, it can not make analysis to each effective decision-making unit (DMU) in the case of there are multiple effective DMU. So the bench-marking method is used to make up this shortcoming of DEA.
In accordance with the DEA model and evaluation system of college English teacher performance built in this thesis, the input of college English teacher performance includes:manpower input, material input and financial resources input; output of it includes:teaching output, scientific research output and service output.
7. In the college English teacher performance evaluation, if there are some teachers' evaluation result is unsatisfactory, how to present his or her improvement plan using DEA model? How to use DEA model to evaluate some teachers who are unbalanced in their teaching performance and scientific research performance?
This thesis combines the DEA method and bench-marking method, it not only can make performance evaluation to college English teacher, but also can offer improvement strategies to non-valid teachers, and for instance, by adding teaching hours, scientific research tasks or improving the degree of whole performance satisfaction, by this way the non-valid teacher can become valid teacher. A second round evaluation can be made to all the valid teachers, by integrating bench-marking method into DEA model, so that the ranking of the valid teachers can be gotten. In addition, by applying constraint conditions to the DEA model, the unbalanced development problem of college English teacher in teaching, scientific research and service can be solved; the unbalanced development problem of college English teacher in teaching quantity and teaching quality can be solved partly.
An empirical study is made in this thesis, based on the characteristics of college English teacher, a preference constraint of balancing teaching and scientific research, and another a preference constraint of balancing teaching quantity and teaching quality are designed to add to the DEA model of college English teacher performance evaluation(CETPE), with the changing of the constraints, the value of DEA and the ranking sequence of the 15 teachers are changing. This means the valuators'guidances have significant influences on the evaluation result. Different guidances can be provided through adding different constraints. In the foreign language teaching and scientific research, valuator/appraiser/estimator can present different constraints purposefully, especially to the problems that the valuator concerns about. By this means, the problematic teachers can be found, and the pointed improvement measures can be put forward. The valuators should guide college English teacher to balance their teaching, scientific research and serve work, so that they can get higher performance.
This study consists of 9 chapters.
Chapter one mainly introduces the background and significance of the theme, including the background information of teacher performance evaluation and the relative legal policies; the practical & theoretical significance of the theme; the main studying questions, variables, objects, contents, researching methods, researching frame and range.
Chapter two gives a refined definition of college English teacher performance evaluation; analyzes the actuality or status quo of college English teaching, the particularities of college English teacher, the characteristics of high performance college English teacher; illustrates the function of college English teacher performance evaluation.
Chapter three collects and analyzes the existing data of college English teacher performance evaluation, including the developing course and evaluating practices both at home and abroad; summarizes and analyzes the existing studying achievements and theories by sorting; describes the issues and shortages in current researches; makes a summary of the survey results in college organizational level on the base of sufficient document investigation of related research works at domestic and abroad; in this chapter, on the issues of CETPE, questionnaires survey and interview investigation are adopted; the present problems and influential facts are pointed out, several solutions to these issues are put forward.
Chapter four expounds the theories supporting college English teacher performance evaluation, including teaching procedure theory, teacher evaluation theory, human resource management theory, values theory, motivation theory, system theory. Chapter five gives the detail information about the guidelines and principles of college English teacher performance evaluation index system. The concrete index structure, evaluation procedures, evaluation steps, evaluation indexes and index weight design are presented.
Chapter six expounds the specific methods of college English teacher performance evaluation. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) method is outlined, including its meaning, fundamental rules and basic analysis function. The two basic models of DEA, their actual meaning and application conditions are introduced in here. The characteristics of DEA as a method of performance evaluation are described; the feasibility and superiority of DEA in this study are elucidated. The limitations of DEA are also be analyzed. Then, the benchmarking management method is introduced. The benchmarking management method is integrated with DEA method to compensate or make up the shortcomings of DEA model.
Chapter seven establishes the DEA model and the evaluation index system of college English teacher performance. On the basic analysis of the job of college English teacher, an input analysis and an output analysis of college English teacher's job are made. An index system is constructed from the perspective of DEA.
Chapter eight is an empirical analysis. It is a case of college English teacher performance evaluation. In this chapter, DEA model and benchmarking management method are applied, taking 15 English teachers of a university as the sample, an operation, a solution and a relative analysis are made. The feasibility of this evaluation system and method can be verificated in this way. At the same time, in accordance with the reduction function of DEA model, several kinds of improved schemes for inefficient DMU (DEA decision making units) are supplied. A second round evaluation is performed to the efficient or valid DMUs by using the benchmarking way. At last, from the aspect of balancing among teaching, scientific research and service, a DEA model with constraints is brought forward.
Chapter nine is a summary to generalize the whole study, innovations and limitations in this dissertation. Suggestions are proposed for further research and improvement.
为了进行深入研究,本论文进行了充分的准备与论证,重点针对大学英语教师绩效评估所涉及的7个方面,展开了较为全面的理论思辨和实证研究。本文研究的主要问题和观点如下：
1、大学英语教师的绩效应该包括哪些方面?教师绩效评估的功能、原则和意义是什么?
大学英语教师绩效评估是对大学英语教师在工作中的表现,包括教学、科研、服务和素质等几个方面,也就是大学英语教师的劳动过程、劳动行为和劳动结果等进行评估,通过对评估结果的反馈,提高大学英语教师的素质、教学、科研和服务水平的过程,是对教师行为的一种规范和引导。在评估的过程中和指标确立的过程中要充分考虑大学英语教师区别于其他行业及专业群体的特殊性。绩效评估要考虑到大学英语教师所占有资源(投入)的因素,即成本因素,从成本投入与产出的角度来进行绩效评价,要体现出一定的效率。开展大学英语教师绩效评估研究有利于完善外语教师评估,有利于拓展外语教师管理理论,有利于提高高校外语教学质量,有利于引入外部竞争淘汰机制,调动大学英语教师的积极性、主动性,有利于吸引优秀人才,增强外语师资力量,提高组织内部管理效率,有利于填补现有研究空白。
2、大学英语教师的绩效和其他行业人员或其他专业教师的绩效是否有差异?如果有的话,大学英语教师的特殊性(差异性)是什么?
大学英语教师有其不同于其他行业和专业的劳动特点和自身素质特征。大学英语教师行业的特殊性主要包括：教师职业对教师素质技能要求的特殊性,劳动手段、过程和对象的特殊性和复杂性,劳动成果的特殊性和复杂性。大学英语教师专业的特殊性主要包括：英语地位的迅速提升及社会的广泛认同是其他专业学科无法比的,大学英语教师的从业群体之巨大是其他专业无法比的,全国范围内的大规模的大型统一考试,是其他专业所不具备的,较其他专业比,大学英语的大班授课现象也比较严重,从学生对某一学科的重视率和重视程度上看,大学英语要远远高于其他学科,英语的重要的工具性角色也是其他专业无法比拟的,全国范围的大学英语教学改革是其他专业无法比的,全国范围内大学英语教学政策和外语教育教学政策的多次颁布也是其他专业无法比的,作为一门学科,英语的必修实践如此之长,这时其他专业所无法比的,大学英语的学分占总学分的比重也是其他学科无法比的。
3、什么样的教师可以称为高绩效大学英语教师?其特征有哪些?
高绩效大学英语教师的特征是指具有高水平的教学、科研和服务的大学英语教师区别于教学科研水平低或毫无教学或科研的大学英语教师的独特差异或不同点。高绩效大学英语教师应具备如下特征：(1)有丰富的教育知识和语言知识,包括：外语学科内容知识、一般教育学知识、教学法内容知识；(2)充满问题意识和批判性思维,包括：善于探寻教学现象,用批判性的眼光看待教学,善于与教学实践紧密联系；(3)具备优秀的教学能力和信息化素养,具备主动性、敏锐性、灵活性和创造性；(4)注重教师的个人发展,具备终身发展的意识,包括经常进行反思性教学,经常进行协作发展,经常利用网络进行学习,经常进行教学行动研究；(5)具有较强的教学自主能力和很高的自我效能感,包括：具有较强的专业承诺力,具备较强的自主工作动机的内在原动力,可以产生更好的教育有效性；(6)有较强的人格魅力、影响力和沟通能力；(7)突出的外语教学、科研和服务成就,包括圆满完成外语教学任务,承担科研项目,发表科研论文和专著等,积极参加校内外的服务工作与活动,为外语学科建设贡献力量。
高绩效大学英语教师可以从教师行为和教师成就两方面去判断,行为(如教师综合素质等)是成就产生的基础或条件,成就(如教学、科研和服务等)是特定行为的逻辑结果。一般而言,高绩效大学英语教师的教学行为高度合理,教学成果显著有效。具体来说大致包括四个方面：素质、教学、科研和服务。它们是一个整体,共同构成高绩效大学英语教师的特征。
4、大学英语教师绩效评估的现状是什么?此问题又可以分为如下子问题：1)目前各个学校大学英语教师绩效评估的方式和方法是什么?所采取的评估指标都包括什么?2)各个大学对评估结果的反馈和利用情况如何?3)大学英语教师对现行的评估体系满意么?他们持什么态度?4)目前大学英语教师绩效评估体系合理么?存在哪些问题?如何解决这些问题?
通过对全国23所高校的108名一线大学英语教师进行问卷调查与访谈,发现目前各个学校大学英语教师绩效评估有的采用定量方法,有的采用定性方法,有的是定量和定性相结合的方法；评估指标主要包括教学工作量和科研工作量,理工科院校更加重视科研；对于评估结果有些学校给予了反馈,有些学校根本没有反馈；大学英语教师对于现行的评估体系和实施是不太满意的。现行的绩效评估中存在很多问题：绩效评估制度中存在的问题,包括“重量轻质”的思想,“走过场”的做法；绩效评估体系中存在的问题,包括评估体系仅考虑产出绩效而没有考虑投入成本,缺少统一的评估标准,绩效评估结果没有促成改进等；绩效评估指标中存在的问题,包括评估指标不全面,导向不合理,评估指标内涵有交叉,评估指标缺乏科学分析,没有体现差异性。因此,在绩效评估指标体系的设计中应该考虑英语学科差异性,从而确保大学英语教师绩效评估的公平性、科学性。
5、如何建立一个合理的大学英语教师绩效评估体系?一个合理的体系究竟应该包括哪些具体指标?建立一个合理的评估体系的基点、程序和步骤是什么?
建立一个合理的绩效评估指标体系是需要理论支撑的,一个有效的大学英语教师绩效评估指标体系应该建立在以下理论基础之上：教学过程理论、教师评估理论、价值观理论、人力资源管理理论、系统理论和激励理论。建立大学英语教师绩效评估指标体系要遵照以下基点：评估中要以人为本,评估要全面,评估要着眼于提升教师素质,重视评估中的教学方法、教学模式指标。同时要充分考虑到以下几个原则：局部服从整体的原则,理论与实践相结合的原则,普遍性与特殊性相结合的原则,系统优化原则,可行性原则等。按照发散阶段、收敛阶段和试验修订阶段等三个步骤来设计指标体系
由于各大学的外语学院都肩负着外语教学、科研、服务三大任务,依据高校的发展目标、人才培养的客观要求以及大学英语教师工作的具体特点,本文对大学英语教师的评估从以下4个方面进行,即素质,教学,科研,服务。(1)素质。以师德为首,包括是否能够为人师表,教学的态度、科研的道德操守、团队合作精神以及教师的专业素质等等。(2)教学,包括教学工作量、教学质量、教学创新、学生对教师的评分等。教学分为质和量两个方面,量的方面主要通过统计教学时数、学生人数、教学手段等数据,质的方面是通过学生评估、听课组专家评估及主管教学院长评估等来衡量。(3)科研,包括具原创水平的科研成果、科研项目的数量和质量、论文的数量和质量,等等；在科研方面不仅有量的要求,而且还有质的要求。(4)服务,包括参与学校和社会的各种公益活动,在学术界的地位等等。如社会兼职、党政职务、学术兼职等。在现有的教师绩效评估研究的基础上,通过对一百多名大学英语教师和近十名外语教育专家的调查,以及对来自17所大学的担任外语学院行政职务且同时从事大学英语教学的教师们进行了访谈,反复筛选、讨论,最后形成了大学英语教师绩效评估指标结构。
6、用什么方法来对大学英语教师的绩效做出评估更为合理?为何要选取数据包络分析方法?其具体模型如何设计?如何应用数据包络分析方法和标杆管理思想来对大学英语教师的绩效做出科学合理的评估?
进行绩效评估的方法有很多,借于数据包络分析方法在大学英语教师绩效评价中的优越性和可行性,本文采用了数据包络分析方法。DEA方法的优点是：同类教师既可以横向作多个教师间比较,也可以纵向做DEA分析；不需要预先知道投入产出指标之间的显性函数关系；不用预先计算投入产出综合比率指标,不必无量纲化处理,输入与输出指标的量纲可以不统一。DEA法将投入和产出分开考虑,计算量较小；也不用事先确定各指标的权重,因此把DEA方法应用在大学英语教师绩效评估上有较强的客观性和实用性。但是,DEA只能用于相对有效性评价,对于存在多个DEA有效单元的情况,无法对每个有效决策单元进行分析,因此本文将引入标杆管理的思想来弥补DEA方法的缺点。
根据本文所构建的大学英语教师绩效评估的DEA模型和指标体系大学英语教师绩效的投入主要包括人力投入、财力投入和物力投入三种形式,产出主要包括教学产出、科研产出和服务产出。
7、在大学英语教师绩效评估中,如果有些教师评估结果不理想,应该如何利用数据包络分析模型对其提出改进方案?针对有些教师教学和科研发展不平衡的状况应该如何应用数据包络分析方法进行评判?
