摘要
20世纪未中国高等教育大规模扩招使得高等教育从精英教育向大众教育转型,教育质量由此成为高等教育发展中的核心问题。学生评教,作为一个信效度较高,又行之有效的评价工具,已经成为高等教育监管中不可缺少的一个环节,备受国内外教育学家的青眯。然而,我国翻译硕士(MTI)的相关研究还处在起始阶段,学生评教的实证研究更是无人涉足,故本文为了填补这方面的空白,在美国顾客满意度指数(ACSI)模型基础之上，构建了基于学生满意度的翻译硕士教学质量评估模型,旨在较为全而地反映当前翻译硕士(MTI)教学状况的全貌,从而为将来MTI在确立合理的课程设置、以及选用具体的教学方法、校园文化建设等方面提供一手的借鉴资料,确保整个MTI教学过程的系统性和科学性。
本研究首先综述了国内外学生评教的研究成果,然后介绍了学生评教的理论基础,进而在鲍威(2007)研究的基础上,发展了基于学生满意度的MTI教学质量评估模型,继而提出了3个研究问题：MTI学生对所在培养单位教学质量满意度的总体状况：不同层次院校的学生满意度差异对比；造成学生满意度差异的影响机制。本研究采用实证研究的方法,以2007年和2008年审议通过的40所设置MTI专业硕士专业学位高校的5个培养类别中各选取1所高校共计80名在读口、笔译硕士研究生为测试对象,对其进行问卷调查,为了全面了解学生对MTI教学满意度,设定了39个提问项目，其中29个闭合式项目采用4等级评定尺度、3个开放式项目和7个学生背景项目。我们使用SPSS18.0对所得统计数据进行定量分析,为了保证研究的全而性,我们还对调查问卷中的开放式项目进行定性分析。本项研究结果表明：1)学生对MTI教学总体状况持肯定态度；2)不同层次院校MTI培养单位中，985院校教学总体满意度高于211和一般类院校；3)影响教学成效的因素(即造成教学总体满意度差异的影响机制)主要包括高校选拔性,工作经验,升学打算,工作意向和教学过程等一系列指标。
本研究有效地反映了MTI教学状况的全貌,获得了MTI教学开展过程中的现状和问题,分析探讨了教育成效的影响机制,为改革和调整MTI教学课程的结构性,改善教师教学态度和校园学术环境制定事与一套完善的指标体系提供现实依据,对MTI研究具有重大的借鉴意义。
In the current educational background, teaching quality assurance is a priority in the institutes of higher education (HEIs). Student evaluations of teaching (SETs) have been widely accepted as a reliable, valid and effective rating instrument, and have attracted much attention from researchers both at home and abroad. However, the practice of SETs has not yet been carried out in MTI (Master of Translation and Interpreting) program since its inception in2007. The present study, based on American Customer Satisfaction model, develops a student satisfaction model, aiming to depict a comprehensive picture of MTI educational practice, and provide the first-hand reference for a highly intentional program setting, effective teaching methods, and welcome campus construction in order to ensure the systematic and scientific operation of MTI teaching practice.
In the thesis, the author first reviews the major findings of student evaluations of teaching (SETs), expounds theories underpinning the practice of student evaluations, and introduces a modified version of student evaluation model based on student satisfaction. Then three research questions are proposed:1) What is MTI students'satisfaction rate about the overall teaching in their program?2) Are there any differences in the satisfaction degree in different universities? If any, what are they?3) What are the factors that really work in the course of student evaluations of teaching in MTI program?
To address the research questions, a paper-based questionnaire survey is administered nation-widely among five MTI institutes chosen from the first40institutes approved by the Ministry of Education in2007and2008respectively. Participants in this research are80second-year students of the MTI institutes mentioned above. This survey is composed of thirty-nine items, including twenty-nine quantitative items, three qualitative items, and seven personal information items. We conduct quantitative analysis on the data collected by employing SPSS (Version18.0for windows), and also make qualitative analysis by examining students'responses to the open-ended question items, in order to depict a comprehensive picture of the research focus. Results obtained show that1) students. panoramically, express positive responses towards overall teaching quality in Mil institutes;2) in terms of MTI teaching quality in different types of universities, it can be argued that university selectivity addresses, to a large extent, the overall student satisfaction;3) factors, including university selectivity, formal work experience, study intention, job intention, and instructional process indicators, cluster together to form the influencing mechanism to student evaluations of MTI teaching.
