大學音樂領域評比指標建構之初探

A Preliminary Study of Establishing University Ranking Indicators for the Field of Music

近年來國際間各大學排名系統之評比結果漸受重視，成為高等教育重要的參考，然而部分領域卻因學科特性，至今仍欠缺具公信力之評比機制。國立臺灣師範大學有鑑於校內多元之特色領域，乃進行指標建置計畫，以結合音樂、藝術、運動與休閒三個學院在教學、研究、展演及比賽等方面之特點，建構特色領域之共同指標。本研究係計畫子項研究之一，首先探討國際評比系統，並從東亞教師教育國際聯盟及亞洲音樂校系中取樣，進行音樂校系特色分析，並初擬大學音樂領域評比指標。在初版指標形成後，遂以德懷術法向11位校外專家施以問卷調查，並透過多次校內會議完成指標訂定。研究結果獲致特色領域在聲譽20%、教學35%、研究／展演／比賽35%、國際化10%之共同構面與權重，及其對應之主指標及次指標，音樂領域之次指標則因學術與專業特色而與其他兩個學院有所不同。最後，本研究對評比指標後續之研究與實施提出建議。

University rankings have been gaining international attention in recent years, and have become an important reference for higher education. Some fields, however, lack a reliable system of indicators due to disciplinary peculiarities. National Taiwan Normal University (NTNU) endeavored to establish ranking system with appropriate indicators that are representative of the attributes specific to teaching, research, performance and competition within the colleges of music, arts, and sports and recreation. This study, as part of the university's overall project, aimed to establish ranking indicators for the field of music. In order to form a basis for the proposed indicators, the author first examined the current international ranking systems, analyzed the characteristics of music departments with selected samples from the International Consortium for Universities of Education in East Asia and selected conservatories in Asia, and proposed a tentative list of key indicators for the ranking of music departments and schools. The proposed indicators were tested by a survey conducted in the Delphi technique with 11 experts outside of NTNU. Further, numerous internal meetings were also held at NTNU for ongoing revisions. These results were used to create university-ranking indicators, which are comprised of four aspects weighted as: Reputation (20%), Teaching (35%), Research/Performances/Competitions (35%) and Internationalization (10%). Whereas each aspect has its own set of indicators and sub-indicators, those for the field of music should also differ slightly from the other two colleges due to the academic and professional features unique to the discipline. Lastly, this research offered suggestions for future research and implementation for a more well-rounded ranking system.