本文選題：高校貴重設(shè)備 + 評估�。� 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2013年碩士論文

【摘要】：設(shè)備尤其是貴重設(shè)備是現(xiàn)代高校的物質(zhì)技術(shù)基礎(chǔ),也是人們評價一所高校辦學(xué)水平的重要依據(jù)。近年來高校對設(shè)備投資有了長足的發(fā)展和提高,貴重儀器設(shè)備的添置尤其迅速。本文搜集資料,對當前各高校的貴重設(shè)備的管理現(xiàn)狀進行調(diào)研,發(fā)現(xiàn)高校對貴重儀器設(shè)備的管理沒有同步協(xié)調(diào)發(fā)展,出現(xiàn)了一系列急需解決的問題,如高校中普遍存在著貴重儀器設(shè)備重復(fù)購置、管理混亂、利用率低等弊端,究其原因主要是因為貴重設(shè)備評估體系存在著一定的缺陷。目前高校對貴重設(shè)備的評估體系沒有或很少提及貴重儀器設(shè)備自身的技術(shù)、經(jīng)濟指標。沒有考慮設(shè)備的壽命周期因素,計分方法也存在著一些弊端。因此需要要分析現(xiàn)狀,重新構(gòu)建貴重儀器設(shè)備的評估體系。不僅指標要切實可行、便于操作,而且考核結(jié)果要真正能起到鼓勵先進、鞭策后進的目的。能使貴重儀器設(shè)備的優(yōu)勢和作用充分發(fā)揮出來。 針對高校貴重設(shè)備評估體系的指標缺陷問題,本文引入企業(yè)設(shè)備評估方法中的一些因素,目前,在企業(yè)被廣泛接受的儀器設(shè)備評估方法有三種,即市場比較法、成本法和收益法。本文詳細分析了企業(yè)與高校的設(shè)備評估,比較二者不同之處并查找原因,然后引入企業(yè)設(shè)備評估中的重置成本、實體性貶值、功能性貶值、經(jīng)濟性貶值、設(shè)備生命周期費用以及設(shè)備壽命等因素來完善高校的貴重設(shè)備評估指標,然后利用層次分析法計算指標權(quán)重,并且引入壽命周期因素,提出評估后分五階段比較結(jié)果,此外本文還對計分方法做了改進,最后隨機選用x大學(xué)A學(xué)院3臺設(shè)備,分別用在用的和新構(gòu)建的兩種評估體系進行評估,并詳細分析比較評估結(jié)果。 本文有如下兩個創(chuàng)新點：一是在評估體系中增加了投入成本和購置管理的詳細指標,使指標體系更完整,且用層次分析法計算指標的權(quán)重。提出了壽命周期五階段分類評估比較,使評估更公平。還對計分方法做了改進,新的計分方法能充分體現(xiàn)出設(shè)備的優(yōu)勢、劣勢,使評估體系更科學(xué)。二是隨機選取A學(xué)院3臺貴重設(shè)備分別用目前在用的與新構(gòu)建的兩種評估體系對其評估。經(jīng)過仔細的分析,新構(gòu)建的評估體系評估的結(jié)果更科學(xué)、合理與公平。
[Abstract]:Equipment, especially precious equipment, is the material and technical basis of modern colleges and universities, and is also an important basis for people to evaluate the level of running a university. In recent years, colleges and universities have made considerable development and improvement in equipment investment, especially in the purchase of valuable instruments and equipment. This article collects data, carries on the investigation to the present university precious equipment management present situation, discovers the university to the precious instrument equipment management does not synchronously coordinate the development, has appeared a series of urgent problems which need to be solved. For example, there are many disadvantages in colleges and universities, such as repeated purchase of valuable instruments and equipment, confusion in management and low utilization rate. The main reason is that there are some defects in the evaluation system of valuable equipment. At present, the evaluation system of precious equipment in colleges and universities does not mention the technical and economic indexes of precious instruments and equipments. Without considering the life cycle of the equipment, there are some drawbacks in the scoring method. Therefore, it is necessary to analyze the present situation and reconstruct the evaluation system of valuable instruments and equipments. Not only the index should be feasible and easy to operate, but also the examination result should play the purpose of encouraging the advanced and pushing the backward. The advantages and functions of valuable instruments and equipment can be brought into full play. Aiming at the index defect of the evaluation system of valuable equipment in colleges and universities, this paper introduces some factors in the evaluation method of enterprise equipment. At present, there are three kinds of instruments and equipment evaluation methods that are widely accepted in enterprises, that is, market comparison method. Cost and income methods. This paper analyzes the equipment evaluation of enterprises and universities in detail, compares the differences between the two and finds out the reasons, and then introduces the replacement cost, entity depreciation, functional depreciation, economic depreciation in the enterprise equipment evaluation. The life cycle cost and life span of the equipment are used to perfect the evaluation index of valuable equipment in colleges and universities. Then the weight of the index is calculated by AHP, and the life cycle factor is introduced, and the comparison results are put forward in five stages after the evaluation. In addition, this paper also improves the scoring method. At last, three equipments are selected randomly, which are used in service and two new evaluation systems, and the evaluation results are analyzed and compared in detail. There are two innovations in this paper: first, the detailed index of input cost and purchase management is added to the evaluation system to make the index system more complete, and the weight of index is calculated by analytic hierarchy process (AHP). The life cycle five-stage classification evaluation comparison is put forward to make the evaluation more fair. The new scoring method can fully reflect the advantages and disadvantages of the equipment and make the evaluation system more scientific. The second is to select three valuable equipments in College A randomly to evaluate them with two kinds of evaluation systems which are currently in use and newly constructed. After careful analysis, the evaluation results of the new evaluation system are more scientific, reasonable and fair.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：G647