The present study contributes in two important ways. The study, on the one hand, delineates a comprehensive picture of MTI teaching quality as a whole to understand the status quo and problems inside MTI institutes. It probes, on the other, into the influencing mechanism sensitive to the rating results in order to provide suggestions on adjusting curricular structure, improving faculty qualifications, and constructing campus environment to a realistic level.
引文
Abrami, P. C. & D' apollonia, S. (1990). The dimensionality of ratings and their use in personnel decisions. In M. Theall & J. Franklin (Eds.), Student ratings of instruction: Issues for improving practice: New directions for leaching and [earning, 43, (pp. 97-111). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Abrami, P. C, Perry, R. P. & Leventhal, L. (1982). The relationship between student personality characteristics, teacher ratings, and student achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 111-125.
Aleamoni, L. M. (1981). Student ratings of instruction. In J. Millman (Ed.), Handbook of Teacher Evaluation, (pp. 110-145). Beverly Hills, Sage.
Aleamoni, L. M. & Hexner, P. Z. (1980). A review of the research on student evaluation and a report on the effect of different sets of instructions on student course and instructor evaluation. Instructional Science, 9, 67-84.
Alkhafaji, A, F. (1989). A stakeholder approach to corporate governance: Managing in a dynamic environment. Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Anderson, E. (1995). High tech v. high touch: A case study of TQM implementation in higher education. Managing Service Quality, 5 (2), 48-56.
Anderson, E. W., Fornell, C. & D. R. Lehmann. (1994). Customer Satisfaction, Market Share, and Profitability: Findings from Sweden. Journal of Marketing, 58, 53-66.
Benton, S. L., Duchon, D. & Pallett, W. H. (2011). Validity of student self-reported ratings of instruction. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 16.
Bolton, R. N. and Drew, J. H. (1991a). A longitudinal analysis of the impact of service changes on customer attitudes. Journal of Marketing, 55, 1-9.
Bolton, R. N. and Drew, J. 11. (1991b). A multistage model of customers' assessments of service quality and value. Journal of Consumer Research, 17, 375-384.
Brandenburg, G. C. & Remmers, H. H. (1927). A rating scale for instructors. Educational Administration and Supervision, 13, 399-406.
Braskamp, L. A. & Ory, J. C. (1994). Assessing faculty work: Enhancing individual and institutional performance. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Brenda M. O. & Baron, S. (2000). Student perceptions of service quality in a Kuniversity business and management faculty. Quality Assurance in Education, 8 (2), 85-95.
Brennan,J., Brighton, R., Moon, N., Richardson, J., Rindl, J. & Williams, R. (2002). Collecting and using student feedback on quality and standards of learning and teaching in higher education:A report to the Higher Education Funding Council for England. London:HEFCE
Brown, S. W. & Teresa, A. S. (1989). A gap analysis of professional service quality. Journal of Marketing,53,92-98.
Browne, B., Kaldenberg, D., Browne, W. & Brown, D. (1998). Student as customers: factors affecting satisfaction and assessments of institutional quality. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,8 (3),1-14.
Cadotte, E. R., Woodruff, R. B. & Jenkins, R. L. (1987). Expectations and norms in models of consumer satisfaction. Journal of Marketing Research,24,305-314.
Carman, J. M. (1990). Consumer perceptions of service quality:An assessment of the SERVQUAL dimensions. Journal of Retailing,66 (1),33-55.
Cashin, W. E. (1988). Student ratings of teaching:A summary of research (IDEA Paper No. 20). Manhattan:Kansas State University, Division of Continuing Education.
