審議民主如何創造校園公民？以中國文化大學吸煙區規劃和英語畢業門檻之 審議活動為例

How Deliberative Democracy on Campus Shapes Citizenship Consciousness of College Students: Cases of Deliberative Practices on Guidelines of ''Designated Smoking Areas'' and ''English Proficiency Proof Required for Graduation'' in the Chinese Culture University

由於我國校園的威權環境普遍缺乏民主操作，年輕世代或許因而缺乏民主實踐所 需的感情與技能，故即便教師引入審議民主元素予以改善，過程中也很容易出現由教 師與意見領袖主導討論的現象。本文首先整理審議民主近年的研究文獻，認為研究者 或需理解學生的生活脈絡限制，挑選學生身為「多元利害相關人」的校園公共議題， 並淡化教師權威者角色，才能給予大學生民主操作能力的適當評價。 為證明此項觀點，研究者在 2018 年 8 月至 2019 年 8 月的一年間，選定中國文化 大學的二年級跨域課程，以大四學生帶動審議民主操作，先選定「吸煙區規劃」和「英 語畢業門檻」兩項與該校學生權益相關的公共議題，接著進行公民共識會議操作，觀 察學生在「效能感」、「民主感情」和「認知反思」各層面的變化，結果發現：在「與 學生切身相關」與「減少教師干預」的情形下，學生有能力發揮優良的審議能力，提 出突破現狀框架的共好方案。 更重要的是，本研究也發現審議過程除讓學生肯認自己的主體效能感，也藉著對 異己者的同理和顛覆過往認知，而能肯認不同個體在民主體系中的價值，因此審議活 動對於民主教育而言，不是像傳統教育僅停留在「認知」上的增能，而是在「行為」 與「感情」面讓參與者產生互相強化的全面成長，進而催生出具有民主技能的校園公 民。

The insufficiency of democratic operations in Taiwan's administrative sector-centered campuses has resulted in the young generation lacking necessary sentiments and skills in carrying out democratic practices. Even when some of the instructors introduce deliberative practices, the students overall are still inclined to be dominated by teachers and opinion leaders. This article reviewed recent literature on deliberative democracy and concluded that we may risk making inappropriate assessment on university students' abilities in exercising democracy. We must fully comprehend the contexts of students' campus lives and then choose public issues which can integrate students as diverse stakeholders. To verify this notion, from August 2018 to August 2019, the researcher chose cross-fields courses for sophomore students in the Chinese Culture University and assigned senior students to lead deliberations in the selected courses. The leading students chose both ''smoking area designation'' and ''English proficiency proof required for graduation'' as topics for deliberation as they were closely related to students' rights. The leading senior students conducted deliberation practices similar to ''citizens' consensus meetings'' while observing the changes of students in ''self-efficacy'', ''democratic sentiments,'' and ''cognitive reflections'' throughout a series of deliberative activities. The findings suggest that, under the conditions of ''being relevant to students'' and ''minimizing teachers' authoritarian role,'' the students can demonstrate decent deliberative abilities and deliver mutually beneficial proposals beyond the existing frameworks. More importantly, this research also finds that the deliberative exercises allowed students to acknowledge not only self-efficacy and autonomy, but also the value of diverse individuals in the democratic system. This was made possible by empathizing dissidents and in turn overturning previous cognition patterns as a whole. Therefore, instead of merely providing cognitive knowledge, deliberative measures on campus have reinforced behavioral and sentimental growth of these young participants, thus giving birth to the citizenship consciousness of college students as well as developing their democratic skills.