臺灣原住民族高等教育政策分析

A Study on Higher Education Policies for Indigenous Residents in Taiwan

黃家凱
Chia-Kai Huang

Doi:10.3966/181665042018091403002


所屬期刊: 第14卷第3期 「教育政策與制度」
主編:國立臺灣師範大學教育學系副教授
林子斌
系統編號: vol054_02
主題: 教育政策與制度
出版年份: 2018
作者: 黃家凱
作者(英文): Chia-Kai Huang
論文名稱: 臺灣原住民族高等教育政策分析
論文名稱(英文): A Study on Higher Education Policies for Indigenous Residents in Taiwan
共同作者:
最高學歷:
校院名稱:
系所名稱:
語文別: 中文
論文頁數: 32
中文關鍵字: 教育公平; 原住民族; 高等教育; 教育政策分析; 政策週期
英文關鍵字: education equity, indigenous residents; higher education; education policy analysis; policy cycle
服務單位: 國立臺灣師範大學教育學系
稿件字數: 20615
作者專長: 高等教育; 原住民教育; 人才培育; 後設評鑑
投稿日期: 2018/6/26
論文下載: pdf檔案icon
摘要(中文): 本研究之目的在於描繪臺灣原住民族高等教育政策執行的情形,以釐清政策
實踐之結果及其影響。以Stephen J. Ball 的「政策週期」作為研究分析架構,採文
件分析法及次級資料分析進行。分析資料來源包括原住民族教育政策白皮書、教
育部統計處及行政院原住民族委員會之統計調查資料。透過調查統計資料分析臺
灣高等教育原住民族學生就學及就業狀況,以了解高等教育原住民學生就學狀況,
及對其未來職涯發展的連結。研究結果顯示:一、高等教育大眾化的結果,雖提
升原住民族學生進入高等教育的機會,惟仍存在數量及品質上的不公平現象;二、
高等教育原住民學生人才結構呈現失衡現象,高階人才(如碩、博士)的培育缺
乏積極性的支持;三、原住民學生與非原住民學生在科系選擇上有同質化現象,
然而原住民學生在科系的選擇上與其自身文化背景脈絡缺乏連結,且缺乏學習志
趣,導致原住民學生休學及退學比例高;四、高等教育原住民學生畢業後,在就
業方面呈現出不同學歷文憑間低薪、低就情形,所從事之行業及職業特性亦以高
替代性、低技術性工作為主。整體而言,原住民族高等教育人才培育政策目標與
政策實踐結果呈現不一致現象。透過本研究初步描繪臺灣原住民族高等教育人才
培育政策之圖像,進一步探究政策實踐是改善、惡化或創造了新的學習問題。
摘要(英文): This study aims at analyzing the influences of higher education policies on
Taiwanese indigenous students. This study applies Stephen J. Ball’s “policy cycle” as
framework and document analysis and secondary data analysis as analytical methods.
Data is from the white paper on the educational policy for indigenous peoples,
Department of Statistics of Ministry of Education and the survey conducted by the
Council of Indigenous Peoples. The results show that: 1. Massification of Higher
Education in Taiwan increases the number of indigenous students’ enrolling in higher
institutions. However, there is still unequal status on the quality and quantity between
Han Chinese and indigenous students studying in higher education sector; 2. There is
an imbalance structure of indigenous students studying in higher education and a lack
of support to those reading for higher degrees including master or doctoral students;
3. A similar trend could be seen on the choice of their major between indigenous and
non-indigenous students. However, indigenous students’ majors are not related to their
interests and cultural background. It results in a high drop-out rate for indigenous
students; 4. Indigenous graduates tend to have lower salary and lower skill requirement
jobs. Overall, the purpose and outcomes of Taiwanese indigenous higher education
policies do not match with each other. Through the analyses of this study, the sketch of
indigenous people’s higher education status is presented.
