Reflections on the Development of Taiwan's HigherEducational Evaluation: From Australia’s Perspectives

[[abstract]]The aims of this research are to analyze the quality assurance system in Australian higher education, to compare the characteristics between Australian and Taiwan’s educational evaluation system, and to reflect on the deficiencies of higher educational evaluation system in Taiwan. This research used document analysis, semi-structural interview, and Bereday’s Comparative Education approach to collect and analyze the data. The four stages of data analysis are description, explanation, juxtaposition, and comparison. The major findings are as follow: 1. Backgrounds of higher educational evaluation: Although differences existing in their backgrounds, both Australia and Taiwan are used to be colonies and their educational evaluation systems in higher education are controlled by the governments. 2. Higher educational evaluation systems between Australia and Taiwan: a) Differences in the fundamentals of evaluation: The bases of evaluation systems are various because of different country backgrounds. b) Differences in types of evaluation: Australia implements institutional audit but Taiwan carries out program and institutional evaluation. c) Differences in evaluation approaches: Australia adopts quality audit but Taiwan adopts accreditation. However, higher educational evaluation in both countries is mandatory. d) Both countries publish the evaluation outcomes but with no ranking. 3. Evaluation characteristics and problems: a) It’s been argued that Taiwan adopts accreditation approach but still proceeds national mandatory evaluation. b) Australian audit indicator emphasizes the degree of internationalization and community involvement of the audited institutions. c) Australian audit adopts ADRI model while Taiwan adopts CIPP model. However, higher educational evaluation systems in both countries values self-improvement. d) Australia is seeking the perfection of the self-evaluation system; Taiwan is facing the problem of lacking evaluation professionals and financial problems of the institutions.