Cashin, W. E. (1995). Student ratings of teaching:The research revisited. Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development,32,2.
Cashin, W. E., & Downey, R. G. (1992). Using global student rating items for summative evaluation. Journal of Educational Psychology,84,563-572.
Centra, J. A. (1974). The relationship between student and alumni ratings of teachers. Educational and Psychological Measurement,34,321-326.
Centra, J. A. (1977). Student ratings of instruction and their relationship to student learning. American Educational Research Journal,14,17-24.
Centra, J. A. (1979). Determining faculty effectiveness. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Centra, J. A. (1993). Reflective faculty evaluation. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
Centra, J. A. (2003). Will teachers receive higher student evaluations by giving higher grades and less course work? Research in Higher Education,44,495-518.
Centra, J. A.& Creech, F. R. (1976). The relationship between student teachers and course characteristics and student ratings of teacher effectiveness. Project Report. Princeton, NJ, Educational Testing Service.
Chandler, J. A. (1978). The questionable status of student evaluations of teaching. Teaching of Psychology,5,150-152.
Coates, H. (2005). The value of student engagement for higher education quality assurance. Quality in Higher Education,11(1),25-36.
Cohen, P. A. (1981). Student ratings of instruction and student achievement: A meta-analysis of multisection validity studies. Review of Educational Research, 51, 281-309.
Cronin, Jr. J. J. & Tayor, S. A. (1992). Measuring service quality: A reexamination and extension.J. Market, 56, 55-68.
Crosby, P. B. (1979). Quality is free: The art of making quality certain. New York: American Library.
Cuthbert, P. F. (1996). Managing service quality in HE: is SERVQUAL the answer? Part 2. Managing Service Quality, 6 (3), 31-35.
Deny, J. O. (1979). Can student's ratings of instruction serve rival purposes? Journal of Higher Education, 50, 79-88.
Dowell, D. A. & Neal, J. A. (1982). A selective review of the validity of student ratings of teaching. Journal of Higher Education, 53, 51-62.
Feldman, K. A. (1976a). Grades and college students' evaluations of their courses and teachers. Research in Higher Education, 4, 69-111.
Feldman, K. A. (1976b). The superior college teacher from the students* view. Research in Higher Education, 5, 243-288.
Feldman, K. A. (1978). Course characteristics and college students' ratings of their teachers: What we know and what we don't. Research in Higher Education, 9, 199-242.
Feldman, K. A. (1983). Seniority and experience of college teachers as related to evaluations they receive from students. Research in Higher Education, 18, 3-124.
Feldman, K. A. (1984). Class size and college students' evaluations of teachers and courses: A closer look. Research in Higher Education, 21, 45-116.
Feldman, K.. A. (1987). Research productivity and scholarly accomplishment of college teachers as related to their instructional effectiveness: A review and exploration. Research in Higher Education, 26, 227-298.
Feldman, K. A. (1988). Effective college teaching from the students' and faculty's view: Matched or mismatched priorities. Research in Higher Education, 28, 291-344.
Feldman, K. A. (1989a). Instructional effectiveness of college teachers as judged by teachers themselves, current and former students, colleagues, administrators and external (neutral) observers. Research in Higher Education, 30, 137-194.
Feldman, K. A. (1989b). The association between student ratings of specific instructional dimensions and student achievement: Refining and extending the synthesis of data from multisection validity studies. Research in Higher Education, 30, 583-645.
Feldman, K. A. (1997). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching:Evidence from student ratings. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), Effective teaching in higher education:Research and practice (pp.368-395). New York:Agathon Press.
Feldman, K. A. (2007). Identifying exemplary teachers and teaching:Evidence from student ratings. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The Scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education:An evidence-based perspective (pp.93-129). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Springer.
Farrugia, C. (1996). A continuing professional development model for quality assurance in higher education. Quality Assurance in Education,4 (2),28-34.
Frances, M. H. (1995). Managing service quality in higher education:the role of the student as primary consumer. Quality Assurance in Education,3 (3),10-21.