參考文獻: 內政部戶政司(2018a)。人口數按年齡及婚姻狀況。取自http://www.ris.gov.tw/
zh_TW/346
內政部戶政司(2018b)。縣市原住民人口按性別及身分。取自http://www.ris.gov.
tw/zh_TW/346
王麗雲、甄曉蘭(2007)。臺灣偏遠地區教育機會均等政策模式之分析與反省。
教育資料集刊,36,25-46。
呂佩真、鄭勝耀(2010)。四位國民小學課輔教師教學信念之研究。載於淡江大
學師資培育中心暨課程研究所(主編),轉弱為強:弱勢學生教育的課程與
教學(頁247-279)。臺北市:師大書苑。
林生傳(2005)。教育社會學。臺北市:巨流。
阿浪.滿拉旺、楊錦浪(2010)。原住民族教育的省思與展望:87 - 95 學年度《原
住民族教育調查統計報告》解析。取自http://www.apc.gov.tw/portal/docDetail.
html?CID=DC739DB337374216&DID=0C3331F0EBD318C29D4257D42BDA
0B16
行政院原住民族委員會(2012)。101 學年度原住民族教育調查統計。取自http://
www.ns.org.tw/download/20130701/101 學年度原住民族教育調查報告全文.pdf
行政院原住民族委員會(2016)。105 年原住民族就業狀況調查。臺北市:作者。
行政院原住民族委員會(2017)。105 學年度原住民族教育調查統計。取自http://
www.ns.org.tw/download/20130701/105 學年度原住民族教育調查統計.pdf
國家教育研究院(2017)。中華民國教育年報電子書105 年版。取自https://www.
naer.edu.tw/files/11-1000-1310.php?Lang=zh-tw
教育部(2001)。教育改革之檢討與改進會議。臺北市:作者。
教育部(2016)。102 - 104 大學校院原住民專班名額一覽表。取自https://depart.
moe.edu.tw/ED2200/News_Content.aspx?n=38E925417DBAF594&s=5EEF1F6B
D53A49C0
教育部(2017)。107 學年度原住民專班核定一覽表。取自https://depart.moe.edu.
tw/ed2200/News_Content.aspx?n=5E9ABCBC24AC1122&s=54749249005A1BA7
教育部、行政院原住民族委員會(2011)。原住民族教育政策白皮書。取自
http://www.edu.tw/pages/list.aspx?Node=1255&Type=1&Index=9&wid=45a6f039-
fcaf-44fe-830e-50882aab1121
教育部大專校院校務資訊公開平臺資訊網(2018)。校12. 學雜費減免人數-以
「校」統計。取自https://udb.moe.edu.tw/DetailReportList/%E6%A0%A1%E5%
8B%99%E9%A1%9E
教育部統計處(2017)。106 學年原住民族教育概況分析。取自http://stats.moe.
gov.tw/files/analysis/105native.pdf
教育部統計處(2018a)。大專校院概況表(80 ~ 106 學年度)。取自https://stats.
moe.gov.tw/files/main_statistics/u.xls
教育部統計處(2018b)。原住民學生概況表(87 ~ 106 學年度)。取自https://
stats.moe.gov.tw/files/main_statistics/ob1.xls
教育部統計處(2018c)。106 學年度各級教育統計概況分析。取自http://stats.moe.
gov.tw/files/analysis/106_all_level.pdf
許雅玲(2018)。106 學年原住民族教育概況分析。取自http://stats.moe.gov.tw/
files/analysis/106native.pdf
陳麗珠(2007)。論資源分配與教育機會均等之關係:以國民教育為例。教育研
究與發展期刊,3(3),33-54。
黃雯玲(2017)。原住民族的高等教育人才。原教界,75,6-7。
楊國賜(2018)。高等教育的藍海策略。臺北市:師大書苑。
楊瑩(1995)。教育機會均等:教育社會學的探究。臺北市:師大書苑。
楊瑩(1998)。教育機會均等。載於陳奎?(主編),現代教育社會學(頁269-
313)。臺北市:師大書苑。
楊瑩(1999)。當前臺灣地區教育機會均等問題的探討。載於中華民國比較教育
學會、中國教育學會(主編),社會變遷中的教育機會均等(頁1-28)。臺
北市:揚智。
Apple, M. (1994). Texts and contexts: The state and gender in educational policy.
Curriculum inquiry, 24(3), 349-360.
Ayalon, H., & Shavit, Y. (2004). Educational reforms and inequalities in Israel: The MMI
hypothesis revisited. Sociology of education, 77(2), 103-120.
Ball, S. J. (1990). Politics and policy making in education: Explorations in policy
press.
Ball, S. J. (1998). Big Policies/Small World: An introductionto international perspectives
in education policy. Comparative education, 34(2), 119-130.
Ball, S. J. (2006). Education policy and social class: The selected works of Stephen J.
