• 청소년시설환경
• /
• 제9권4호
• /
• pp.49-55
• /
• 2011

The purpose of this study is to investigate and analysis importance for evaluation indicators in youth centers. The sample of it is 138 youth centers. Method of this analysis of importance for its indicators is AHP(Analytic Hierarchy Process). Evaluation domains in youth center are process evaluation, product evaluation, input evaluation and specialized program in order of importance. Also, it is important to evaluate in needs assessment, recruitment of youth instructor, participation of youth in decision making, connective project with schools, sanitation level of youth center, satisfaction research, efforts of improvement of youth center staff in evaluation indicators. The result of this study is that importance for evaluation indicators suggests developmental directivity in youth center management.

• 임상간호연구
• /
• 제19권2호
• /
• pp.233-244
• /
• 2013

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to develop the evaluation indicators of positive nursing organizational culture in a clinical setting. Methods: The evaluation indicators of positive nursing organizational culture were developed from a literature review and a focus group interview. The content validity testing was done using a clinical expert panel. The content utility testing was done using a survey questionnaire. Results: The evaluation indicators of positive nursing organizational culture consists of 88 indicators representing the eight domains with the 24 categories. The average scores in evaluation indicators of positive nursing culture included the importance (3.29 points in average), the potential for further utilization (3.14 points in average) and the current state of extension agency (2.80 points in average). Conclusion: The developed evaluation indicators can be applied to measure the nursing organizational culture, which would be the basic data to manage human resources effectively in a clinical setting.

• 농촌계획
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.105-116
• /
• 2023

In this study, evaluation indicators for quantitative and qualitative indicators were presented by resetting the evaluation indicators for the selection of the living conditions renovation project for vulnerable residential areas by reflecting the results of expert importance. The appropriateness of the project selection evaluation index was reviewed by comparing the results of the expert AHP importance survey to make the project sustainable and to discover vulnerable villages. Evaluation items were constructed based on the guidelines for selecting the target site, and AHP importance evaluation was performed using this evaluation item as a proxy variable. Based on the data collected from 152 villages in Gimhae-si for case studies, the evaluation results were derived by applying the existing guideline evaluation indicators and evaluation indicators reflecting the importance proposed in this study. As a result of the study, Overall, there was a positive correlation between the results of the existing guideline evaluation and the results of the AHP importance survey, but in detail, there is a difference in the results evaluated by the two evaluation methods. In the future, if the scope of participating experts is expanded to supplement the importance evaluation, and the evaluation grade is set by analyzing quantitative data from Gyeongsangnam-do or rural areas nationwide, local governments and others will use this evaluation index as basic data when promoting the project.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제13권4호
• /
• pp.1-27
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study was to develop the evaluation indicator for the health promotion programs of the Community Health Centers and to test its validity. The modified logic model was used as the evaluation model based on the literature reviews. Using this model, four dimensions, eleven sub­dimensions, and forty­one individual indicators were developed. These evaluation indicators are superior in reflecting the distinctiveness of the community health promotion programs, and also flexible enough to accommodate diverse programs. These indicators also emphasize the role of process evaluation, and the diversity of outcomes. To test content validity, survey method of experts in the community health promotion field was conducted. Eleven in three expert groups(professionals, practitioners in Community Health Centers, and policy makers) generally agreed with the validity of evaluation indicators. To examine criteria and construct validity, these indicators were used to evaluate the health promotion programs conducted by the 18 Key Community Health Centers. The data came from the interview surveys of the main health promotion practitioner and 30 visitors from each center. The ranks of these eighteen Community Health Centers were computed from these data. There was no significant difference in ranking either by these indicators or by the existing indicators, which was developed by Technical Support and Evaluation Team for criteria validity. There was no statistically significant difference in ranking between input, process and outcome dimensions. Based on these study results, evaluation indicators developed in this study are valid to evaluate Community Health Center's health promotion program. It can be used both by the Community Health Center for internal evaluation, and by the stakeholders for external evaluation.

• 지식경영연구
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.65-84
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this study is to develop Meta Evaluation Indicators for Defense R&D Programs in Korea. At first, the four components of this meta evaluation model were designed, which are evaluation context, evaluation input, evaluation process and evaluation outcome. And fifty two indicators for this meta evaluation were developed by experts who performed evaluations for Defense R&D Programs. The reliability of components and items was verified by Cronbach's ${\alpha}$ coefficient. It was over 0.6 in all areas. The validity of components and items was verified by Factor Analysis. Analytic Hierarchy Process method was used in assigning the evaluation weight. The survey of twenty two evaluators participated in Defense R&D Programs showed that the Consistency Ratio was under 0.1 in evaluation components and items. In this study, an objective and reasonable set of Defense R&D Meta Evaluation Indicators was developed to increase the responsibility of Defense R&D Programs and improve the quality of evaluation results.