本研究把DEA模型和标杆管理思想结合起来,不但可以对大学英语教师的绩效做出评估,还可以针对绩效不佳的教师提出具体改进策略,如适当增加教学工作量和科研工作量,增加整体绩效满意度等方法来使这些绩效不佳的大学英语教师变成绩效良好的教师；可以通过引入标杆教师的方法,对绩效都是良好的教师进行再排名,在本文的研究中,有三位教师为DEA有效,通过引入标杆管理方法,对这些教师的有效性进行了再区分；此外,可以通过施加约束的办法,来解决当前大学外语教师的教学、科研和服务三者发展不平衡的问题,解决部分教师教学工作质量和教学工作数量发展不平衡的问题。
针对大学英语教师的特点,引入了教学科研平衡发展约束和教学内部平衡发展约束,随着约束数量的不断增加,每个大学英语教师的DEA有效性的数值和具体排名也随之发生变化,这说明学院的导向对于教师的绩效评估结果有着非常重要的影响,我们可以通过给指标施加不同约束的方法,来有效地引导外语教师的教学、科研和服务工作。在外语教师的绩效评估工作中,学院可以根据自己的发展目标有目的的增加或改变不同的约束,使得教师向着学院引导的方向发展,同时还可以把就某一方面存在问题的外语教师找出来,提出针对性的措施。
领导者们也应该有意识的引导大学英语教师在教学、科研和服务三方面的平衡发展,使得大学英语教师平衡好教学工作量和教学质量的关系。
本研究由九个章节组成。
第一章,介绍了论文选题的背景,包括教师评价研究的缘起以及大学英语教师评价的法律政策背景；从理论角度和现实角度介绍了本文的研究意义；整体介绍了本文的研究问题、研究变量、研究对象、研究内容、研究方法、研究范围和研究框架。
第二章,对大学英语教师绩效评价的概念逐级加以界定,分析了大学英语教师教学现状,大学英语教师绩效的特殊性和高绩效大学英语教师的特征；阐述了大学英语教师绩效评价的功能,原则和意义。
第三章,对我国大学英语教师绩效评价研究现状进行了汇总分析,包括国外高校教师绩效评价研究发展历程及其绩效评价实践和国内高校教师绩效评价研究发展历程及其绩效评价实践；对国内现有的教师绩效评价研究进行了分析归类与总结,指出了当前研究中存在的问题与不足；在对国内外相关研究进行文献检索的基础上,总结了高校组织层面的调查分析结果；针对大学英语教师绩效评估,从教师层面进行了问卷调查与统计分析,分析了大学英语教师绩效评估中目前存在的问题及其影响因素,并提出了消除影响因素的对策。
第四章,具体论述了大学英语教师的绩效评估的理论基础。包括教学过程理论、教师评价理论、价值观理论、人力资源管理理论、激励理论和系统理论。
第五章,详细介绍了大学英语教师绩效评估指标体系建立的基点和原则,评估指标设计的程序和步骤,以及大学英语教师绩效评估指标设计的具体结构和评分标准,另外还对大学英语教师绩效评价指标权重设计提出了建议。
第六章,对大学英语教师绩效评估的方法,即数据包罗分析方法进行了概述,首先介绍了DEA方法的含义、基本原理、基本分析功能、基本模型和具体意义,对DEA模型作为业绩评价方法的特点做了详细阐述,分析了将DEA方法应用于大学英语教师绩效评价的可行性和优越性,同时也指出了DEA方法的不足。另外引入了标杆管理方法,来弥补DEA方法的不足,尽量做到对教师绩效评估的科学化。
第七章,具体分析了大学英语教师的投入和产出的含义和内容,建立了大学英语教师绩效的DEA模型及评价指标体系。
第八章,是大学英语教师绩效评估的实证分析。给出了一个具体例子。应用之前介绍的DEA方法,对该学院的十几名大学英语教师进行了绩效评估,得出了具体排名,对评估结果的具体数据进行了详细的分析,证明了DEA方法的可行性。同时对于绩效评估结果中效果不理想的教师,利用数据包络分析模型的还原功能,进行了再次运算和求解,提出了具体改进办法。对于绩效较高的教师即DEA的值全部为1的教师,通过引入标杆教师的方法,对他们进行了再排名和重新评价,以发现他们的不足。最后通过添加约束的方法,融入学院的导向,来引导大学英语教师在教学、科研和服务等几方面平衡发展。
第九章,
对整个论文的研究工作做了总结。总结了论文的主要工作和创新点。展望了有待进一步研究的问题。
21st century is an international era of high-tech; this age is facing the conversion from industrial society to informational society. It expands cultural exchange and cooperation among different countries with the rapid technological advancement, the rising of interdisciplinary, the blending between the scientific culture and the literary culture, the developing of information society. The opportunity and challenge to foreign language teacher'education would be realized. Plan Outline for Medium and Long Term Education Development and Reform (2010—2020) points out that high-quality teacher staff should be built. Teachers are the essentials in the education. Qualified teachers can lead to qualified students. Education evaluation should be improved. A scientific and diverse assessing rubric should be established according to talent objective and conception. Teacher evaluation and selection system should be improved, so that a better education environment can be created. With scientific talent concept, scientific and socialized teacher evaluation and development system should be established. And this system is based on job responsibilities, is oriented to morality, ability and performance. College English teacher performance evaluation is a key session of foreign language teacher education; college English teacher performance evaluation will be studied in this paper.
This dissertation includes three parts. Part 1 is research status. In this part, the definition and the particularities of college English teacher performance are made clear, it is a kind of conceptual refinement; The characteristics of high performance college English teacher is analyzed; the status quo of college English teacher performance evaluation is studied by the way of questionnaires and interview. Part 2 is the study of index system of college English teacher performance evaluation. In this part, the theoretical basis, guidelines, principles and function of the index system are illustrated; the concrete structure and weight scales of the assessment index system are constructed. Part 3 is actualization (or implementation method) study of college English teacher performance evaluation. It includes:ranking 15 teachers using data envelopment analysis method and bench-marking method; bringing forward betterment measures to non-valid (or poor performance) teachers; balancing teaching, scientific research and service work of college English teacher by adding constraints.
In order to make an in-depth study or an intensive study, an adequate preparation and a substantial argument are made. Especially to the 7 aspects involved in college English teacher performance evaluation, a comprehensive theoretical speculativeness and empirical research are developed. The questions and viewpoints are as follows:
1. What kind of aspects should be included in college English teacher performance? What are the functions, principles and significance of college English teacher performance evaluation?
College English teacher performance evaluation is the assessment to the work performance of college English teacher, including teaching, scientific research and service. In other words, it refers to the evaluation to labor process, labor behavior and labor results of college English teacher. It can regulate and guide the teachers'behavior according to the evaluation feedback so that the teachers'qualities, teaching level, scientific research level and service level can be improved. The particularities of college English teacher as distinguished from other groups should be considered in the process of evaluation and process of establishing the index system. To some extent, performance evaluation means efficiency evaluation, so that the cost factor or the input factor should be taken into consideration. The evaluation can be made from the aspect of cost input and performance output, to reflect the efficiency. Developing college English teacher performance evaluation will benefit foreign language teacher performance evaluation system, will contribute to the development of foreign language teacher management theories, will be helpful to improve college foreign language education quality, will be favorable to bring in competition mechanism, will be good to stimulate or motivate teacher enthusiasm and initiative, will be beneficial to attract talent, enlarge faculty force, improve the organizational efficiency, will be conductive to fill the gap of current studies.
2. Are there any differences between the performance of college English teacher and that of other industries or other professions? If there are, what are the particularities of college English teacher performance?
College English teacher have their own particularities as distinguished to other groups, such as industrial characteristics and professional features. Industrial particularities cover:the particular teacher quality skill required by teacher vocation; the specialty and complexity of teacher labor method, labor process, labor object and labor fruits. Professional particularities comprise:rapider development and wider affirmation of English major; larger population of English teacher; nation-wide unified examination; larger class teaching; more significant status in students'mind; the tool role of English; nation-wide college English teaching reformation; many times foreign language education policies promulgation; the longest time as obligatory course; more credits than other subjects, etc.
3. What kind of teacher can be called high-qualified college English teacher? What are their characteristics?
The characteristics of high-qualified college English teacher refer to the differences of high-level college English teacher as distinguished to low-level teachers, in the respects of teaching, scientific research and service. The characteristics are as follows:(1) abundant education knowledge and language knowledge, including foreign language knowledge, general education knowledge, and pedagogy knowledge etc; (2) problem consciousness and critical thinking, containing exploring teaching phenomena, making a critical thinking in teaching and studying, integrating theory with practice; (3) excellent teaching ability and information accomplishment, flexibility, initiative and creativeness;(4) all-around development value, individuality development belief and lifelong development belief, covering reflective teaching, cooperation development, network studying, teaching action research; (5) better teaching autonomy and higher sense of self-efficacy, such as great profession promise ability, automatic working motivation, better education validity; (6) stronger personality, influence, communication capability; (7) outstanding achievement on foreign language teaching, scientific research and service, embracing finishing teaching task successfully, publishing scientific research papers, taking active part in service activities inside school and outside school, contributing their share to foreign language subject development etc.
High-performance college English teacher can be judged from two sides:teacher behavior and teacher achievement. Teacher behavior, such as teacher synthetic quality which is the base and condition of teacher achievement, teacher achievement, such as teaching, scientific research and service is the logical result of teacher behavior. Generally speaking, the teacher behavior of high-performance college English teacher is highly reasonable, teacher achievement is highly effective.In details, there are four fields, i.e. quality, teaching, scientific research and service. They are an entirety; they constitute the characteristics of high-performance college English teacher.
4. What is the status quo of college English teacher performance evaluation? This question can be divided into the following subquestions:1) What are the methods of college English teacher performance evaluation? What has been included in the evaluation indexes? 2) How do colleges feedback and use the performance results? 3) Are college English teacher satisfied with the current evaluation system? What are their attitudes? 4) Is the current evaluation system reasonable? What kind of problems are in the present evaluation system? How to solve the problems?
The questionnaires and interviews to 108 college English teacher coming from 23 universities are made to find problems in the current evaluation system. Some colleges take quantitative method, some take qualitative method, others take both; evaluation indexes mainly include teaching hours and scientific research tasks, science and technology colleges make more emphasis on the scientific research tasks; some universities make feedback to the assessment result, but others do not; most of the college English teacher are not satisfied with the current evaluation system and execution process. There are a lot of problems in the present performance evaluation system. Firstly, there are some problems in the performance evaluation mechanism, such as stressing quantity but not quality, making evaluation as a mere formality. Secondly, there are some problems in the performance evaluation system, like lacking unified rubrics; emphasizing the outputs of teachers but not inputs; the evaluation results do not make for teachers'improvement. Thirdly, there are some problems in the performance evaluation indexes, such as the indexes themselves are incomplete and lack of scientific analysis, are short of differences between different indexes; indexes'orientation is unreasonable; the interpretation of the indexes are overlapping. Therefore, the differences of college English teacher should be taken into consideration when designing the performance evaluation system, so that the equity and scientificity of performance evaluation to college English teacher can be guaranteed.
5. How to establish a reasonable college English teacher performance evaluation system? What should be included in this system? What are the guidelines and stages of the reasonable evaluation system?
Theoretical supporting is necessary for a reasonable evaluation system. There are many theories to support college English teacher performance evaluation system, such as teaching procedure theory, teacher evaluation theory, values theory, human resource management theory, system theory and motivation theory. There are many guidelines for the evaluation system:principle of people-oriented or people foremost, principle of subordinating the interests of the part to those of the whole, principle of combining theory with practice, principle of unifying universality with particularity, comprehensive principle, operative principle, objective principle, feasible principle systematic and dynamic principle, the principle of emphasizing promoting teacher's quality, stressing teaching methods and teaching modes indexes. There three stages of designing the evaluation system:divergent phase, convergent phase and experimental stage.
As most of the foreign language departments of universities undertake three tasks, i.e. foreign language teaching, scientific research and service, in accordance with college developing targets and talents cultivating requirements, there are four aspects involved in college English teacher performance evaluation:quality, teaching scientific research and service. (1) Quality, headed by virtue, covers teaching attitude, scientific research morality, team-work spirits, and professional quality, being a paragon/model of virtue and learning for others, etc. (2) Teaching includes teaching hours, teaching quality, teaching innovation and students'impression. From the quantitative respect, teaching means teaching hours, student numbers and teaching method, etc. From the qualitative respect, teaching means the students'impression, the experts'impression and marks. (3) Scientific research contains original scientific research fruits, the quantity and quality of scientific research projects and articles, etc. (4) Service consists of inside-school and outside-school socially useful activities, the teacher's status in the academic world, like social position, government position and other professional contributions, and so on. On the base of existing research on the teacher performance evaluation, questionnaires and interviews are made to more than 100 college English teacher and 10 foreign education experts, in-depth interviews are made to the college English teacher with administrative post coming from 17 universities. The college English teacher performance evaluation system structure is constructed after repeated siftings and discussions.
6. What is the appropriate evaluating method to college English teacher performance? Why the data envelopment analysis (DEA) method is adopted? How to use DEA method and bench-marking method to make an evaluation to college English teacher performance?
There are many methods to make performance evaluation. After comparing, DEA is adopted for its advantages and feasibility. The chief advantages of DEA are:horizontal comparison and longitudinal comparison among different teachers can be made; the dominant functional relationship between input indexes and output indexes does not to be calculated beforehand; the comprehensive rate parameters do not need to be calculated in advance; the non-dimensional quantities treatment do not need to be done; dimension of the input and output indexes do not need to unified; DEA deals with the input and output indexes separately with less computation amounts; so it is more objective and feasible to use DEA method in college English teacher performance evaluation. However, DEA can only deal with relative efficiency evaluation, it can not make analysis to each effective decision-making unit (DMU) in the case of there are multiple effective DMU. So the bench-marking method is used to make up this shortcoming of DEA.
