Overview of Program

D. Performance Indicators

In the effort to establish a thorough and objective performance rating index and evaluation model for eff ective tracking and management, NTU formulated the NTU Ami for the Top University Project Performance Rating Essentials, according to the evaluation objectives, principles, methods, and indicators outlined therein a university-wide evaluation is conducted.

1. Evaluation Objectives

  1. As reference for the National Taiwan University ATU Project Advisory Committee's review and budgetary allocation.
  2. As reference for the ATU Project Implementation Controls and Performance Evaluation Committee's assessment.
  3. As reference for the self-evaluation and goal setting of units undergoing evaluation.
  4. Evaluation findings as the basis for future review of the ATU Project by the Ministry of Education.

2. Evaluation Principles

  1. Evaluation system must have specific objectives and functions.
  2. Evaluation indicators must be diff erentiable and graduated.
  3. Variety of components to be scrutinized, to ensure optimal understanding of development.
  4. Evaluation should be undertaken in a spirit so as to encourage units under review to take risks and innovate.
  5. Evaluation process should have self-evaluation methods in the interest of self-management.

3. Evaluation Methods

Evaluation methods include the following three phases:

Evaluation Methods

3.1. Self-evaluation

Implementation units or teams establish self-evaluation committees, convened by the unit's executive member. In addition to thorough and accurate completion of the self-evaluation form,content statement, and submission of related supporting documents, the implementing unit or team shall make a self-assessment of each evaluation item on the evaluation form to examine its strengths and shortcomings, providing an in-depth analysis of its current operational status. The resulting written self-evaluation report shall be submitted to the Level One administrative unit in charge.

3.2. Written Evaluation

Level One administrative units shall make evaluations of the self-evaluation reports submitted by implementing units under their direction. Administrative units shall compile the selfevaluations together with the fi ndings of their review into a self-evaluation report for submission to the ATU Project Implementation Controls and Performance Evaluation Committee. The ATU Project Implementation Controls and Performance Evaluation Committee shall then allocate implementation funding at each administrative level in line with the report fi ndings and program outcome.

4. Evaluation Indicators

In order to ensure the comprehensive scope and content of evaluation, evaluation shall be assessed largely on the six target indicators of Development Plan, Human Resources, Teaching Quality, Research Performance, International Exchange, and Reputation Recognition. Among these items, Research Performance is assessed along the lines of an evaluation structure (Figure 4) consisting of Intellectual Property, Technical Merit, Cooperative Development, as well as an Evaluation Indicator Contents Table (Table 2), as follow.

Table 2: Evaluation Indicator Contents - NTU's Strategies and Measures for Promoting a Quality Teaching and Research Campus

Major Indicator Secodary Indicator Component Indicator Description
Development Plan Development Plan Plan Gauge unit's forward-looking planning ability on vision, objectives and strategy, and rate the appropriateness and feasibility of its status and development. Determination and achievement of Top 100 world university standards.
Human Resources Human Resources HR Estimate current unit teaching, research, and technical staff quantity and quality, as well as the rate of sustained research manpower replenishment. Selection and hiring of outstanding people and introduction of exceptional teams.
Teaching Quality Teaching Quality System Examine whether concrete regulations or systemic mechanisms govern the elevation of teaching, research and service quality ‒ especially regarding the system for developing new teachers and startup costs.
Research Performance Intellectual Property IP Evaluate units' speed and capacity for innovative knowledge and evaluate capacity for looking forward in terms of knowledge and skills, the unit' s ability to promote and propagate its knowledge and skills, and its degree of closeness with industry.
Technical Merit Merit Weigh units' development skills and knowhow, potential, and capacity for cooperative development with the community at large.
Cooperative Development Cooperation Assess units' research energy and potential for obtaining outside research funding.
International Exchange International Exchange International Exchange Assess whether units have specific programs to further internationalization and degree of internationalization.
Reputation Recognition Reputation Recognition Reputation Evaluate units' degree of international recognition and how well its know-how is recognized in the international community.


Figure 4: Performance Evaluation Model

5. Implementation of Indicator Implications

In the effort to further Level One implementation unit colleagues' understanding and appreciation of the ATU Project and elevate administrative performance, meetings concerning promotional measures among implementing units should, in addition to making working group reports, conduct regular reviews and training. Following the example of the Offi ce of Student Aff airs, besides promoting the Academic Aff airs Leanness Program and recommendations of colleagues by various units to take part in the ATU Project Performance Report Group, also conduct training and seminar programs in groups and as a division to discuss the running and performance assessment of the ATU program.