臺灣高等教育各學門實施前段不分系課程的知識理念探討－全球化知識生產模式轉變之分析

The “Declaration of Majors in Sophomore or Junior Year” of Undergraduate Curriculum in Taiwan－the Analysis of Transformation of Knowledge Production from Mode 1 to Mode 2

近年來，「大一不分系」或「大學分院不分系」的議題不斷在臺灣高等教育的法制與政策上引起廣泛的討論與關注。2007年以來，臺灣已有第一波大規模的大學前段不分系實踐，2008年的大學招生中有更多院校科系加入不分系招生的實踐，再再顯示此趨勢成為當前我國高等教育課程理念與實踐的重要論述，亟需加以探討。從全球化知識論述的觀點來看，Gibbons、Limoges與Nowotny（1994）提出了在全球化脈絡下知識產生了從「知識生產符碼一」（mode1）到「知識生產符碼二」（mode2）的變遷。當前臺灣的大學部課程有一股走向學科領域界限模糊的趨勢－大學前段不分系的制度改革，正可由全球化知識生產模式轉變為「跨學科」的典範來分析。本文研究的目的有四。一、從全球化知識生產模式轉變的理念來論述大學跨學科制度的課程實踐。二、探討臺灣高等教育實施大學前段不分系政策的課程理念與全球化知識生產的關聯。三、從2007年各學門實施前段不分系的設立宗旨來分析其中全球化知識生產模式轉變的意義。四、從教授訪談來分析各學門實施前段不分系的知識信念，並探討其與模式二知識之關係。本文希望藉由此大學部課程實踐與知識信念脈絡性的分析與探究，提供未來各大專院校課程實施之借鏡。本文研究方法上主要採取訪談法，來探究不同學門實施前段不分系的知識信念。並輔以對其設立宗旨之文件分析來探討其中的全球化知識生產之意義。在研究對象上，作者選取2007年電機資工學門、理學院學門、法律學門、管理學門、語文學門、傳播學門、人文社會學門、景觀遊憩、生物科技、藝術設計學門等已實施前段不分系的機構中，並從關鍵教授訪談來探究各學門共同面臨全球化知識生產模式轉變的知識信念，並進一步分析各學門實施前段不分系的理念。本文主要研究發現如下：\r一、從設立宗旨看各學門實施前段不分系的理念與全球化知識生產的關係在實施理念與知識信念方面，臺灣第一波大學前段不分系各學門實施前段不分系的理念主軸為強化實作性並培育跨領域的整合人才，此注重實務的創新與整合，基本上正是一種Mode二的全球化知識生產模式。二、各學門教授對於前段不分系的知識信念大致可歸納為下列五種\r臺灣第一波大學前段不分系的實踐以來，教授的知識信念大致可歸納為下列五種：一、學門本身透過知識的串接，預期在實務界會更有競爭力，有其市場需求；二、學門知識本身較純理論性，需要與其他專長領域連結，增加其實作性；三、學門本身知識有很多共通的基礎知識，領域界限在模糊中；四、希望學門的大學生在大學前段先有通識素養；五、有意識到學門領域畢業後學生需要面對複雜的人事物，因此需要在大學階段了解其它領域的知識；整體而言正是跨學科與實作性兩大知識信念，與全球化模式二的知識生產是相呼應的。

The issues of “declaration of majors in sophomore or junior Year” and “college allocation only， no major specified in universities” have， in recent years， brought a widespread discussion and considerable concern to higher education in terms of laws and policies in Taiwan. In 2007， a string of revolutionary policy of “enrollment without major specification” was adopted by some colleges and universities. It was the first large-scale practice of “non-major specification for the first half of university courses.” Since then， more schools following this trend has become a critical issue in curriculum in Taiwan higher education and attracted research interest for further studies.From the perspective of global discourse on knowledge， Gibbons et al. (1994) argued that the form of knowledge production had turned into Mode 2 from Mode 1 under the globalization context. Based on this， the trend of “non-major specification for the first half of university courses” conducted in Taiwan， blurring the boundaries of disciplines， can also be examined as a transformation of knowledge production from a mode of globalization into a paradigm of inter-discipline.Four purposes have been tried in this paper. First， the curriculum practice under the inter-discipline policy is discussed from the perspective of transformation of global knowledge production. Secondly， the correlation between the policy of “non-major specification for the first half of university courses” and the production of global knowledge is analyzed. Then the meaning of transformation of knowledge production from the adoption of “non-major specification for the first half of university courses” in Taiwan is examined. Finally， the relation between the concept of knowledge behind “non-major specification for the first half of university courses” policy and Mode 2 knowledge production is explored from the professors’\rThe research method consists of interviewing and document analysis. The documents analyzed come from the disciplines which have adopted “non-major specification for the first half of university courses”. Professors from these disciplines were also interviewed.The main findings include several facets. First， for the correlation between the policy of “non-major specification for the first half of university courses” and the production of global knowledge， the policy adopted belongs to Mode 2 knowledge production as the policy aims to cultivate students’ ability of innovation and integration of knowledge from various disciplines.For the concept of knowledge the interviewees have with “non-major specification for the first half of university course，” five types were found. First， the students with combined knowledge become more competitive and welcomed in the workplace. Secondly， connecting theoretical knowledge with practical skills in various disciplines are strongly required. Thirdly， common knowledge in different disciplines remains and blurs the boundary among them. Furthermore， students receive more liberal arts education during the first half of undergraduate curriculum. Finally， students have to learn knowledge of other disciplines to cope with the requirement in their career. In sum， the concept of knowledge toward inter-discipline and practical learning corresponds with Mode 2 knowledge production.