In accordance with the DEA model and evaluation system of college English teacher performance built in this thesis, the input of college English teacher performance includes:manpower input, material input and financial resources input; output of it includes:teaching output, scientific research output and service output.
7. In the college English teacher performance evaluation, if there are some teachers' evaluation result is unsatisfactory, how to present his or her improvement plan using DEA model? How to use DEA model to evaluate some teachers who are unbalanced in their teaching performance and scientific research performance?
This thesis combines the DEA method and bench-marking method, it not only can make performance evaluation to college English teacher, but also can offer improvement strategies to non-valid teachers, and for instance, by adding teaching hours, scientific research tasks or improving the degree of whole performance satisfaction, by this way the non-valid teacher can become valid teacher. A second round evaluation can be made to all the valid teachers, by integrating bench-marking method into DEA model, so that the ranking of the valid teachers can be gotten. In addition, by applying constraint conditions to the DEA model, the unbalanced development problem of college English teacher in teaching, scientific research and service can be solved; the unbalanced development problem of college English teacher in teaching quantity and teaching quality can be solved partly.
An empirical study is made in this thesis, based on the characteristics of college English teacher, a preference constraint of balancing teaching and scientific research, and another a preference constraint of balancing teaching quantity and teaching quality are designed to add to the DEA model of college English teacher performance evaluation(CETPE), with the changing of the constraints, the value of DEA and the ranking sequence of the 15 teachers are changing. This means the valuators'guidances have significant influences on the evaluation result. Different guidances can be provided through adding different constraints. In the foreign language teaching and scientific research, valuator/appraiser/estimator can present different constraints purposefully, especially to the problems that the valuator concerns about. By this means, the problematic teachers can be found, and the pointed improvement measures can be put forward. The valuators should guide college English teacher to balance their teaching, scientific research and serve work, so that they can get higher performance.
This study consists of 9 chapters.
Chapter one mainly introduces the background and significance of the theme, including the background information of teacher performance evaluation and the relative legal policies; the practical & theoretical significance of the theme; the main studying questions, variables, objects, contents, researching methods, researching frame and range.
Chapter two gives a refined definition of college English teacher performance evaluation; analyzes the actuality or status quo of college English teaching, the particularities of college English teacher, the characteristics of high performance college English teacher; illustrates the function of college English teacher performance evaluation.
Chapter three collects and analyzes the existing data of college English teacher performance evaluation, including the developing course and evaluating practices both at home and abroad; summarizes and analyzes the existing studying achievements and theories by sorting; describes the issues and shortages in current researches; makes a summary of the survey results in college organizational level on the base of sufficient document investigation of related research works at domestic and abroad; in this chapter, on the issues of CETPE, questionnaires survey and interview investigation are adopted; the present problems and influential facts are pointed out, several solutions to these issues are put forward.
Chapter four expounds the theories supporting college English teacher performance evaluation, including teaching procedure theory, teacher evaluation theory, human resource management theory, values theory, motivation theory, system theory. Chapter five gives the detail information about the guidelines and principles of college English teacher performance evaluation index system. The concrete index structure, evaluation procedures, evaluation steps, evaluation indexes and index weight design are presented.
Chapter six expounds the specific methods of college English teacher performance evaluation. Data envelopment analysis (DEA) method is outlined, including its meaning, fundamental rules and basic analysis function. The two basic models of DEA, their actual meaning and application conditions are introduced in here. The characteristics of DEA as a method of performance evaluation are described; the feasibility and superiority of DEA in this study are elucidated. The limitations of DEA are also be analyzed. Then, the benchmarking management method is introduced. The benchmarking management method is integrated with DEA method to compensate or make up the shortcomings of DEA model.
Chapter seven establishes the DEA model and the evaluation index system of college English teacher performance. On the basic analysis of the job of college English teacher, an input analysis and an output analysis of college English teacher's job are made. An index system is constructed from the perspective of DEA.
Chapter eight is an empirical analysis. It is a case of college English teacher performance evaluation. In this chapter, DEA model and benchmarking management method are applied, taking 15 English teachers of a university as the sample, an operation, a solution and a relative analysis are made. The feasibility of this evaluation system and method can be verificated in this way. At the same time, in accordance with the reduction function of DEA model, several kinds of improved schemes for inefficient DMU (DEA decision making units) are supplied. A second round evaluation is performed to the efficient or valid DMUs by using the benchmarking way. At last, from the aspect of balancing among teaching, scientific research and service, a DEA model with constraints is brought forward.
Chapter nine is a summary to generalize the whole study, innovations and limitations in this dissertation. Suggestions are proposed for further research and improvement.
引文
1Freeman, D.2006. The hidden side of the work:teacher knowledge and learning to teach [J]. Language Teaching 35:1-13
2引自《2010—2020年国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要》第十七章加强教师队伍建设
1引自《2010一2020年国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要》 第十一章 人才培养体制改革(三十三)改革教育质量评价和人才评价制度。
2引自《2010—2020年国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要》 第十七章 加强教师队伍建设(五十一)建设高素质教师队伍
1蔡永红.对教师绩效评估研究的回顾与反思[J].高等师范教育研究,2001(5)：23-24
2在人事心理学中,效标是一种可直接或间接测量的绩效样本,它体现了组织中相关预测源(predictor)或人事决策的价值。
1杜雪兴.发展性教师评价——教师评价的新举措[J].苏州教育学院学报.2003.(12)：45-49
2李润洲.发展性评价一一教师评价的新理念[J].现代中小学教育.2002.(6)：53-55
3吴俊卿.绩效评价的理论和方法[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社,1992：85-154.[3]
1王斌华.发展性教师评价制度[M].华东师范大学出版社.1998年版.56-57
2何宪.人才评价师[M].人事部全国人才流动中心办公室编著,2005：68
3陈玉琨.教育评价学[M].北京：人民教育出版社.1998：23
1赵应生.大学教师劳动特点及绩效评估的人文关怀[J].黑龙江高教研究,2005(2)：24-25
2赵应生.大学教师劳动特点及绩效评估的人文关怀[J].黑龙江高教研究,2005(2)：24-25
1赵应生.大学教师劳动特点及绩效评估的人文关怀[J].黑龙江高教研究,2005(2)：24-25
1王建新等.大学英语教学改革呼唤观念更新[J].外语教学与研究,2003(3)
1高悦伶,高校优秀大学英语教师特征初探[J],首都经济贸易大学学报,2008.11
1李洁,大学英语教师个人特征对知识、技能和能力的影响研究[J],外语界,2006.08
2姚利民,綦珊珊,教学学术型大学教师特征论[J],湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2007(9)
1张逸岗,丁方.试论外语教师的基本素质[J].外语界,1996,(3).
2吴一安,优秀外语教师专业素质探究[J],外语教学与研究,2005.06
1庞丽娟,洪秀敏,教师自我效能感：教师自主发展的重要内在动力机制[J],教师教育研究,2005.07
1张艳玲.影响英语教师专业自主发展的内外在因素分析[J]湖北经济学院学报,2008(10).
1邓华,基于战略管理的高校教师绩效评价系统[D],重庆大学硕士论文,2008.10
1庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价指标体系研究[D],南京理工大学硕士论文,2006.05
1 庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价研究现状初探[J],中国高校师资研究,2006.11
1John A森特拉,(美)著.许建钺译.大学教师评估工作[M].北京航空航天大学出版社,1992
1王敏,我国高校教师绩效评价的问题及对策研究[J],兰州大学硕士论文2010,04
1庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价研究现状初探[J],中国高校师资研究,2006.11
1王斌华.发展性教师评估制度[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,1998
1袁贵仁.价值学引论[M].北京师范大学出版社,1991
2袁贵仁.价值观的理论与实践[M].北京师范大学出版社,2006
1袁贵仁.价值学引论[M].北京师范大学出版社,1991
1赵曙明.人力资源管理研究[M].中国人民大学出版社,2001
1车卡佳 周晓光.高校高新技术企业人力资源管理的研究[J].科技进步与对策,2002(6)
1马斯洛.动机与人格[M].华夏出版社,1987：69-70
1 郭琴,浅析高校教师绩效考核指标体系的设计与研究,中国水运(理论版),2007.03
1教育部办公厅关于印发《大学英语课程教学要求》的通知,《中华人民共和国教育部公报》,2007.11
1刘洋,校教师绩效评价指标体系的研究与实践[D],工程大学硕士论文,2008
1王英,教师绩效评价体系研究[D],河北工业大学硕士论文,2008
1引自《2010—2020年国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要》 第十七章 加强教师队伍建设
2李宁,校教师绩效评价指标体系的构建[J],教育学术月刊,2009.03
1素质要求参照了《高等学校英语专业英语教学大纲修订说明》
1李宁,校教师绩效评价指标体系的构建[J],教育学术月刊,2009.03
1魏权龄,数据包络分析(DEA)[J],科学通报,2000
1魏权龄,评价相对有效性的DEA方法：运筹学的新领域[M],中国人民大学出版社,1988
2马占新,数据包络分析方法的研究进展[J],,系统工程与电子技术,2002
1魏权龄,数据包络分析(DEA)[J],科学通报,2000
1刘和旭,基于DEA的高校教师绩效评价方法及应用研究[D],国防科学技术大学硕士论文,2006.04
2张蔚磊,企业业绩评价方法的利弊分析[J],交通财会,2004
1张蔚磊,上市公司业绩评价研究与DEA模型的应用[D],大连海事大学硕士学位论文,2005
2张蔚磊,上市公司业绩评价研究与DEA模型的应用[D],大连海事大学硕士学位论文,2005
1喻和文,彭回春,标杆管理在现代企业中的应用研究[J],现代商贸工业,2009.01
1孔杰,程寨华,标杆管理理论述评[J],东北财经大学学报,2004.03
1曾玉清,黄朝峰,高校办学效益DEA评价指标体系研[J],大学教育科学,2006.06
Alan Bryman, Dunean Cramer. Quantitative Data Analysis with Minitab A Guide for Social Scientist Collection and Analysis. Lond and New York:International Thomson Publishing Company.1996.
Ali A I, et al. Strict vs. weak ordinal relations for multipliers in DEA [J]. Management Science,1991,37(6):733-738.
Athanasso Poulos A D, Gounaris C, Sissouras A. A Descriptive Assessment of the Production and Cost Efficiency of General Hospitals in Greece [J].Health Care Managemeni Science,1999,2(2):97-106.
Avkiran N K. Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian Universities through data envelopment analysis[J]. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences,2001,35(1):57-80
Bandura, A. Self-efficacy:The exercise of control. New York:W. H. Freeman, 1997.
Bates J M. Measuring Predetermined Socioeconomic'Inputs'When Assessing the Efficiency of Educational Outputs [J]. Applied Economics,1997,29(1):85-93.
Boussofiane A,et al. Applied data envelopment analysis[J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1991,52:1-15.
Brouwers, A.,& Tomic, W., A longitudinal study of teacher burnout and perceived self-efficacy in classroom management J]. Teaching and Teacher Education,2000, 16(3),239-253.
Cameron Kim,Smart John. Maintaining Effectiveness Amid Downsizing and Decline in Institution of Higher Education[J].Research in Higher Education,1998,39(1):65-86.
Charnes A, CooPer W. W hodes E. Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1978,2(6):429-444.
Colin Robson. Small-Scale Evaluation, Lond. Thousand Oaks. New Delhi:SAGE Publications.2000.
Cook W D,Kress M, Seiford L M. On the use of ordinal date in data envelopment analysis [J]. Operation Research of Society,1993,44(2):133-140.
Cooper W W,etal. IDEA and AR-IDEA:models for dealing with imprecise data in DEA[J].Management Science,1999,45(4):597-607.
Dale L L. A blueprint for a teacher development program[A]. Second Language Teacher Education[C].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,人民教育出版社,2000.
Debaorahk Padgett. Qualitative Methods In Social work Research:Challenges and Rewards. (London)SAGE Publication Ltd.1998.
Farrell M J. The measurement of Productive efficiency [J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Soeiety.1957. (120A):125-281.
Freeman D. Teacher training, development, and decision making model:A model of the teaching and related strategies for language teacher education[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1989, (23):27-45.
Giokas D. The use of goal programming and data envelopment analysis for estimating efficient marginal costs of outputs [J]. Journal of the Operational Research Society,1997,48(3):319-323.
Jam E. Freed, Marie R. Klugman. Quality Principles and Practices in Higher Education: Different Questions for Different Times. Arizona The Oryx Press.1997.
Jill Johnes & Jim Taylor. Performance Indicators in Higher Education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.1990.
Kao Chiang, SiTai Liu. Data envelopment analysis with missing data:An application to university libraries in Taiwan [J]. Journal of the Operational Research Society,2000,51(8):897-905.
Kim S H,et al. An application of data envelopment analysis in telephone offices evaluation with partial data [J]. Computers & Operations Research, 1999,26:59-72.
Kim I, Hendry L C. Using DEA to assess NATO burden-sharing [J]. European Journal of Operations Research,1998,49:228-236.
Manuel J. de la Torre Cruz & Pedro F. Casanova Arias. Comparative analysis of expectancies of efficacy in in-service and prospective teachers[J]. Teaching and Teacher Education,2007,23,641-652.
Martha C P. A Professional development focus for the language teaching practicum[A]. Second Language Teacher Education[C].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,人民教育出版社,2000.