Franklin, J., Thell, M. & Ludlow, L. (1991). Grade inflation and student ratings:A closer look. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago.
Freeman, R. E. (1984). Strategic management:A stakeholder approach. Boston:Pitman.
Freeman, R. E. & Reed, D. L. (1983). Stockholders and stakeholders:A new perspective on corporate governance. California Management Review,25(3),93-94.
Garvin, D. A. (1983). Quality on the line. Harvard Business Review,61,65-73.
Giese, J. L & Cote, J. A. (2000). Defining Consumer Satisfaction. Academy of Marketing Science Review, (1),1-24.
Gillmore, G. M., Kane, M. T. & Naccarato, R. W. (1978). The generalizability of student ratings of instruction:Estimates of teacher and course components. Journal of Educational Measurement,15,1-13.
Greenwald, A. & Gillmore, G. (1997). Grading leniency is a removable constraint. American Psychologist,52,1209-1217.
Gronroos, C. (1982). Strategic management and marketing in the service sector. Hlelsingfors:Swedish School of Economics and Business Administration.
Gronroos, C. (1984). A service quality model and its marketing implications. European Journal of Marketing,18 (4),36-44.
Guolla, M. (1999). Assessing the teaching quality to student satisfaction relationship: applied customer satisfaction research in the classroom. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice,7(3),87-97.
Gutman, J & Miaoulis, G. (2003). Communicating a quality position in service delivery: An application in higher education. Managing Service Quality,13 (2),105-111.
Halstead D., Hartman, D. & Schmidt, S. L. (1994). Multisourcc effects on the satisfaction formation process. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 22, 114-129.
Hanges, P. J., Schneider, B. & Niles, K. (1990). Stability of performance: An interactionist perspective. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 658-667.
Heaton, J. B. (1982). Language testing. Modern English Pub.
Howard, G. S., Conway, C. G. & Maxwell, S. H. (1985). Construct validity of measures of college teaching effectiveness. Journal of Educational Psychology, 77, 187-196.
Howard, G. S. & Maxwell, S. E. (1980). The correlation between student satisfaction and grades: A case of mistaken causation? Journal of Educational Psychology, 72, 810-820.
Howard, G. S. & Maxwell, S. E. (1982). Do grades contaminate student evaluations of instruction? Research in Higher Education, 16, 175-188.
Howard, J. A. and Sheth, J. N. (1969). The Theory of Buyer Behavior. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Hoyt, D. P. & Lee, E. (2002a). IDEA technical report no. 12: Basic data for the revised IDEA system. Manhattan, KS: The IDEA Center.
Hugh, H. (1993). Reliability and validity of student evaluations: Testing models versus survey research models. Political Science and Politics, 26, 562-569.
Johnston, W. J. & Bonoma, T. V. (1981). Purchase process for capital equipment and services. Industrial Marketing Management, 4, 261.
Jones, T. M. (1980). Corporate social responsibility revisited, redefined. California Management Review, 22(2), 59-67.
Joseph, M., Yakhou, M. & Stone, G. (2005). An educational institution's quest for service quality: customers' perspective. Quality Assurance in Education, 13 (1), 66-82.
Kelly, N. & DePalma, D. A. (2012). The top 100 language service providers. http://www.commonsenseadvisory.eom/Portals/0/downloads/120531_QTTop_100_LSPs.pdf
Koblitz, N. (1990). Are student ratings unfair to women? Newsletter of the Association for Women in Mathematics, 20, 17-19.
Koon, J. & Murray, H. G. (1995). Using multiple outcomes to validate student ratings of overall teacher effectiveness. Journal of Higher Education, 66, 61-81.
Koushki, P. A. & Kuhn, H. A. J. (1982). How reliable are student evaluations of teachers? Engineering Education, 72, 362-367.
Kulik, J. A. & McKeachie, W. J. (1975). The evaluation of teachers in higher education. In F. N. Kerlinger (Ed.), Review of research in education,3 (pp.210-240). Itasca, IL F. E. Peacock.
