Different Conceptions of Quality Assurance in Humanities and Social Science and Natural Science: Analyzed with Conceptual Frameworks of Disciplinary Epistemology
Taiwan higher education evaluation has undergone two important reforms recently. In 2013, Taiwan changed the program accreditation from a single- to dual-track quality assurance system. In 2017, the Ministry of Education (MOE) announced the suspension of program accreditation and the universities had more autonomy to find their ways to assure the educational quality of the provided programs. However, it raised another issue: should the programs be evaluated by their professional associations? In Taiwan, similar quality assurance approaches were applied to evaluate various disciplinary programs. However, the intrinsic differences among disciplines may bring out various conceptions of quality assurance. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the views of evaluation reliability of the hard and soft subjects, as well as the views of educational goals, curriculum design and instruction. This study applied content analysis to examine the appeal reports in the 1st cycle of program accreditation in Taiwan. Results reveals that different disciplines exist distinct characteristics causing by different ways of knowledge accumulation and social communication, leading different views on evaluation reliability and evaluation concepts. Soft subjects pay more attention to context, and cline to set up their educational goals based on social level, school level and departmental characteristics.
|關鍵詞||申復、系所評鑑、知識觀、高等教育、學科本質、appeals、program accreditation、epistemology、higher education、nature of disciplines|