Martin Bennet & Peter James. Sustainable Measures:Evaluation and Reporting of Environmental and Social Performance. Sheffield:Greenleaf Publishing Limited. 1999.
Michael Quinn Patton. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods(2nd). Newbury Park. London. New Delhi:SAGE Publications.1990.
Moore D R, Mei-I Cheng, A R F Dainty. Competence, competency and competencies: Performance assessment in organizations[J]. Work Study, Volume 51, Number 6, 2002.
Necmi K, Avkiran. Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian Universities through data envelopment analysis [J]. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences,2001,35(1):57-80.
Ng Y C, Sung K L. Measuring the research performance of Chinese higher education institutions:An application of data envelopment analysis [J]. Education Economics, 2000,8(2):139-156.
Nunan D. Action Research in the Language Classroom is Second Language Teacher Education by Jack Richards and David Nunan [M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,人民教育出版社,2000.
Noguchi H Ishii H. Total raking method for multiple categorized data[C].The 15th Triennial Interactional Conference of IFORS'99 Beijing, Aug.,1999:15-20.
Podinovski V V, Athanassopoulos A D. Assessing the relative efficiency of decision making units using DEA model with weight restrictions [J]. Operation Research of Society,1998,49:500-508.
Richards J. The dilemma of teacher education in TESOL[J]. TESOL Quarterly,1987, (21).
Richards J C. Beyond Training[M]. New York:Cambridge University Press,1998.
Roger Sapsford. Vicotor JuPP(zhupian). Data Collection and Analysis. Lond. Thousand Oaks. New Delhi:SAGE Publications.1996.
Roll Y,Golany B. Alternate methods of treating factor weights in DEA [J]. OMEGA, 1998,21(1):99-109.
Sarrico C, Robert G D. Using DEA for planning in UK universities-An institutional perspective[J]. Journal of the Operational Research Society,2000,51(7):789-800.
Seiford L M, Joe Zhu. An investigation of returns to scale in data envelopment analysis [J]. OMEGA,1999,27:1-11.
Shinkfied, A.T.& Stumebeam, D., Teacher evaluation:Guide to effective Practice [M], Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers,1995.
Shulman L S. Knowledge and teaching:Foundations of new reform [J]. Harvard Educational Review,1987,57:1-22.
Smith Kari. Teacher educators'expertise what do novice teachers and teacher educators say [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education, Vo 1 ume 21, Issue2,2005.
Sueyoushi T. Stochastic frontier production analysis:measuring performance of public telecommunications in 24 OECD countries [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1994,74:466-478.
Taylor Barbara E, Megerson Joel W,Massy Willian F.Strategic Indicators for Higher Education:Improving Performance[M].Peterson's Guides,1993.
Toshiyuki Sueyoshi, Kenji Ohnishi, Youichi Kinase. A benchmark approach for baseball evaluation [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1999,115:429-448.
Tsui ABM. Understanding Expertise Teaching:Case Studies of Second Language Teachers[M]. Cambridge:CUP,2003.
Tschanen—Moran, woolfolk Hoy & Hoy. Teacher Efficacy:Its Meaning and Measure[J]. Review of Educational Research,1998,68(2),202-248.
Wright T. Understanding classroom role relation[A]. in Richards J C & David Nunan(eds.). Second Language Teacher Education[C]. New York:Cambridge University Press,1990.
Xiao-Bai Li, Gray R, Reeves. A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1999,115:507-517.
Yu Qet al. Construction of all DEA efficient surfaces of the production possibility set under the generalized data envelopment analysis model [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1996,95:491-510.
Zilla S, et al. Ranking units via AHP in the DEA context [C]. The 15th Triennial International Conference of IROFS'99, Beijing,1999,Aug.:15-20.
班杜拉. 自我效能：控制的实施[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2003.
包乌云.美国教师评价制度的改革与发展[J].教育探索.2004,45-47
布鲁纳,教育论著选[M],人民教育出版社,1989
布卢姆B·S、邱渊译,教育评价[M].华东师范大学出版社,1987.
蔡基刚.大学英语教学若干问题思考[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(2).
蔡言厚,田金山,吴厚平.大学科研定量评价指标体系的探讨[J].中国高等教育评估,2002(2)：21-24
蔡永红.对教师绩效评估研究的回顾与反思[J].高等师范教育研究,2001.
蔡永红、黄天元《教师评价研究的缘起、问题及发展趋势》[J].《北京师范大学学报》2003(1)
蔡永红,林崇德.教师绩效评价的理论与实践[J].教师教育研究,2005(01).
车卡佳周晓光.高校高新技术企业人力资源管理的研究[J].科技进步与对策,2002(6)
陈伯成,王友平.对层次分析法的认识[J].管理工程学报,1997(3)：155-161.
陈凌芹.绩效管理[M].北京：中国纺织出版社,2004：38
陈宏,应用型高等院校教师绩效考核体系研究[D], 浙江大学硕士论文,2009.03
陈荣昭.可用于分析民意测验的一个统计分析方法[J].数理统计与应用概率,第三卷,第四期：417-424.
陈述云,张崇甫.对多指标综合评价的主成分分析方法的改进[J].统计研究1995,(1)：35-39.
陈通,白建英.我国高等教育投入产出相对有效性的评价研究[J].中国高等教育评估,2002,(6).
陈伟.层次分析法在教师年度评估中的应用[J].辽宁财专学报,2001(03)
陈玉琨.教育评价学[M].第5次版.北京：人民教育出版社,2003：8,24-26.
陈玉琨著.中国高等教育评价论[M].广东教育出版社,1993.
陈玉琨,李如海.我国教育评价发展的世纪回顾与未来展望[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版).2000(1).
陈孝大.论教师的形成性评价和终结性评价[J].教育理论与实践,1988(2).
陈向明.定性研究中的效度问题[J].教育研究.1996,(7)：52-58.
岑建君.我国高校外语教学现状[J].外语教学与研究,1999,(1).
代蕊华.高校的教学、科研及其评价[J].高等教育研究,2001,(1)：94-98.
代蕊华,高校办学效益研究[D].上海：华东师范大学,1999.
戴曼纯,张希春.高校英语教师素质抽样调查[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2004,
(3).
戴亦欣,孙荣玲.无形资产价值实现及其量化[J].中国软科学.2000,(7)：73-76.
邓红霞,甘泉,张松.基于层次分析法的教学质量模糊评价[J].四川教育学院学报,2005(5)：94-96.
邓华,基于战略管理的高校教师绩效评价系统[D], 重庆大学硕士论文,2008.10
邓金主编.培格曼最新国际教师百科全书[M].学宛出版社,1989.
丁文恒,冯英浚,康宇虹.同时面向投入和面向产出的一种数据包络分析(DEA)模型
[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2001,(11)：41-44.
丁小浩.中国高等院校规模效益的实证研究[M].北京：教育科学出版社2000：63-69.
段海军.教师效能感与教师专业的自主发展[J].陕西师范大学继续教育学院学报,2007,(1)：10—13.
发展性教学评价的原理与方法[Z].广州市教育局教学研究室编,2003
樊相宇,谢昌芸.邮电高校办学效益DEA分析[J].西安邮电学院学报,1999,(6).
方鹏.定量考核方法分析及高校教师定量考核实践 [J].高等农业教育,2000(5)：52-55.
方旭儒.高校教师绩效评估研究.[D].西南石油学院,2003.
冯茁.试论素质教育背景下教师评价机制的转变[J].沈阳师范学院学报,2002(2).
冯玉芳.美国高校教师教学评价研究[D].河北师范大学.2004
傅道春.教师的成长与发展[M].教育科学出版社,2001.
付亚和,许玉林.绩效考核与绩效管理 [M].北京：电子工业出版社,2003.
甘正东.反思性教学：外语教师自身发展的有效途径[J]外语界,2000(4).
高广学,施丽梅.对教师绩效评价的思考[J].齐齐哈尔大学学报,1999(5)：93-95.
高悦伶,高校优秀大学英语教师特征初探[J],首都经济贸易大学学报,2008.11
葛新斌,姜英敏.日本大学教师评估制度改革动向分析[J].比较教育研究,2004(9)：76-79.
郭爱明、郭耀邦.层次分析法(AHP)确定食品质量指标权重[J].食品科学,1994(7).
郭卉.论中国研究型大学教师评估[D].武汉：华中科技大学,2003.
郭均鹏,吴育华,李汉华.改进的DEA模型及其在地区行业经济评价中的应用[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2003,12(2)：174-176.
郭琴,浅析高校教师绩效考核指标体系的设计与研究,中国水运(理论版),2007.03
韩敬愈.教师评价工作应注意的几个问题[J].教育科学研究,2002(2)
郝海.评价决策单元相对效率的修正DEA方法[J].系统工程与电子技术,2000,22(3)：40-43.
郝海,杨印生,李树根.区分有效决策单元的数据包络分析方法[J].天津工业大学学报,2001,20(4)：62-64.
何保全.试论教师评价的目的与准则[J].煤炭高等教育,1998(4)
何东昌主编.当代中国教育[M].当代中国出版社,1996.
何东昌主编.中华人民共和国重要教育文献[M].海南出版社,1998.
何刚.高校教师考核误差产生的原因及对策[J].江苏高教,1997(06).
何育萍.发展.教师评价工作的支点[J].北京教育学院学报,2001(3)
侯光文著.教育评价概论[M].河北教育出版社,1996.
胡方茜,刘继荣,朱原,陈抗生,杨维晓.网络化：建立教师考核体系的最佳途径[J].高等工程教育研究,1999(02).
胡皎,郑小兰.教师综合素质评价指标体系探讨[J].师资建设,2005,(5)：60-61
胡少勘,苏晶.教师考核结果反馈的原则及意义[J].内蒙古教育学院学报,1999(03)
胡永宏,贺思辉.综合评价方法[M]北京：科学出版社,2000：80.
华南理工大学.中国高校教师评价体系调研报告[M].18
黄甫全, 王本陆.现代教学论学程[M].教育科学出版社2004.
黄朝峰、沈永平.数据包络分析方法在高教评估中的应用研究田[J].中国高等教育评估.2003(4)
黄朝峰.高教评估中人才产出数量的计算[J].中国高等教育评估,2003,(1)：27-29.
黄朝峰,沈永平,陈英武等.大学评价中的科研效益评价[J]科学学与科学技术管理,2003,(7)：83-85.
黄蔚,陈雅.对教师教学评价现状的思考[J].理工高校研究,2003,(2)：37-38
黄宪成.模糊多目标决策理论、方法及其应用研究[D].大连：大连理工大学, 2003：11-12.
霍力岩.编制教育评价方案的一个关键问题[J].教育科学研究,2001(1)
[美]J.A.森特拉.许建械等译.大学教师工作评估[M].北京：北京航天航空大学出版社,1992：前言第Ⅲ页.
季明明、叶齐炼主编.学校教师工作评估实用手册[M].中央民族学院出版社,1993.
贾爱武.外语教师教育与专业发展研究综述[J].外语界,2005,(1).
教育部.大学英语课程教学改革要求[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,2003.
教育部办公厅关于印发《大学英语课程教学要求》的通知,《中华人民共和国教育部公报》,2007.11
蒋国华.科研评价与指标[M].北京：红旗出版社,2000：176-179,280-288.
蒋建新.信息化社会教师能力结构维度分析[J].远程教育杂志,2002(04).
蒋建洲.发展性教育评价制度的理论与实践研究[M].湖南师范大学出版社2000：27,11,5
姜志扬.我国高校教师评价的现状及问题[J].商丘职业技术学院学报.2003.(5)：54-55
焦佩婵.关于实施发展性教师评价制度的思考[J].教学与管理,1999(11)
金光远,冯军.论高校教师评价功能的实现[J],浙江师大学报(社会科学版).2001,26(6)：84-87.
金菊良,魏一鸣,丁晶.基于改进层次分析法的模糊综合评价模型[J].数理学报,2004(3)：65-70.
金浩.经济统计分析与SAS应用[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2002.
孔杰,程寨华.标杆管理理论述评[J].东北财经大学学报,2004(02)
李秉德.教学论[M].北京：人民教育出版社,1991.
李臣之,课程教学过程论[J],课程.教材.教法,2006(8)
李德林.教师综合素质评估的实践[J].农机化研究,2003(03)
李佑颐.高等学校教师绩效评估系统设计[J].扬州大学学报(高教研究版),2000(04)
李振峰.模糊综合评判法在教学质量评价中的应用[J].滨州教育学院学报.1996.(1)：4-7
李长华,曾晓东.美国高校教师绩效评价存在的争议[J].外国教育研究,2004(11)：41
李长华.美国高校教师绩效评价方法综述[J].国家教育行政学院学报,2005,(1)：91-95.
李果,沈晓勇,王应明.对决策单元进行排序的一种方法[J].预测,2000(4)：51-53.
李吉会.当前我国教育评价面临的挑战与对策[J].教育科学研究,1995(2)
李吉会.教师工作评价标准[J].教育科学研究,1996(6)
李洁,大学英语教师个人特征对知识、技能和能力的影响研究[J],外语界,2006.08
李光金,刘永清.DEA有效决策单元判断及排序的新方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,1996,(8)：37-42.
李宁,高校教师绩效评价指标体系的构建[J],教育学术月刊,2009.03
李润洲.教师评价的局限与超越[J].教育科学研究,2003(3).廖其发主编.新中国教育改革研究[M].重庆出版社,1996.
梁程妙.高校教师绩效考核体系存在的问题及对策[J].大众科技,2005(3)：85-86.
刘本固著.教育评价的理论与实践[M].浙江教育出版社,2000.
刘宝存.大学理念的传统与变革[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2004：219-228,16-43.