Lehtinen, U. & Jarmo R. L. (1982). Service quality:A study of quality dimensions, unpublished working paper. Helsinki:Service Management Institute, Finland OY.
Galloway, L. (1998). Quality perceptions of internal and external customers:A case study in educational administration. The TQM Magazine,10 (1),20-26.
Lewis, R. C. & Bernard, H. B. (1983). The marketing aspects of service quality. In L. Berry, G. Shostack & G. Upah (Eds.), Emerging Perspectives on Services Marketing (pp. 99-107). Chicago:American Marketing.
Mavondo, F. T., Tsarenko, Y. & Gabbott, M. (2004). International and local student satisfaction:resources and capabilities perspective. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education,14 (1),41-60.
Mitchell, A. & Wood, D. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: Defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review,22 (4),853-886.
Marsh, H. W. (1982). Validity of students'evaluations of college teaching:A multitrait-multimethod analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology,74,264-279.
Marsh, H. W. (1983). Multidimensional ratings of teaching effectiveness by students from different academic settings and their relation to student/course/instructor characteristics. Journal of Educational Psychology,75,150-166.
Marsh, H. W. (1984). Students' evaluation of university teaching:Dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases, and utility. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76,707-754.
Marsh, H. (1987). Students' evaluations of university teaching:Research findings, methodological Issues, and directions for further research. International Journal of Educational Research,11,253-388.
Marsh, H. W. (2001). Distinguishing between good (useful) and bad workloads on student evaluations of teaching. American Educational Research Journal,38,183-212.
Marsh, H. W. (2007). Students' evaluations of university teaching:Dimensionality, reliability, validity, potential biases and usefulness. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The Scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education:An evidence-based perspective (pp.319-383). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:Springer.
Marsh, H. W. & Dunkin, M. J. (1992). Students' evaluations of university teaching:A multidimensional perspective. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education:Handbook of Theory and Research, 8, (pp. 143-233). New York, Agathon Press.
Marsh, H. W. & Dunkin, M. J. (1997). Students1 evaluations of university teaching: A multidimensional perspective. In R. P. Perry & J. C. Smart (Eds.), Effective teaching in higher education: Research and practice (pp. 241-320). New York: Agathon Press.
Marsh, H. W. & Roche, L. A. (1994). The use of students' evaluations of university teaching to improve teaching effectiveness. Canberra, Australian Capital Territory, Australia: Department of Employment, Education and Training.
Marsh, H. W. & Roche, L. A. (2000). Effects of grading leniency and low workload on students' evaluations of teaching: Popular myth, bias, validity, and innocent bystanders. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92, 202-222.
Marsh, H. W., Overall, J. U. & Kesler, S. P. (1979). Validity of student evaluations of instructional effectiveness: A comparison of faculty self-evaluations and evaluation by their students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 149-160.
Marsh, II. W. & Ware, J. E. (1982). Effects of expressiveness, content coverage, and incentive on multidimensional student rating scales: New interpretations of the Dr. Fox effect. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 126-134.
Mccallum, L. W. (1984). A meta-analysis ol course evaluation data and its use in the tenure decision. Research in Higher Education, 21, 150-158.
McKeachie, W. J. (1979). Student ratings of faculty: A reprise. Academe, 65, 384-397.
McKeachie, W. J. (1990). Research on college teaching: The historical background. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 189-200.
Murray, H. G. (1980). Evaluating university teaching: A review of research. Toronto, Ontario, Canada: Ontario Confederation of University Faculty Associations.
Murray, H. G, Rushton, P. J. & Paunonen, S. V. (1990). Teacher personality traits and student instructional ratings in six types of university courses. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 250-261.
Naftulin, D. H., Ware, J. E. & Donnelly, F. A. (1973). The Doctor Fox lecture: A paradigm of educational seduction. Journal of Medical Education, 48, 630-635.
