從設計領域觀點探索大學人文及社會科學領域的社群參與

Exploring Community Engagement of the Humanities and Social Sciences Disciplines in Universities from the Perspective of Design Disciplines

本研究運用個案研究法，從設計觀點探索「人文及社會科學知識跨界應用能力培育計畫（HFCC）」專案，針對五所基礎人文及社會科學領域系所大學團隊成員進行訪談。結果發現：1.場域設置考量包括「可控制性」與「利害關係人複雜度」，而場域助理扮演關鍵角色；2.社群參與課程的創新包括長期與實地的「敘事轉譯」以及「共創的社會實踐」以促進「互為主體」，並可視為行銷創新與組織創新；3.跨域與設計領域合作的模式，「人社領域議題導向」課程係經由「設計思考」融入課程，設計領域扮演「促進者」與「專案管理者」角色，而在「設計技術應用導向」課程合作則可區分為「共同設計者」與「啟發者」；4.在創業案例部分，本研究發現人社領域的部署文化創業模式，其價值主張為文化的稀缺性，因而形成獨特性與正當性，有助於累積社會資本以促成創業。此案例貫串了前述場域與課程，特別是透過組織創新，建構了大學培育創業的機制。

This study employed case study approach to explore the practical experiences of community engagement of the humanities and social sciences disciplines in universities from the typical perspective of the field of design. It explored the Humanities, Field, and Co-Creation (HFCC) Project initiated by the Department of Information and Technology Education, Ministry of Education, Taiwan. Specifically, this study interviewed university project team members from five departments or institutes of fundamental humanities and social sciences to investigate field settings, planning of a community engagement curriculum, and interdisciplinary collaboration with those in the design field, as well as entrepreneurship cases and considerations. Research results revealed that controllability and stakeholder complexity are considerations related to field settings. Moreover, field assistants played a crucial role in field settings. Impressive community engagement curricula were divided into long-term fieldwork for “narrative translation” and “co-creation of social practice” that facilitated intersubjectivity and could be treated as marketing innovation and organizational innovation. In terms of interdisciplinary collaboration between those in humanities, social sciences, and design, the integration of design thinking into social topic–oriented courses was observed, with the discipline of design serving as a facilitator and project manager. Furthermore, the roles of designers in design application–oriented curricula could be categorized into co-designer and inspirer. Regarding case analysis on entrepreneurship, this study found that the value proposition of sociology-based entrepreneurship cases was relatively scarce, thus bringing uniqueness and legitimacy. Sociology-based entrepreneurship was regarded as a culture-deploying model to accumulating social capital for entrepreneurship and the key point was organizational innovation that would build a mechanism to foster entrepreneurship in a university.