刘和旭,基于DEA的高校教师绩效评价方法及应用研究[D],国防科学技术大学硕士论文,2006.4
刘润清,戴曼纯.中国高校外语教学改革状况与发展策略研究[M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社.2003.
刘世清,刘伟芳.浅论教师的教学效能感及其培养[J].辽宁教育研究,2002,(9)：59-60
刘世清,刘伟芳.浅论教师的教学效能感及其培养[J].辽宁教育研究,2002
刘淑兰主编.教育评估和督导[M].华东师范大学出版社,2000.
刘尧.论教育评价的科学性与科学化问题[J].教育研究,2001(6).
刘先强.试论发展性教师评价模式的建构及操作策略[J].教育导刊.2004,(12)：42-44
刘新宪,朱道立.选择与判断-AHP(层次分析法)决策[M].上海科学普及出版社,1990.
刘学惠.教学自我评价与教师专业发展[J].江苏教育学院学报(社科版),1999,(4)：34-37.44
刘亚荣.我国高等学校办学效率评价分析[J].教育与经济.2001(4)
刘志军.课堂教学质量评价方法论的探讨[J].教育理论与实践.2001,(2)：80
梁方楚.主成分分析法在教师考核中的应用[J].宁波高等专科学校学报,2000(04)
林少杰.发展性教师评价的目的内容和实施原则[J].教育导刊.2005.(11)：49-50
陆兴发.美国教师评价制度的改革与发展趋势[J].教育探索,2002(10)
陆黎明.中美企业人力资源开发绩效评估的比较与思考[D],哈尔滨：哈尔滨工程大学,2002.
卢春香.试论现行教师绩效评估中存在的问题与对策[J].新乡教育学院学报,2003(1).
芦薇.高等学校教育经费效益模糊综合评价[J].武汉城市建设学院学报,2000,17(2)：52-55.
罗杰斯,教学理论述评[M],北京：农业科学出版社,1990
马少莲,赵超,赵海琳.高校教师工作绩效考核体系研究[J].成都教育学院学报,2006(8)：1-3.
马占新,唐焕文.一个综合的DEA模型及其相关性质[J].系统工程学报,1999,14(4)；311-316.
莫光政,李忠云.高等学校社会服务实证分析研究[J].中国农业教育,2001,(4)：21-23.
斯金纳,程序教学和教学机器[M],北京：人民教育出版社,1979
欧家庆,胡振江.层次分析法在综合评价教师教学质量中的应用[J].安徽农业技术师范学院学报,1998(01)
庞丽娟,洪秀敏,教师自我效能感：教师自主发展的重要内在动力机制[J],教师教育研究,2005.07
庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价指标体系研究[D],南京理工大学硕士论文,2006.05
庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价研究现状初探[J],中国高校师资研究,2006.11
裴娣娜著.教育研究方法导论[M].安徽教育出版社,2001.
齐晓东.高校教师评价制度中意义缺失与对策[J].黑龙江教育(高教研究与评估版),2005,1-2：31-33.
乔锦忠.研究型大学教师激励制度.褚宏启.中国教育管理评论(第二辑)[C].北京：教育科学出版社,2004：227.
曲铁华,梁清,孙帅.教师发展和评价的基本原则[J].中小学教师培养,2005
曲绍卫.论教师劳动之经济价值[J].太原：教育理论与实践.1995,(5)：10-13.
任民,王烈.评价决策单元DEA有效的两阶段法[J].预测,2003,22(6)：75-77.
沈玉顺主编.现代教育评价[M].华东师范大学出版社,2002.
沈晓南、张录达.线性规划电算化教学系统研究[J].高校论丛.2000(1).
盛昭瀚、朱乔、吴广谋.DEA理论、方法与应用[M].北京：科学出版社,1996.
柬定芳.外语教学改革：问题与对策[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,2004.
隋延力,宋成金,蒋韬.重视和加强教师考核工作中的激励作用[J].中国冶金教育,1998(04)
孙健.360度绩效评估 [M].北京：企业管理出版社,2003：157,109-140.
孙培青主编.中国教育史[M].华东师范大学出版社,2000.
孙玉洁.浅析教师评价的目的及其实现[J].辽宁教育学院学报,2001(7).
孙志麟.教师自我效能与教学行为的关系[J].国立台北师范学院学报,2001(14)：
唐俊.关于构建高校教师工作评估制度的若干思考[J].曲靖师范学院学报,2002(01)
唐玉光.教师专业发展的研究[J]外围教育资料,1999(6).
陶西平主编.教育评价辞典[M].北京师范大学出版社,1998.
田静,裴兆宏.高校教师个体评价的研究[J].清华大学教育研究,2002,(5)：27-28.
田军、何德权.多准则DEA模型及应用研究[J].陕西工学院学报,2000(3).
(英)托尼,布什.当代西方教育管理模式[M].南京师范大学出版社.1998,(1)：172
王斌华.发展性教师评价制度[M].华东师范大学出版社.1998：121
王斌,李志敏,张德贤.模糊DEA方法及在相对经济效益评价中的应用[J].青岛建筑工程学院学报,1997,18(1)：74-78.
王大伟,冯英俊.模糊多级综合评价模型与应用[J].系统工程与电子技术,2006(6)：867-868.
王迪钊.工科院校教师科研绩效评价模型的研究[J].浙江理工大学学报,2005(02)
王光彦,大学教师绩效评价研究[D],华东师范大学博士论文,2009
王建新等.大学英语教学改革呼唤观念更新[J].外语教学与研究,2003(3)
王汉澜主编.教育评价学[M].河南大学出版社,1995.
王浩.军事院校绩效评估应注意的几个问题[J].南京政治学院学报,2003(05)
王鲁捷,侯健.科技人才绩效评估指标体系探讨[J].中国人力资源开 发,2005,(1)：48-51.
王景英主编.教育评价理论与实践[M].东北师范大学出版社,2002.
王景英.当前美国中小学教师评价的特点及其启示[J].外国教育研究,2002(9).
王景英.理解与对话.从解释学视角解读教师评价[J].外国教育研究,2003(8).
王莲芬,许树柏.层次分析法引论[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,1990.
王善迈.教育投入与产出研究[M].石家庄：河北教育出版社,1999：168.
王敏,我国高校教师绩效评价的问题及对策研究[J],兰州大学硕士论文2010,04
王秋萍.美国教师聘任制度评价[J].上海教育科研,2000(12).
王英,教师绩效评价体系研究[D],河北工业大学硕士论文,2008
王友青,姚明亮.模糊理论在职工绩效考核中的应用研究[J].北京电子科技学院学报,2006(1)：88-90.
王文静、赵希斌.新课程实施中的教师评价改革[J].中小学管理,2003(7).
王文源.关于教师评价的思考[J].中小学管理,1997(9).
王小飞.英国教师评价制度的新进展_兼PRP体系计划述评[J].比较教育研究,2002(3).
王学军.教师评价工作存在的主要问题及对策[J].宁夏教育,2002(2).
王孝玲编著.教育评价理论与技术[M].上海教育出版社,1999.
王一秀主编.中国行政管理大词典[M].光明日报出版社,1991.
王战军.学位与研究生教育评估技术与实践[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2002.
汪沛.高等学校教师管理评估体系的研究[D].大连海事大学,2003
魏宏森.系统论[M].清华大学出版社.1995
魏红.我国高校教师教学评价发展的回顾与展望[J].高等师范教育研究,2001,(5)：68-72.
魏清泉.教师评价指标的关联分析[J].聊城师范学院学报,1999(4).
魏权龄.评价相对有效性的DEA方法一运筹学的新领域[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,1988.
魏权龄.估计要素增长型技术进步滞后及超前年限的DEA模型[]].数量经济技术经济研究,1991,(3)：11-17.
魏雪峰,基于发展性评价理论的教师评价模型研究[D],天津师范大学硕士论文,2006.04
吴钢著.现代教育评价基础[M].学林出版社,1996.
吴国富.安万福.刘景海编.实用数据分析方法[M].北京：中国统计出版社.1992
吴俊卿.绩效评价的理论和方法[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社,1992：85-154. [3]
吴思孝.隐性评价一教师评价的另一视角[J].教学与管理,2003(8).
吴也显.教学论新编[M].北京：教育科学出版社,1991.
吴一安.优秀外语教师专业素质探究[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(3).
吴育华,吴伟雄.普通中学相对有效性评估模型研究[J].系统工程理论与实践.2000(5).
吴畏主编.中国教育管理精览[M].警官教育出版社,1998.
吴增强. 自我效能：一种积极的自我信念[J].心理科学,2001。(4)：499.
吴振利.中小学教师评价权的个案调查与探讨[J].内蒙古师范大学学报,2001(5).
吴志红.教育行政学[M].北京人民教育出版社,2001,263
武书连,吕嘉,郭石林.中国大学研究与发展成果评价(节录)[J].科学与科学技术管理,1997,18(7)：49-70(8)：31
夏纪梅.大学英语教师的外语教育观念、知识、能力、科研现状与进修情况调查报告[J].外语界,2002,(5).
肖海平,丁远坤,教育信仰：教师专业发展的内在动力[J],孝感学院学报,2008.07
肖丽萍.国内外教师专业发展研究述评[J].中国教育学刊,2002(6).
肖远军.论新课程观下教师评价的基本特征[J].浙江教育学院学报,2003(4).
邢军.发展性小学教师评价的实践探索[J].辽宁教育研究,2003(7).
徐成龙,吴健中.决策单元相互评价模型及其应用研究[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2000,9(1)：78-82.
徐辉,季诚均等.大学教学概论[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2004：42-49.
徐荣青、王爱武.关于教师评价的思考[J].职业技术教育,2000(4).
徐玉珍.论“好教师”[J].课程·教材·教法,1997(11).
徐秀英,韩美贵,王雯等.研究型大学教师绩效评价指标体系与模糊综合评价的探讨[J].教育科学管理,2005(4)：32-34.
徐耀玲,唐五湘,吴秉坚.科技评估指标体系设计的原则及其应用研究[J].中国软科学.2000,(2)：48-51.
许传海.标准分在教师业绩计量中的应用[J].山东建筑工程学院学报,2001(03)
许明.英国中小学教师的评价制度和特点[J].外国教育研究,2002(12).
许晓东.高等学校规模效益评价的理论和应用研究[D].武汉：华中理工大学,2000.
薛天祥.高等教育评估中应正确处理定性与定量的关系[J].中国高等教育评估.1999,(4)：1-5.
严开胜.点击学校教师考核的误区[J].教学与管理.2001,(9)：16
严慕容、张泰岭.高等学校教学工作状态定量评估方法研究[J].华南农业大学学报(社会科学版).2002(2)
杨潮,刘红,陈抗生.谈数据库建设对教师绩效考核的促进作用[J].中国高教研究,1999(4)
杨成俊,周伟庆,宋利华,李立超.教师综合素质评估指标体系的研究与实践[J].卫生职业教育,2002(05)
杨浩编著.模型与算法[M].北京：北方交通大学出版社,2002.
杨建云,王卓.论教师发展性评价与奖惩性评价的关系[J].中国教育学刊,2003,(1)：46-49
杨建云,王卓.论我国发展性教师评价的实质[J].教育科学,2005,(1)
杨华.我国教师评价方法存在的问题探析及解决对策[J].辽宁师范大学学报,2001(5).
杨玲莉,杨培真.高校无形资产流失的原因分析及其对策研究[J].科研管理.1995,(2)：62-64.
杨伟.探索教师评价新方法[J].中小学管理,2002(1)
姚利民,綦珊珊,教学学术型大学教师特征论[J],湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2007(9)
易宣,朱方长.高校教师评价体系建构的合理性问题研究[J].高等农业教育,2004,(3)：56-58.
英配昌、范国睿.关于教师评价的个案研究一兼论传统教师评价模式的弊端[J].教学与管理,2001(4).
俞国良,辛涛,等.教师教学效能感：结构与影响因素的研究[J].心理学报,1995(2)：159-166.
于京天.试论教师评价改革的定位和依据[J].课程·教材·教法,2001(9).
于家太.教师绩效考核中的问题和对策[J].江苏教育,2003(11)：14-15.
袁贵仁.价值观的理论与实践[M].北京师范大学出版社,2006
袁贵仁.价值学引论[M].北京师范大学出版社,1991
张成武.我国新时期教师评价的制度化历程、现存问题与对策研究[D].成都：西南师范大学,2004.
张家浚.谈高校教师评估中科研与教学的平衡[J].高等建筑教育,2002(04).
张辉华.国外教师评价新去向[J].外国中小学教育,2002(6)
张其志.当代教师评价制度述论[J].韶关学院学报,2002(10)
张其志.对发展性教师评价的审视与思考[J].教育研究与试验,2005(1)：61-66.
张天宝,王攀峰.我国教育评价理论研究的现状及其基本走向[J].江西教育科研.2001.(6)：10-16
张维和.高校教师业绩定量考核方法的初步研究[J].天津师范大学学报(自然科学版),2001(01).
张尧庭,张晓朴.综合评价的历史和一些结论[J].统计研究.1995,(2)：39-43.
张彦通.英国高校教师评估理论[J].比较教育研究,1996(5)：16-19.
张逸岗,丁方.试论外语教师的基本素质[J].外语界,1996,(3).
张煜等主编.学校教师工作评估实用手册[M].北京：中央民族大学出版社,1997.802-803.
张煜,孟宏伟.教育研究中的多层次分析方法[J].教育研究.1995,(2)：42-47.
张艳玲.影响英语教师专业自主发展的内外在因素分析[J].湖北经济学院学报,2008(10).
张玉田等主编.学校教育评价[M].中央民族大学出版社,1998.