Oliver, R. L. (1977). Effect of expectation and disconfirmation on post-exposure product evaluations: An Alternative Interpretation. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62 (4), 480-486.
Oliver, R. L. (1980). A cognitive model of the antecedents and consequences ol'satislaction decisions. Journal of Marketing Research, 17, 460-469.
Overall, J. U. & Marsh, H. W. (1979). Midterm feedback from students:Its relationship to instructional improvement and students'cognitive and affective outcomes. Journal of Educational Psychology,72,321-325.
Parasuraman, A., Valarie, Z. & Leonard B. (1985). A Conceptual Model of Service Quality and Its Implications for Future Research. Journal of Marketing,49 (Fall),41-50.
Parasuraman, A., Valarie Z. & Leonard B. (1988). SERVQUAL:A multiple-item scale for measuring consumer perceptions of service quality. Journal of Retailing,64 (Spring),12-40.
Ramsden, P. (1991). A performance indicator of teaching quality in higher education:The course experience questionnaire. Studies in Higher Education,16,129-150.
Rathmcll, J. M. (1966). What is meant by services? Journal of Marketing,30 (October), 32-36.
Remmers, H. H. (1927). The Purdue rating scale for instructors. Educational Administration and Supervision,6,399-406.
Remmers, H. H. (1928). The relationship between students' marks and students' attitudes toward instructors. School and Society,28,759-760.
Remmers, H. H. (1930). To what extent do grades influence student ratings of instructors? Journal of Educational Psychology,21,314-316.
Remmers, H. H. & Brandenburg, G. C. (1927). Experimental data on the Purdue ratings scale for instructors. Educational Administration and Supervision,13,519-527.
Richardson, J. T. E. (2005). Instruments for obtaining student feedback:A review of the literature. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education,30 (4),387-415.
Rust, R. T. & Oliver, R. L. (1994). Service quality:Insights and managerial implications from the frontier. In R. T. Rust & R. L. Oliver (Eds.), Service quality:New directions in theory and practice (pp.1-19). Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.
Sahaney, S., Banwet, D. K. & Karunes, S. (2006). An integrated framework for quality in education:Application of quality function deployment, interpretive structural modeling and path analysis. Total Qual. Manage.,17,265-285.
Sasser, W. E., Paul, Jr. R. & Wyckoff, D. D. (1978). Management of service operations: Text and cases. Boston:Allyn & Bacon.
Seldin, P. (1984). Changing Practices in Faculty Evaluation. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass.
Seldin, P. (1993). The use and abuse of student ratings of professors. Chronicle of Higher Education,39 (46), A 40.
Sixbury, G. R. & Cashin, W. E. (1995a). IDEA technical report no 10: Comparative data by academic field. Manhattan: Kansas State University, Center for Faculty Evaluation and Development.
Stephen, L. B. & Cashin, W. E. (2009). Student ratings of teaching: A summary of research and literature. Idea Paper, 50, 1-22.
Thompson, J. K., Wartick, S. L., & Smith, H. L. (1991). Integrating corporate social performance and stakeholder management: Implications for a research agenda in small business. Research in Corporate Social Performance and Policy, 12, 207-230.
Tse, D. K. & Wilton, P. C. (1988). Models of consumer satisfaction: An extension. Journal of Marketing Research, 25 (May), 204-212.
Westbrook, R. A. & Reilly, M. D. (1983). Value-percept disparity: An alternative to the disconfirmation of expectations theory of consumer satisfaction. In R. P. Bagozzi & A. M. Tybout (Eds.), Advances in Consumer Research, 10, (pp. 256-261). Ann Arbor, MI: Association for Consumer Research.
Yi, Y. (1990). A critical review of consumer satisfaction. In V. A. Zeithaml (lid.), Review of Marketing (pp. 68-123). Chicago: American Marketing Association.
Watkins, D. (1994). Student evaluations of teaching effectiveness: A cross-cultural perspective. Research in Higher Education, 35, 251-266.
