메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류
인문학
인문학 일반 역사학 철학 종교학 어문학 기타 인문학
사회과학
사회과학 일반 경영학 관광학 교육학 군사학 문헌정보학 법학 사회학 신문방송학 심리과학 정치외교학 지리학 행정학 경제학 무역학 인류학 기타 사회과학
자연과학
자연과학 일반 물리학 생물학 생활과학 수학·통계학 천문학 지구과학 화학 기타 자연과학
공학
공학 일반 건축공학 기계공학 산업공학 재료·에너지공학 전기전자공학 조선해양공학 화학공학 컴퓨터학 기타공학
의약학
의학 일반 간호학 수의학 약학 한의학 기초의학 임상의학 기타 의약학
농수해양학
농수해양학 일반 농학 수산학 식품과학 임학 축산학 해상운송학 기타 농수해양학
예술체육학
예술 일반 디자인 미술 미용 사진 음악학 의상 체육 공연매체예술 기타 예술체육학
복합학
학제간연구 과학기술학 뇌인지과학 기술정책 기타 복합학

ENG

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국산업경영시스템학회 산업경영시스템학회지 산업경영시스템학회지 제32권 제3호
발행연도
2009.1
수록면
59 - 70 (12page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
This study is the result of meta evaluation for the self evaluation of defense R&D programs in Korea by using meta evaluating indicators. The overall meta evaluation result of defense R&D programs gained 74.3 points out of 100, so it was evaluated as ‘Good’. But it demonstrated that further improvement for overall system of defense R&D programs evaluation is required. And especially, it demonstrated that more alternatives are necessary in order to improve the utilizations and the feedbacks of evaluation results. The evaluation context component gained 80.2 points out of 100, so it was evaluated as ‘Very Good’. The evaluation input component gained 73.1 points out of 100, so it was evaluated as ‘Good’. The evaluation process component gained 74.8 points out of 100, so it was evaluated as ‘Good’. And the evaluation outcome component gained 69.0 points out of 100, so it was evaluated as ‘Good’. Basic model of meta evaluation was derived from the literature review and brain storming. And this meta evaluation model was determined by adopting the result of experts who performed evaluations for defense R&D programs in recent years. The reliability of components and items was verified by Cronbach’s α coefficient. It was over 0.6 in evaluation components and items. And the reliability of evaluation context was 0.877, that of evaluation input was 0.755, that of evaluation process was 0.755, that of evaluation output was 0.755 respectively. From the analysis, it is attempted to identify possible problems and to find out the ways of improvements related to the self evaluation system of defense R&D programs. The ultimate objective of this study is to manage the programs effectively and improve the reliability and the objectiveness of the defense R&D programs.
#Defense R& #amp #D Programs #Performance Evaluation #Self Evaluation #Meta evaluation

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (23)

참고문헌 신청
American Evaluation Association / 1995 / Guidelines for Evaluator / Jossey-Bass google schola Chelimsky, Eleanor / 1985 / Program Evaluation: Patterns and Directions / The American Society for Public Administration : 1 ~ 35 google schola Cook T D. / 1978 / Metaevaluation Research / Evaluation Quarterly 2 (1) : 5 ~ 55 google schola Hong H. D. / 2000 / Meta-evaluation of National Large-Scale R&D Programs : A Comparison of Evaluation Systems of 6 National R&D Programs google schola Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation / 1994 / The Programme Evaluation Standards / Sage Publications google schola

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0