张远增.大学无形资产及其评估初步研究[J].教育与经济,2000,(4)：49-51.
赵焕臣,许树柏,和金生.层次分析法一一种简易的新决策方法[M].科学出版社,1998
赵金栋.对“教师评价的统计分析及二次量化模型”一文的研究与探讨[J].数学的实践与认识.1995,(3)：68-71.
赵庆典.我国高校教师职务制度50年回顾与展望[J].江苏高教,2000(2)
赵希斌.国外发展性教师评价的发展趋势[J].比较教育研究,2003(1)
赵曙明.人力资源管理研究[M].中国人民大学出版社,2001
赵应生等.大学教师劳动特点及绩效评估的人文关怀[J].黑龙江高教研究,2005,(2)：75-76.
赵文华.高等教育系统论[M].桂林：广西师范大学出版社.2001
赵勇,岳超源,陈诞.数据包络分析中有效单元的进一步分析,[J].系统工程学报,1995,10(4)：95-100.
郑英姿.北京大学科技论文及其相关因素分析[J].中国科技期刊研究,1998
郑秀英.高等学校无形资产及其管理问题研究[D].天津：天津大学,2000.
中国外语教育研究中心.中国外语教育研究中心“十五”规划[J].外语教学与研究,2002,(5)：225-227.
周朝森.教育评价理论的新探索[J].教育研究,1992(2)
周燕.高校英语教师发展需求调查与研究[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(3).
周谦主编.教育评价与统计[M].科学出版社,1997.
周作宇.高校人力资源管理的几个理论问题[J].中国高等教育,2000(12)
朱保江.依法实施教师资格制度,加强教师队伍建设[J].中国教育报,2003年3月8日第3版
朱乔.数据包络分析/保证域(DEA/AR)方法[J].系统工程理论方法应用,1995,4(2)：13-19.
朱泰英,孙波,陈兆均.基于数据包络分析的工程建设项目评标方法[J].公路交通技术,2004(2)：101-103.
朱舟著.人力资本投资的成本收益分析[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社.1999年.
邹明信,徐学军.企业标杆管理的应用探讨[J].价值工程,2005(6).
2引自《2010—2020年国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要》第十七章加强教师队伍建设
1引自《2010一2020年国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要》 第十一章 人才培养体制改革(三十三)改革教育质量评价和人才评价制度。
2引自《2010—2020年国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要》 第十七章 加强教师队伍建设(五十一)建设高素质教师队伍
1蔡永红.对教师绩效评估研究的回顾与反思[J].高等师范教育研究,2001(5)：23-24
2在人事心理学中,效标是一种可直接或间接测量的绩效样本,它体现了组织中相关预测源(predictor)或人事决策的价值。
1杜雪兴.发展性教师评价——教师评价的新举措[J].苏州教育学院学报.2003.(12)：45-49
2李润洲.发展性评价一一教师评价的新理念[J].现代中小学教育.2002.(6)：53-55
3吴俊卿.绩效评价的理论和方法[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社,1992：85-154.[3]
1王斌华.发展性教师评价制度[M].华东师范大学出版社.1998年版.56-57
2何宪.人才评价师[M].人事部全国人才流动中心办公室编著,2005：68
3陈玉琨.教育评价学[M].北京：人民教育出版社.1998：23
1赵应生.大学教师劳动特点及绩效评估的人文关怀[J].黑龙江高教研究,2005(2)：24-25
2赵应生.大学教师劳动特点及绩效评估的人文关怀[J].黑龙江高教研究,2005(2)：24-25
1赵应生.大学教师劳动特点及绩效评估的人文关怀[J].黑龙江高教研究,2005(2)：24-25
1王建新等.大学英语教学改革呼唤观念更新[J].外语教学与研究,2003(3)
1高悦伶,高校优秀大学英语教师特征初探[J],首都经济贸易大学学报,2008.11
1李洁,大学英语教师个人特征对知识、技能和能力的影响研究[J],外语界,2006.08
2姚利民,綦珊珊,教学学术型大学教师特征论[J],湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2007(9)
1张逸岗,丁方.试论外语教师的基本素质[J].外语界,1996,(3).
2吴一安,优秀外语教师专业素质探究[J],外语教学与研究,2005.06
1庞丽娟,洪秀敏,教师自我效能感：教师自主发展的重要内在动力机制[J],教师教育研究,2005.07
1张艳玲.影响英语教师专业自主发展的内外在因素分析[J]湖北经济学院学报,2008(10).
1邓华,基于战略管理的高校教师绩效评价系统[D],重庆大学硕士论文,2008.10
1庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价指标体系研究[D],南京理工大学硕士论文,2006.05
1 庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价研究现状初探[J],中国高校师资研究,2006.11
1John A森特拉,(美)著.许建钺译.大学教师评估工作[M].北京航空航天大学出版社,1992
1王敏,我国高校教师绩效评价的问题及对策研究[J],兰州大学硕士论文2010,04
1庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价研究现状初探[J],中国高校师资研究,2006.11
1王斌华.发展性教师评估制度[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,1998
1袁贵仁.价值学引论[M].北京师范大学出版社,1991
2袁贵仁.价值观的理论与实践[M].北京师范大学出版社,2006
1袁贵仁.价值学引论[M].北京师范大学出版社,1991
1赵曙明.人力资源管理研究[M].中国人民大学出版社,2001
1车卡佳 周晓光.高校高新技术企业人力资源管理的研究[J].科技进步与对策,2002(6)
1马斯洛.动机与人格[M].华夏出版社,1987：69-70
1 郭琴,浅析高校教师绩效考核指标体系的设计与研究,中国水运(理论版),2007.03
1教育部办公厅关于印发《大学英语课程教学要求》的通知,《中华人民共和国教育部公报》,2007.11
1刘洋,校教师绩效评价指标体系的研究与实践[D],工程大学硕士论文,2008
1王英,教师绩效评价体系研究[D],河北工业大学硕士论文,2008
1引自《2010—2020年国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要》 第十七章 加强教师队伍建设
2李宁,校教师绩效评价指标体系的构建[J],教育学术月刊,2009.03
1素质要求参照了《高等学校英语专业英语教学大纲修订说明》
1李宁,校教师绩效评价指标体系的构建[J],教育学术月刊,2009.03
1魏权龄,数据包络分析(DEA)[J],科学通报,2000
1魏权龄,评价相对有效性的DEA方法：运筹学的新领域[M],中国人民大学出版社,1988
2马占新,数据包络分析方法的研究进展[J],,系统工程与电子技术,2002
1魏权龄,数据包络分析(DEA)[J],科学通报,2000
1刘和旭,基于DEA的高校教师绩效评价方法及应用研究[D],国防科学技术大学硕士论文,2006.04
2张蔚磊,企业业绩评价方法的利弊分析[J],交通财会,2004
1张蔚磊,上市公司业绩评价研究与DEA模型的应用[D],大连海事大学硕士学位论文,2005
2张蔚磊,上市公司业绩评价研究与DEA模型的应用[D],大连海事大学硕士学位论文,2005
1喻和文,彭回春,标杆管理在现代企业中的应用研究[J],现代商贸工业,2009.01
1孔杰,程寨华,标杆管理理论述评[J],东北财经大学学报,2004.03
1曾玉清,黄朝峰,高校办学效益DEA评价指标体系研[J],大学教育科学,2006.06
Alan Bryman, Dunean Cramer. Quantitative Data Analysis with Minitab A Guide for Social Scientist Collection and Analysis. Lond and New York:International Thomson Publishing Company.1996.
Ali A I, et al. Strict vs. weak ordinal relations for multipliers in DEA [J]. Management Science,1991,37(6):733-738.
Athanasso Poulos A D, Gounaris C, Sissouras A. A Descriptive Assessment of the Production and Cost Efficiency of General Hospitals in Greece [J].Health Care Managemeni Science,1999,2(2):97-106.
Avkiran N K. Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian Universities through data envelopment analysis[J]. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences,2001,35(1):57-80
Bandura, A. Self-efficacy:The exercise of control. New York:W. H. Freeman, 1997.
Bates J M. Measuring Predetermined Socioeconomic'Inputs'When Assessing the Efficiency of Educational Outputs [J]. Applied Economics,1997,29(1):85-93.
Boussofiane A,et al. Applied data envelopment analysis[J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1991,52:1-15.
Brouwers, A.,& Tomic, W., A longitudinal study of teacher burnout and perceived self-efficacy in classroom management J]. Teaching and Teacher Education,2000, 16(3),239-253.
Cameron Kim,Smart John. Maintaining Effectiveness Amid Downsizing and Decline in Institution of Higher Education[J].Research in Higher Education,1998,39(1):65-86.
Charnes A, CooPer W. W hodes E. Measuring the Efficiency of Decision Making Units [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1978,2(6):429-444.
Colin Robson. Small-Scale Evaluation, Lond. Thousand Oaks. New Delhi:SAGE Publications.2000.
Cook W D,Kress M, Seiford L M. On the use of ordinal date in data envelopment analysis [J]. Operation Research of Society,1993,44(2):133-140.
Cooper W W,etal. IDEA and AR-IDEA:models for dealing with imprecise data in DEA[J].Management Science,1999,45(4):597-607.
Dale L L. A blueprint for a teacher development program[A]. Second Language Teacher Education[C].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,人民教育出版社,2000.
Debaorahk Padgett. Qualitative Methods In Social work Research:Challenges and Rewards. (London)SAGE Publication Ltd.1998.
Farrell M J. The measurement of Productive efficiency [J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Soeiety.1957. (120A):125-281.
Freeman D. Teacher training, development, and decision making model:A model of the teaching and related strategies for language teacher education[J]. TESOL Quarterly, 1989, (23):27-45.
Giokas D. The use of goal programming and data envelopment analysis for estimating efficient marginal costs of outputs [J]. Journal of the Operational Research Society,1997,48(3):319-323.
Jam E. Freed, Marie R. Klugman. Quality Principles and Practices in Higher Education: Different Questions for Different Times. Arizona The Oryx Press.1997.
Jill Johnes & Jim Taylor. Performance Indicators in Higher Education. Buckingham: The Society for Research into Higher Education & Open University Press.1990.
Kao Chiang, SiTai Liu. Data envelopment analysis with missing data:An application to university libraries in Taiwan [J]. Journal of the Operational Research Society,2000,51(8):897-905.
Kim S H,et al. An application of data envelopment analysis in telephone offices evaluation with partial data [J]. Computers & Operations Research, 1999,26:59-72.
Kim I, Hendry L C. Using DEA to assess NATO burden-sharing [J]. European Journal of Operations Research,1998,49:228-236.
Manuel J. de la Torre Cruz & Pedro F. Casanova Arias. Comparative analysis of expectancies of efficacy in in-service and prospective teachers[J]. Teaching and Teacher Education,2007,23,641-652.
Martha C P. A Professional development focus for the language teaching practicum[A]. Second Language Teacher Education[C].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,人民教育出版社,2000.
Martin Bennet & Peter James. Sustainable Measures:Evaluation and Reporting of Environmental and Social Performance. Sheffield:Greenleaf Publishing Limited. 1999.
Michael Quinn Patton. Qualitative Evaluation and Research Methods(2nd). Newbury Park. London. New Delhi:SAGE Publications.1990.
Moore D R, Mei-I Cheng, A R F Dainty. Competence, competency and competencies: Performance assessment in organizations[J]. Work Study, Volume 51, Number 6, 2002.
Necmi K, Avkiran. Investigating technical and scale efficiencies of Australian Universities through data envelopment analysis [J]. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences,2001,35(1):57-80.
Ng Y C, Sung K L. Measuring the research performance of Chinese higher education institutions:An application of data envelopment analysis [J]. Education Economics, 2000,8(2):139-156.
Nunan D. Action Research in the Language Classroom is Second Language Teacher Education by Jack Richards and David Nunan [M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社,人民教育出版社,2000.
Noguchi H Ishii H. Total raking method for multiple categorized data[C].The 15th Triennial Interactional Conference of IFORS'99 Beijing, Aug.,1999:15-20.
Podinovski V V, Athanassopoulos A D. Assessing the relative efficiency of decision making units using DEA model with weight restrictions [J]. Operation Research of Society,1998,49:500-508.
Richards J. The dilemma of teacher education in TESOL[J]. TESOL Quarterly,1987, (21).
Richards J C. Beyond Training[M]. New York:Cambridge University Press,1998.
Roger Sapsford. Vicotor JuPP(zhupian). Data Collection and Analysis. Lond. Thousand Oaks. New Delhi:SAGE Publications.1996.
Roll Y,Golany B. Alternate methods of treating factor weights in DEA [J]. OMEGA, 1998,21(1):99-109.
Sarrico C, Robert G D. Using DEA for planning in UK universities-An institutional perspective[J]. Journal of the Operational Research Society,2000,51(7):789-800.
Seiford L M, Joe Zhu. An investigation of returns to scale in data envelopment analysis [J]. OMEGA,1999,27:1-11.
Shinkfied, A.T.& Stumebeam, D., Teacher evaluation:Guide to effective Practice [M], Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers,1995.
Shulman L S. Knowledge and teaching:Foundations of new reform [J]. Harvard Educational Review,1987,57:1-22.
Smith Kari. Teacher educators'expertise what do novice teachers and teacher educators say [J]. Teaching and Teacher Education, Vo 1 ume 21, Issue2,2005.
Sueyoushi T. Stochastic frontier production analysis:measuring performance of public telecommunications in 24 OECD countries [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1994,74:466-478.
Taylor Barbara E, Megerson Joel W,Massy Willian F.Strategic Indicators for Higher Education:Improving Performance[M].Peterson's Guides,1993.