Ball. London, England: Routledge.
Ball, S. J., Maguire, M., & Bruan, A. (2012). How schools do policy: Policy enactments
in secondary schools. Oxford, England: Routledge.
Ballarino, G., Bernardi, F., Requena, M., & Schadee, H. (2009). Persistent inequalities?
Expansion of education and class inequality in Italy and Spain. European
sociological review, 25(1), 123-138.
Benadusi, L. (2001). Equity and education: A critical review of sociological research and
thought. In W. Hutmacher, D. Cochrane & N. Bottane (Eds.), In pursuit of equity in
education: Using international indicators to compare equity policies (pp. 25-64).
New York, NY: Kluwer academic publishers.
Blossfeld, H., & Shavit, Y. (1993). Persisting barriers: Changes in educational
opportunities in thirteen countries. In Y. Shavit & Hans-Peter Blossfeld (Eds.),
Persistent inequality: Changing educational attainment in thirteen countries (pp.
1-24). San Francisco, CA: Westview Press.
Bowe, R., Ball, S., & Gold, A. (1992). Reforming education and changing schools: Case
studies in policy sociology. London, England: Routledge.
Bowe, R., Ball, S., & Gold, A. (1996). The policy process and the processes of policy. In
J. Ahier, B. Cosin, & M. Hales (Eds), Diversity and change: Education, policy, and
selection (pp. 273-288). London and New York: Routledge Falmer.
Busemeyer, M. R., Cattaneo, M. A., & Wolter, S. C. (2011). Individual policy preferences
for vocational versus academic education: Microlevel evidence for the case of
Switzerland. Journal of european social policy, 21(3), 253-273.
Dye, T. (2016). Understanding public policy (15th ed). Boston, MA: Pearson.
Fazal, R., & Bob, L. (2010). Globalizing education policy. New York, NY: Routledge.
Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative
practices. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
Gutman, A. (1987). States and education. In A. Gutman (Ed.), Democratic education
(pp.19-47). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Hout, M. (2004, July). Maximally maintained inequality revisited: Irish educational
mobility in comparative perspective. Paper presented at the meeting of survey
research center (SRC). Berkeley, CA: University of California.
Lingard, B., & Sellar, S. (2013). Globalization, edu-business and network governance:
the policy sociology of Stephen J. Ball and rethinking education policy analysis.
London Review of education, 11(3), 265-280.
Lucas, S. R. (2001). Effectively maintained inequality: Education transitions, track
mobility, and social background effects. The American journal of sociology, 106(6),
1642-1690.
Mackay, M. (2011). Understanding and applying basic public policy concepts. Guelph,
Canada: University of Guelph.
Mansfield, K. C., Welton, A. D., & Grogan, M. (2014). “Truth or consequences”:
A feminist critical policy analysis of the STEM crisis. International journal of
qualitative studies in education, 27(9), 1155-1182.
Parsons, T. (1970). Quality and inequality in modern society, or social stratification
revisited. In E. O. Laumann, P. M. Siegel, & R. W. Hodge (Eds.), The logic of social
hierarchies (pp. 13-72). Chicago, IL: Markham.
Raftery, A. E., & Hout, M. (1993). Maximally maintained inequality: Expansion, reform
and opportunity in Irish education 1921–1975. Sociology of education 66(1), 41-62.
Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Rochefort, D. A., & Cobb, R. W. (1994). The politics of problem definition: Shaping the
policy agenda. Lawrence, KS: University Press of Kansas.
Taylor, S., Rizvi, F., Lingard, B., & Henry, M. (1997). Educational policy and the politics
of change. London, England: Routledge.
Trow, M. (2006). “Reflections on the transition from elite to mass to universal access:
Forms and phases of higher education in modern societies since WWII”, In James
J. F. F. & P. G. Altbach (Eds.) (2006). International handbook of higher education
(pp.243-280). Doedrecht, Netherlands: Springer.
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (1998). Higher
education in the twenty-first century: Vision and action. Retrieved from http://www.
unesco.org/education/educprog/wche/principal/ket-e.html
The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. (2009). World
conference on higher education: The new dynamics of higher education and
research for societal change and development. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.
unesco.org/images/0018/001832/183277e.pdf
Wedel, J. R., Shore, C., Feldman, G., & Lathrop, S. (2005). Towards an anthropology of
public policy. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science,
600, 30-51.