• 공학교육연구
• /
• 제20권4호
• /
• pp.38-50
• /
• 2017

The purpose of this study is to analyze the current evaluation methods on faculty performance at Korean engineering colleges and develop teaching evaluation indicators for faculty performance. We investigated the faculty performance cases in engineering colleges inside and outside of the Korea, the engineering faculty's awareness of evaluation factors for their educational performance, and the appropriate ratios by indicating factors. Also we developed evaluation indicators for educational achievements to improve the current faculty performance system. 227 engineering faculty members answered our survey questionnaire. The result in the case study on faculty performance evaluation is as follows. First, most items of faculty performance evaluation are about quantitative indicators that can easily conduct objective evaluation. Second, evaluation items of faculty performance are mostly focused on instruction in a classroom. Third, the evaluation by students and administrative managers is more dominant than that by professors or their colleagues, document evaluation than on site evaluation, general evaluation than formative evaluation, and static evaluation than dynamic evaluation. Lastly, Some universities tend to substitute outstanding articles for underperforming instruction. The evaluation indicators that we have developed can be implemented by four types of subjects, such as students, professors, their colleagues, and deans. Also, based on the evaluation indicators, faculties can freely select their evaluation domains depending on the their tracks, such as a teaching track, a research track, or an industry-university cooperation track. The mandatory evaluation fields include teaching, student counselling, teaching portfolio evaluation by mentors or colleagues, class management evaluation by deans, and self-evaluation. The other areas are optional and professors can choose their evaluation factors.

• 한국농촌계획학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국농촌계획학회 1998년도 정기총회 및 춘계 학술논문발표회
• /
• pp.21-24
• /
• 1998

The objective of this study is to enforce systematic evaluation on the present condition and ecosystem of coastal wetland to use frame of environmental indicators. For this, the indicators for evaluation of coastal wetland are established and are applied to the present condition. Then, the application possibility of this evaluation indicators and management method by group of coastal method are presented.

• 농촌계획
• /
• 제14권3호
• /
• pp.53-61
• /
• 2008

This study has intended to elicit the definition of rural landscape, to classify rural landscape type, and to develop the evaluation indicators of rural landscape, meeting the definition through delphi expert survey method. The survey was performed five times for 80 days by 20 experts. The delphi expert survey asked experts as follows: 1) to fill out open-ended questions regarding the definition of rural landscape, and classification of rural landscape types, and evaluation indicators; 2) to provide their own feasibility evaluation regarding the results of the previous answer; and 3) to reevaluate the feasibility of the definition, types, and indicators. Based on the survey results, this study has found the appropriate definition of rural landscape like the comprehensive complex of physical (objective) and nonphysical (subjective) factors characterizing natural and/or artificial scenary of rural village itself Also, this study has developed the evaluation indicators of rural landscape in accordance with space types and landscape units classified. The developed indicators included areal ratio, the degree of green naturality, the building coverage ratio for physical landscape field, and skyline, landscape adjectives, color landscape, semantic scale.

• 한국실내디자인학회논문집
• /
• 제25권4호
• /
• pp.147-155
• /
• 2016

In order to ensure a certain level of the quality of design, standardized evaluation indicators are being used as an objective criterion. Even though the evaluation indicators are quantifiable, limitations such as inefficiency and inconsistency caused by manual task in the evaluation process still have been found. BIM (Building Information Modeling) technology that is commonly adopted in architectural design process provides an environment which enables us to figure out a building model to be interpreted quantitatively with the basis of the building information model. It supports quantitative, consistent, accurate and quick evaluations so as to improve quality of design even in the initial design phase. This paper aims to establish BIM-enabled quantitative indicators and an evaluation framework to analyze building circulation even in early phase of design. The indicators are composed of 4 types (relative distance, accessibility, simplicity, pedestrian friendliness) and 7 sub-types. The evaluation framework is the process to derive Parameterized Path Value (PPV) as weighting on each indicator. For demonstrating the scalability of the suggested evaluation indicators and the framework, the authors implemented an evaluation tool and a case study has been carried out by using an actual building remodel project.

• 공학교육연구
• /
• 제26권6호
• /
• pp.62-70
• /
• 2023

The purpose of this study is to derive implications for improving related policies and evaluation criteria in the future by analyzing trends of evaluation criteria for industry-university cooperation in Korea. For this purpose, five surveys on industry-university cooperation by government departments, major general university evaluations, and evaluation indicators of specialized industry-university evaluations by the Ministry of Education were analyzed. As a result, most of the evaluation criteria for domestic industry-university cooperation have been composed of quantitative indicators and have a limited character as quantitative performance management for government projects. Although the Ministry of Education's evaluation criteria for industry-university cooperation projects has gradually changed to a segmented index considering universities, industries, and regions, it needs to be supplemented for sustainability of industry-university cooperation. In order to promote sustainable industry-university cooperation in the future, it was suggested that first, it is necessary to supplementation of qualitative Indicators considering each university's characteristics, second, the composition of indicators related to reflect on demand in the process of the cooperation, and third, to build a virtuous cycle system for future operation of evaluation criteria.