Toshiyuki Sueyoshi, Kenji Ohnishi, Youichi Kinase. A benchmark approach for baseball evaluation [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1999,115:429-448.
Tsui ABM. Understanding Expertise Teaching:Case Studies of Second Language Teachers[M]. Cambridge:CUP,2003.
Tschanen—Moran, woolfolk Hoy & Hoy. Teacher Efficacy:Its Meaning and Measure[J]. Review of Educational Research,1998,68(2),202-248.
Wright T. Understanding classroom role relation[A]. in Richards J C & David Nunan(eds.). Second Language Teacher Education[C]. New York:Cambridge University Press,1990.
Xiao-Bai Li, Gray R, Reeves. A multiple criteria approach to data envelopment analysis [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1999,115:507-517.
Yu Qet al. Construction of all DEA efficient surfaces of the production possibility set under the generalized data envelopment analysis model [J]. European Journal of Operational Research,1996,95:491-510.
Zilla S, et al. Ranking units via AHP in the DEA context [C]. The 15th Triennial International Conference of IROFS'99, Beijing,1999,Aug.:15-20.
班杜拉. 自我效能：控制的实施[M].上海：华东师范大学出版社,2003.
包乌云.美国教师评价制度的改革与发展[J].教育探索.2004,45-47
布鲁纳,教育论著选[M],人民教育出版社,1989
布卢姆B·S、邱渊译,教育评价[M].华东师范大学出版社,1987.
蔡基刚.大学英语教学若干问题思考[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(2).
蔡言厚,田金山,吴厚平.大学科研定量评价指标体系的探讨[J].中国高等教育评估,2002(2)：21-24
蔡永红.对教师绩效评估研究的回顾与反思[J].高等师范教育研究,2001.
蔡永红、黄天元《教师评价研究的缘起、问题及发展趋势》[J].《北京师范大学学报》2003(1)
蔡永红,林崇德.教师绩效评价的理论与实践[J].教师教育研究,2005(01).
车卡佳周晓光.高校高新技术企业人力资源管理的研究[J].科技进步与对策,2002(6)
陈伯成,王友平.对层次分析法的认识[J].管理工程学报,1997(3)：155-161.
陈凌芹.绩效管理[M].北京：中国纺织出版社,2004：38
陈宏,应用型高等院校教师绩效考核体系研究[D], 浙江大学硕士论文,2009.03
陈荣昭.可用于分析民意测验的一个统计分析方法[J].数理统计与应用概率,第三卷,第四期：417-424.
陈述云,张崇甫.对多指标综合评价的主成分分析方法的改进[J].统计研究1995,(1)：35-39.
陈通,白建英.我国高等教育投入产出相对有效性的评价研究[J].中国高等教育评估,2002,(6).
陈伟.层次分析法在教师年度评估中的应用[J].辽宁财专学报,2001(03)
陈玉琨.教育评价学[M].第5次版.北京：人民教育出版社,2003：8,24-26.
陈玉琨著.中国高等教育评价论[M].广东教育出版社,1993.
陈玉琨,李如海.我国教育评价发展的世纪回顾与未来展望[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版).2000(1).
陈孝大.论教师的形成性评价和终结性评价[J].教育理论与实践,1988(2).
陈向明.定性研究中的效度问题[J].教育研究.1996,(7)：52-58.
岑建君.我国高校外语教学现状[J].外语教学与研究,1999,(1).
代蕊华.高校的教学、科研及其评价[J].高等教育研究,2001,(1)：94-98.
代蕊华,高校办学效益研究[D].上海：华东师范大学,1999.
戴曼纯,张希春.高校英语教师素质抽样调查[J].解放军外国语学院学报,2004,
(3).
戴亦欣,孙荣玲.无形资产价值实现及其量化[J].中国软科学.2000,(7)：73-76.
邓红霞,甘泉,张松.基于层次分析法的教学质量模糊评价[J].四川教育学院学报,2005(5)：94-96.
邓华,基于战略管理的高校教师绩效评价系统[D], 重庆大学硕士论文,2008.10
邓金主编.培格曼最新国际教师百科全书[M].学宛出版社,1989.
丁文恒,冯英浚,康宇虹.同时面向投入和面向产出的一种数据包络分析(DEA)模型
[J].数量经济技术经济研究,2001,(11)：41-44.
丁小浩.中国高等院校规模效益的实证研究[M].北京：教育科学出版社2000：63-69.
段海军.教师效能感与教师专业的自主发展[J].陕西师范大学继续教育学院学报,2007,(1)：10—13.
发展性教学评价的原理与方法[Z].广州市教育局教学研究室编,2003
樊相宇,谢昌芸.邮电高校办学效益DEA分析[J].西安邮电学院学报,1999,(6).
方鹏.定量考核方法分析及高校教师定量考核实践 [J].高等农业教育,2000(5)：52-55.
方旭儒.高校教师绩效评估研究.[D].西南石油学院,2003.
冯茁.试论素质教育背景下教师评价机制的转变[J].沈阳师范学院学报,2002(2).
冯玉芳.美国高校教师教学评价研究[D].河北师范大学.2004
傅道春.教师的成长与发展[M].教育科学出版社,2001.
付亚和,许玉林.绩效考核与绩效管理 [M].北京：电子工业出版社,2003.
甘正东.反思性教学：外语教师自身发展的有效途径[J]外语界,2000(4).
高广学,施丽梅.对教师绩效评价的思考[J].齐齐哈尔大学学报,1999(5)：93-95.
高悦伶,高校优秀大学英语教师特征初探[J],首都经济贸易大学学报,2008.11
葛新斌,姜英敏.日本大学教师评估制度改革动向分析[J].比较教育研究,2004(9)：76-79.
郭爱明、郭耀邦.层次分析法(AHP)确定食品质量指标权重[J].食品科学,1994(7).
郭卉.论中国研究型大学教师评估[D].武汉：华中科技大学,2003.
郭均鹏,吴育华,李汉华.改进的DEA模型及其在地区行业经济评价中的应用[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2003,12(2)：174-176.
郭琴,浅析高校教师绩效考核指标体系的设计与研究,中国水运(理论版),2007.03
韩敬愈.教师评价工作应注意的几个问题[J].教育科学研究,2002(2)
郝海.评价决策单元相对效率的修正DEA方法[J].系统工程与电子技术,2000,22(3)：40-43.
郝海,杨印生,李树根.区分有效决策单元的数据包络分析方法[J].天津工业大学学报,2001,20(4)：62-64.
何保全.试论教师评价的目的与准则[J].煤炭高等教育,1998(4)
何东昌主编.当代中国教育[M].当代中国出版社,1996.
何东昌主编.中华人民共和国重要教育文献[M].海南出版社,1998.
何刚.高校教师考核误差产生的原因及对策[J].江苏高教,1997(06).
何育萍.发展.教师评价工作的支点[J].北京教育学院学报,2001(3)
侯光文著.教育评价概论[M].河北教育出版社,1996.
胡方茜,刘继荣,朱原,陈抗生,杨维晓.网络化：建立教师考核体系的最佳途径[J].高等工程教育研究,1999(02).
胡皎,郑小兰.教师综合素质评价指标体系探讨[J].师资建设,2005,(5)：60-61
胡少勘,苏晶.教师考核结果反馈的原则及意义[J].内蒙古教育学院学报,1999(03)
胡永宏,贺思辉.综合评价方法[M]北京：科学出版社,2000：80.
华南理工大学.中国高校教师评价体系调研报告[M].18
黄甫全, 王本陆.现代教学论学程[M].教育科学出版社2004.
黄朝峰、沈永平.数据包络分析方法在高教评估中的应用研究田[J].中国高等教育评估.2003(4)
黄朝峰.高教评估中人才产出数量的计算[J].中国高等教育评估,2003,(1)：27-29.
黄朝峰,沈永平,陈英武等.大学评价中的科研效益评价[J]科学学与科学技术管理,2003,(7)：83-85.
黄蔚,陈雅.对教师教学评价现状的思考[J].理工高校研究,2003,(2)：37-38
黄宪成.模糊多目标决策理论、方法及其应用研究[D].大连：大连理工大学, 2003：11-12.
霍力岩.编制教育评价方案的一个关键问题[J].教育科学研究,2001(1)
[美]J.A.森特拉.许建械等译.大学教师工作评估[M].北京：北京航天航空大学出版社,1992：前言第Ⅲ页.
季明明、叶齐炼主编.学校教师工作评估实用手册[M].中央民族学院出版社,1993.
贾爱武.外语教师教育与专业发展研究综述[J].外语界,2005,(1).
教育部.大学英语课程教学改革要求[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,2003.
教育部办公厅关于印发《大学英语课程教学要求》的通知,《中华人民共和国教育部公报》,2007.11
蒋国华.科研评价与指标[M].北京：红旗出版社,2000：176-179,280-288.
蒋建新.信息化社会教师能力结构维度分析[J].远程教育杂志,2002(04).
蒋建洲.发展性教育评价制度的理论与实践研究[M].湖南师范大学出版社2000：27,11,5
姜志扬.我国高校教师评价的现状及问题[J].商丘职业技术学院学报.2003.(5)：54-55
焦佩婵.关于实施发展性教师评价制度的思考[J].教学与管理,1999(11)
金光远,冯军.论高校教师评价功能的实现[J],浙江师大学报(社会科学版).2001,26(6)：84-87.
金菊良,魏一鸣,丁晶.基于改进层次分析法的模糊综合评价模型[J].数理学报,2004(3)：65-70.
金浩.经济统计分析与SAS应用[M].北京：经济科学出版社,2002.
孔杰,程寨华.标杆管理理论述评[J].东北财经大学学报,2004(02)
李秉德.教学论[M].北京：人民教育出版社,1991.
李臣之,课程教学过程论[J],课程.教材.教法,2006(8)
李德林.教师综合素质评估的实践[J].农机化研究,2003(03)
李佑颐.高等学校教师绩效评估系统设计[J].扬州大学学报(高教研究版),2000(04)
李振峰.模糊综合评判法在教学质量评价中的应用[J].滨州教育学院学报.1996.(1)：4-7
李长华,曾晓东.美国高校教师绩效评价存在的争议[J].外国教育研究,2004(11)：41
李长华.美国高校教师绩效评价方法综述[J].国家教育行政学院学报,2005,(1)：91-95.
李果,沈晓勇,王应明.对决策单元进行排序的一种方法[J].预测,2000(4)：51-53.
李吉会.当前我国教育评价面临的挑战与对策[J].教育科学研究,1995(2)
李吉会.教师工作评价标准[J].教育科学研究,1996(6)
李洁,大学英语教师个人特征对知识、技能和能力的影响研究[J],外语界,2006.08
李光金,刘永清.DEA有效决策单元判断及排序的新方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,1996,(8)：37-42.
李宁,高校教师绩效评价指标体系的构建[J],教育学术月刊,2009.03
李润洲.教师评价的局限与超越[J].教育科学研究,2003(3).廖其发主编.新中国教育改革研究[M].重庆出版社,1996.
梁程妙.高校教师绩效考核体系存在的问题及对策[J].大众科技,2005(3)：85-86.
刘本固著.教育评价的理论与实践[M].浙江教育出版社,2000.
刘宝存.大学理念的传统与变革[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2004：219-228,16-43.
刘和旭,基于DEA的高校教师绩效评价方法及应用研究[D],国防科学技术大学硕士论文,2006.4
刘润清,戴曼纯.中国高校外语教学改革状况与发展策略研究[M].北京：外语教学与研究出版社.2003.
刘世清,刘伟芳.浅论教师的教学效能感及其培养[J].辽宁教育研究,2002,(9)：59-60
刘世清,刘伟芳.浅论教师的教学效能感及其培养[J].辽宁教育研究,2002
刘淑兰主编.教育评估和督导[M].华东师范大学出版社,2000.
刘尧.论教育评价的科学性与科学化问题[J].教育研究,2001(6).
刘先强.试论发展性教师评价模式的建构及操作策略[J].教育导刊.2004,(12)：42-44
刘新宪,朱道立.选择与判断-AHP(层次分析法)决策[M].上海科学普及出版社,1990.
刘学惠.教学自我评价与教师专业发展[J].江苏教育学院学报(社科版),1999,(4)：34-37.44
刘亚荣.我国高等学校办学效率评价分析[J].教育与经济.2001(4)
刘志军.课堂教学质量评价方法论的探讨[J].教育理论与实践.2001,(2)：80
梁方楚.主成分分析法在教师考核中的应用[J].宁波高等专科学校学报,2000(04)
林少杰.发展性教师评价的目的内容和实施原则[J].教育导刊.2005.(11)：49-50
陆兴发.美国教师评价制度的改革与发展趋势[J].教育探索,2002(10)
陆黎明.中美企业人力资源开发绩效评估的比较与思考[D],哈尔滨：哈尔滨工程大学,2002.
卢春香.试论现行教师绩效评估中存在的问题与对策[J].新乡教育学院学报,2003(1).
芦薇.高等学校教育经费效益模糊综合评价[J].武汉城市建设学院学报,2000,17(2)：52-55.
罗杰斯,教学理论述评[M],北京：农业科学出版社,1990
马少莲,赵超,赵海琳.高校教师工作绩效考核体系研究[J].成都教育学院学报,2006(8)：1-3.
马占新,唐焕文.一个综合的DEA模型及其相关性质[J].系统工程学报,1999,14(4)；311-316.
莫光政,李忠云.高等学校社会服务实证分析研究[J].中国农业教育,2001,(4)：21-23.