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 汪濤;牟志平;;關(guān)于高校教學(xué)科研儀器設(shè)備評估的思考——析《普通高等學(xué)校基本辦學(xué)條件指標(試行)》對高校教學(xué)科研儀器設(shè)備管理工作的影響[J];安徽建筑工業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(自然科學(xué)版);2011年02期

2 程天寶;;高校貴重儀器設(shè)備管理研究——關(guān)于實現(xiàn)高校貴重儀器設(shè)備使用效率最大化的思考[J];西華大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);2006年02期

3 崔運鵬;錢平;蘇曉鷺;;基于層次分析法的動態(tài)指標體系管理系統(tǒng)及其應(yīng)用[J];地球信息科學(xué);2007年01期

4 傅恩;建立設(shè)備管理指標體系[J];工程機械與維修;2002年05期

5 武春江;;高校實驗室設(shè)備投資績效評估體系探析[J];中國科教創(chuàng)新導(dǎo)刊;2008年29期

6 陳研;王玉芬;;高校教育功效評估初探[J];鞍山師范學(xué)院學(xué)報;2012年05期

7 畢建杰;高軍;常安瑛;;提高貴重儀器設(shè)備效益評價體系的研究[J];高校實驗室工作研究;1998年04期

8 曹愛紅;;提高高校貴重儀器設(shè)備使用效益的研究與探索[J];中國現(xiàn)代教育裝備;2009年07期

9 張勝文;程運福;;控制論在教學(xué)設(shè)備評估中的應(yīng)用探討[J];科技信息(科學(xué)教研);2007年34期

10 閆樹剛;魏朝俊;唐劍;;提高高校實驗室大型儀器使用率的方法探討[J];中國現(xiàn)代教育裝備;2012年17期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前7條

1 陶輝輝;基于JSF高校設(shè)備管理系統(tǒng)的研究[D];安徽理工大學(xué);2010年

2 袁國鎮(zhèn);機器設(shè)備資產(chǎn)評估研究與實證分析[D];西南交通大學(xué);2004年

3 毛遠英;航天型號研制項目風險識別與評估方法研究[D];西北工業(yè)大學(xué);2005年

4 何玲;普通高校內(nèi)部專業(yè)評估研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2009年

5 殷元元;高校儀器設(shè)備供應(yīng)管理信息系統(tǒng)的設(shè)計與實現(xiàn)[D];中國海洋大學(xué);2008年

6 陳建超;高等學(xué)校內(nèi)部評估機制研究[D];福建師范大學(xué);2009年

7 李寧;基于平衡計分卡的政府門戶網(wǎng)站績效評估體系研究[D];西北大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號：1882547