Zeithaml, V. A. & Parasuraman, A. (1985). Problems and strategies in services marketing. Journal of Marketing, 49, 33-46.
Zeithaml, V. A., Berry, L. L. & Parasuraman, A. (1996). The Behavioral Consequences of Service Quality. Journal of Marketing, 60 (2), 31-46.
Zeithaml, V. A., Parasuraman, A. & Berry, L. E. (1990). Delivering quality service: Balancing customer perception and expectations. New York, Free Press.
鲍川运.翻译师资培训：翻译教学成功的关键[J].中国翻译,2009,2：45-47.
鲍威.学生眼中的高等院校教学质量——高校学生教学评估的分析[J].现代大学教育,2007,4：52-61.
反差：八千万学子习外语，翻译人才缺九成.光明日报.2006，03，27.http://www.sina.com.cn.
柴明颎.对专业翻译教学建构的思考——现状、问题和对策[J].中国翻译,2010,1：54-56.
陈宏辉.企业的利益相关者理论与实证研究[D].浙江大学博士学位论文,2003.
方展,薜二勇.高等教育质量评估中的学生参与——以北欧五国为例[J].教育研究,2007,1：66-71.
何刚强.取精用弘，图远务实[J].中国翻译,2009,1：51-53.
洪彩真.高等教育服务质量与学生满意度的关系研究[D].厦门大学博士学位论文,2008.
胡赤弟.教育产权与人学制度构建的相关性研究[DJ.厦门大学博士学位论文,2004.
胡子详.高等教育顾客感知服务质量的实证研究[J].西南师范大学学报(人文社会科学版),2006,32(1)：135-141.
胡子祥.高等教育服务质量评价模型研究[J].现代大学教育,2006,2：61-67.
黄友义.翻译硕士专业学位教育的发展趋势与要求[J].中国翻译,2001,1：49-50.
蓝江桥,冷余生等.中美两国大学教学质量评价的比较与思考[J].高等教育研究,2003,(2)：96-100.
李福华.大学治理的理论基础与组织架构[M].北京：教育科学出版社,2008.
李军,黄宝印,朱瑞.改革和完善外语专业研究生培养模式[J].中国翻译,2007,4：6-7.
刘俊学.服务性：高等教育质量的基本特征[J].江苏高教,2001,4：40-42.
刘武,张金凤,陈玉芬,高青.硕士研究生课堂教学满意度评价模型的实证分析[J].现代教育管理,2009,12：101-104.
苗菊,高乾.构建MTI教育特色课程—技术写作的理念与内容[J].中国翻译,2010,2：35-38.
苗菊,朱琳.本地化与本地化翻译人才的培养[J].中国翻译,2008,5：30-34.
穆雷.建设完整的翻译教学体系[J].中国翻译,2008,1：41-44.
穆雷,王巍巍.翻译硕士专业学位教育的特色培养模式[J].中国翻译,2011,2：29-32.
任文.翻译教学的发展与TOT计划的实施[J].中国翻译,2009,2：48-52.
石芳华.对大学生参与评教的思考[J].现代大学教育,2006,3：61-63.
唐继卫.加强翻译硕士教育工作,适应翻译产业发展需要[J].中国翻译,2010,1：50-52.
王辉晖.顾客满意度测评研究及实例分析[D].武汉理工大学博士论文,2004：3-4.转引自：洪彩真.高等教育服务质量与学生满意度的关系研究[D].厦门大学博士学位论文,2008.
王建华.第三部门视野中的现代大学制度[D].厦门大学博士论文,2005.
吴明隆.问卷统计分析实务[M].重庆大学出版社,2010.
许钧.关于翻译硕士专业学位教育的几点思考[J].中国翻译,2010,1：52-54.
中国教育年鉴[M].北京：人民教育出版社,2006.转引自：洪彩真.高等教育服务质量与学生满意度的关系研究[D].厦门大学博士学位论文,2008.
仲伟合.翻译硕士专业学位及其对中国外语教学的挑战[J].中国翻译,2007,4(4)：4-12.