斯金纳,程序教学和教学机器[M],北京：人民教育出版社,1979
欧家庆,胡振江.层次分析法在综合评价教师教学质量中的应用[J].安徽农业技术师范学院学报,1998(01)
庞丽娟,洪秀敏,教师自我效能感：教师自主发展的重要内在动力机制[J],教师教育研究,2005.07
庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价指标体系研究[D],南京理工大学硕士论文,2006.05
庞鹤峰,我国高校教师绩效评价研究现状初探[J],中国高校师资研究,2006.11
裴娣娜著.教育研究方法导论[M].安徽教育出版社,2001.
齐晓东.高校教师评价制度中意义缺失与对策[J].黑龙江教育(高教研究与评估版),2005,1-2：31-33.
乔锦忠.研究型大学教师激励制度.褚宏启.中国教育管理评论(第二辑)[C].北京：教育科学出版社,2004：227.
曲铁华,梁清,孙帅.教师发展和评价的基本原则[J].中小学教师培养,2005
曲绍卫.论教师劳动之经济价值[J].太原：教育理论与实践.1995,(5)：10-13.
任民,王烈.评价决策单元DEA有效的两阶段法[J].预测,2003,22(6)：75-77.
沈玉顺主编.现代教育评价[M].华东师范大学出版社,2002.
沈晓南、张录达.线性规划电算化教学系统研究[J].高校论丛.2000(1).
盛昭瀚、朱乔、吴广谋.DEA理论、方法与应用[M].北京：科学出版社,1996.
柬定芳.外语教学改革：问题与对策[M].上海：上海外语教育出版社,2004.
隋延力,宋成金,蒋韬.重视和加强教师考核工作中的激励作用[J].中国冶金教育,1998(04)
孙健.360度绩效评估 [M].北京：企业管理出版社,2003：157,109-140.
孙培青主编.中国教育史[M].华东师范大学出版社,2000.
孙玉洁.浅析教师评价的目的及其实现[J].辽宁教育学院学报,2001(7).
孙志麟.教师自我效能与教学行为的关系[J].国立台北师范学院学报,2001(14)：
唐俊.关于构建高校教师工作评估制度的若干思考[J].曲靖师范学院学报,2002(01)
唐玉光.教师专业发展的研究[J]外围教育资料,1999(6).
陶西平主编.教育评价辞典[M].北京师范大学出版社,1998.
田静,裴兆宏.高校教师个体评价的研究[J].清华大学教育研究,2002,(5)：27-28.
田军、何德权.多准则DEA模型及应用研究[J].陕西工学院学报,2000(3).
(英)托尼,布什.当代西方教育管理模式[M].南京师范大学出版社.1998,(1)：172
王斌华.发展性教师评价制度[M].华东师范大学出版社.1998：121
王斌,李志敏,张德贤.模糊DEA方法及在相对经济效益评价中的应用[J].青岛建筑工程学院学报,1997,18(1)：74-78.
王大伟,冯英俊.模糊多级综合评价模型与应用[J].系统工程与电子技术,2006(6)：867-868.
王迪钊.工科院校教师科研绩效评价模型的研究[J].浙江理工大学学报,2005(02)
王光彦,大学教师绩效评价研究[D],华东师范大学博士论文,2009
王建新等.大学英语教学改革呼唤观念更新[J].外语教学与研究,2003(3)
王汉澜主编.教育评价学[M].河南大学出版社,1995.
王浩.军事院校绩效评估应注意的几个问题[J].南京政治学院学报,2003(05)
王鲁捷,侯健.科技人才绩效评估指标体系探讨[J].中国人力资源开 发,2005,(1)：48-51.
王景英主编.教育评价理论与实践[M].东北师范大学出版社,2002.
王景英.当前美国中小学教师评价的特点及其启示[J].外国教育研究,2002(9).
王景英.理解与对话.从解释学视角解读教师评价[J].外国教育研究,2003(8).
王莲芬,许树柏.层次分析法引论[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,1990.
王善迈.教育投入与产出研究[M].石家庄：河北教育出版社,1999：168.
王敏,我国高校教师绩效评价的问题及对策研究[J],兰州大学硕士论文2010,04
王秋萍.美国教师聘任制度评价[J].上海教育科研,2000(12).
王英,教师绩效评价体系研究[D],河北工业大学硕士论文,2008
王友青,姚明亮.模糊理论在职工绩效考核中的应用研究[J].北京电子科技学院学报,2006(1)：88-90.
王文静、赵希斌.新课程实施中的教师评价改革[J].中小学管理,2003(7).
王文源.关于教师评价的思考[J].中小学管理,1997(9).
王小飞.英国教师评价制度的新进展_兼PRP体系计划述评[J].比较教育研究,2002(3).
王学军.教师评价工作存在的主要问题及对策[J].宁夏教育,2002(2).
王孝玲编著.教育评价理论与技术[M].上海教育出版社,1999.
王一秀主编.中国行政管理大词典[M].光明日报出版社,1991.
王战军.学位与研究生教育评估技术与实践[M].北京：高等教育出版社,2002.
汪沛.高等学校教师管理评估体系的研究[D].大连海事大学,2003
魏宏森.系统论[M].清华大学出版社.1995
魏红.我国高校教师教学评价发展的回顾与展望[J].高等师范教育研究,2001,(5)：68-72.
魏清泉.教师评价指标的关联分析[J].聊城师范学院学报,1999(4).
魏权龄.评价相对有效性的DEA方法一运筹学的新领域[M].北京：中国人民大学出版社,1988.
魏权龄.估计要素增长型技术进步滞后及超前年限的DEA模型[]].数量经济技术经济研究,1991,(3)：11-17.
魏雪峰,基于发展性评价理论的教师评价模型研究[D],天津师范大学硕士论文,2006.04
吴钢著.现代教育评价基础[M].学林出版社,1996.
吴国富.安万福.刘景海编.实用数据分析方法[M].北京：中国统计出版社.1992
吴俊卿.绩效评价的理论和方法[M].北京：科学技术文献出版社,1992：85-154. [3]
吴思孝.隐性评价一教师评价的另一视角[J].教学与管理,2003(8).
吴也显.教学论新编[M].北京：教育科学出版社,1991.
吴一安.优秀外语教师专业素质探究[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(3).
吴育华,吴伟雄.普通中学相对有效性评估模型研究[J].系统工程理论与实践.2000(5).
吴畏主编.中国教育管理精览[M].警官教育出版社,1998.
吴增强. 自我效能：一种积极的自我信念[J].心理科学,2001。(4)：499.
吴振利.中小学教师评价权的个案调查与探讨[J].内蒙古师范大学学报,2001(5).
吴志红.教育行政学[M].北京人民教育出版社,2001,263
武书连,吕嘉,郭石林.中国大学研究与发展成果评价(节录)[J].科学与科学技术管理,1997,18(7)：49-70(8)：31
夏纪梅.大学英语教师的外语教育观念、知识、能力、科研现状与进修情况调查报告[J].外语界,2002,(5).
肖海平,丁远坤,教育信仰：教师专业发展的内在动力[J],孝感学院学报,2008.07
肖丽萍.国内外教师专业发展研究述评[J].中国教育学刊,2002(6).
肖远军.论新课程观下教师评价的基本特征[J].浙江教育学院学报,2003(4).
邢军.发展性小学教师评价的实践探索[J].辽宁教育研究,2003(7).
徐成龙,吴健中.决策单元相互评价模型及其应用研究[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2000,9(1)：78-82.
徐辉,季诚均等.大学教学概论[M].杭州：浙江大学出版社,2004：42-49.
徐荣青、王爱武.关于教师评价的思考[J].职业技术教育,2000(4).
徐玉珍.论“好教师”[J].课程·教材·教法,1997(11).
徐秀英,韩美贵,王雯等.研究型大学教师绩效评价指标体系与模糊综合评价的探讨[J].教育科学管理,2005(4)：32-34.
徐耀玲,唐五湘,吴秉坚.科技评估指标体系设计的原则及其应用研究[J].中国软科学.2000,(2)：48-51.
许传海.标准分在教师业绩计量中的应用[J].山东建筑工程学院学报,2001(03)
许明.英国中小学教师的评价制度和特点[J].外国教育研究,2002(12).
许晓东.高等学校规模效益评价的理论和应用研究[D].武汉：华中理工大学,2000.
薛天祥.高等教育评估中应正确处理定性与定量的关系[J].中国高等教育评估.1999,(4)：1-5.
严开胜.点击学校教师考核的误区[J].教学与管理.2001,(9)：16
严慕容、张泰岭.高等学校教学工作状态定量评估方法研究[J].华南农业大学学报(社会科学版).2002(2)
杨潮,刘红,陈抗生.谈数据库建设对教师绩效考核的促进作用[J].中国高教研究,1999(4)
杨成俊,周伟庆,宋利华,李立超.教师综合素质评估指标体系的研究与实践[J].卫生职业教育,2002(05)
杨浩编著.模型与算法[M].北京：北方交通大学出版社,2002.
杨建云,王卓.论教师发展性评价与奖惩性评价的关系[J].中国教育学刊,2003,(1)：46-49
杨建云,王卓.论我国发展性教师评价的实质[J].教育科学,2005,(1)
杨华.我国教师评价方法存在的问题探析及解决对策[J].辽宁师范大学学报,2001(5).
杨玲莉,杨培真.高校无形资产流失的原因分析及其对策研究[J].科研管理.1995,(2)：62-64.
杨伟.探索教师评价新方法[J].中小学管理,2002(1)
姚利民,綦珊珊,教学学术型大学教师特征论[J],湖南大学学报(社会科学版),2007(9)
易宣,朱方长.高校教师评价体系建构的合理性问题研究[J].高等农业教育,2004,(3)：56-58.
英配昌、范国睿.关于教师评价的个案研究一兼论传统教师评价模式的弊端[J].教学与管理,2001(4).
俞国良,辛涛,等.教师教学效能感：结构与影响因素的研究[J].心理学报,1995(2)：159-166.
于京天.试论教师评价改革的定位和依据[J].课程·教材·教法,2001(9).
于家太.教师绩效考核中的问题和对策[J].江苏教育,2003(11)：14-15.
袁贵仁.价值观的理论与实践[M].北京师范大学出版社,2006
袁贵仁.价值学引论[M].北京师范大学出版社,1991
张成武.我国新时期教师评价的制度化历程、现存问题与对策研究[D].成都：西南师范大学,2004.
张家浚.谈高校教师评估中科研与教学的平衡[J].高等建筑教育,2002(04).
张辉华.国外教师评价新去向[J].外国中小学教育,2002(6)
张其志.当代教师评价制度述论[J].韶关学院学报,2002(10)
张其志.对发展性教师评价的审视与思考[J].教育研究与试验,2005(1)：61-66.
张天宝,王攀峰.我国教育评价理论研究的现状及其基本走向[J].江西教育科研.2001.(6)：10-16
张维和.高校教师业绩定量考核方法的初步研究[J].天津师范大学学报(自然科学版),2001(01).
张尧庭,张晓朴.综合评价的历史和一些结论[J].统计研究.1995,(2)：39-43.
张彦通.英国高校教师评估理论[J].比较教育研究,1996(5)：16-19.
张逸岗,丁方.试论外语教师的基本素质[J].外语界,1996,(3).
张煜等主编.学校教师工作评估实用手册[M].北京：中央民族大学出版社,1997.802-803.
张煜,孟宏伟.教育研究中的多层次分析方法[J].教育研究.1995,(2)：42-47.
张艳玲.影响英语教师专业自主发展的内外在因素分析[J].湖北经济学院学报,2008(10).
张玉田等主编.学校教育评价[M].中央民族大学出版社,1998.
张远增.大学无形资产及其评估初步研究[J].教育与经济,2000,(4)：49-51.
赵焕臣,许树柏,和金生.层次分析法一一种简易的新决策方法[M].科学出版社,1998
赵金栋.对“教师评价的统计分析及二次量化模型”一文的研究与探讨[J].数学的实践与认识.1995,(3)：68-71.
赵庆典.我国高校教师职务制度50年回顾与展望[J].江苏高教,2000(2)
赵希斌.国外发展性教师评价的发展趋势[J].比较教育研究,2003(1)
赵曙明.人力资源管理研究[M].中国人民大学出版社,2001
赵应生等.大学教师劳动特点及绩效评估的人文关怀[J].黑龙江高教研究,2005,(2)：75-76.
赵文华.高等教育系统论[M].桂林：广西师范大学出版社.2001
赵勇,岳超源,陈诞.数据包络分析中有效单元的进一步分析,[J].系统工程学报,1995,10(4)：95-100.
郑英姿.北京大学科技论文及其相关因素分析[J].中国科技期刊研究,1998
郑秀英.高等学校无形资产及其管理问题研究[D].天津：天津大学,2000.
中国外语教育研究中心.中国外语教育研究中心“十五”规划[J].外语教学与研究,2002,(5)：225-227.
周朝森.教育评价理论的新探索[J].教育研究,1992(2)
周燕.高校英语教师发展需求调查与研究[J].外语教学与研究,2005,(3).
周谦主编.教育评价与统计[M].科学出版社,1997.
周作宇.高校人力资源管理的几个理论问题[J].中国高等教育,2000(12)
朱保江.依法实施教师资格制度,加强教师队伍建设[J].中国教育报,2003年3月8日第3版
朱乔.数据包络分析/保证域(DEA/AR)方法[J].系统工程理论方法应用,1995,4(2)：13-19.
朱泰英,孙波,陈兆均.基于数据包络分析的工程建设项目评标方法[J].公路交通技术,2004(2)：101-103.
朱舟著.人力资本投资的成本收益分析[M].上海：上海财经大学出版社.1999年.
邹明信,徐学军.企业标杆管理的应用探讨[J].价值工程,2005(6).
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |