我國跨國高等教育服務指標之建構   全文下載

The Construction of Taiwanese Transnationality Index for Higher Education Services

知識經濟與全球化帶動了由美、英、澳等國大學所主導的跨國高等教育之發展，而世界貿易組織（World Trade Organization, WTO）要求會員國履行開放國內教育市場的承諾，則促使跨國高等教育服務的提供模式趨於多樣化。過去十幾年，許多先進國家的大學紛紛透過課程輸出、線上教學和設立海外分校等方式，積極開拓境外教育服務；對照之下，新加坡與馬來西亞等亞洲國家卻是積極引進跨國高等教育服務，吸引國際學生前去該國就讀，並提出延攬畢業生留在該國就業的人才策略。想要迎頭趕上亞洲鄰國在跨國高等教育方面的進展，我國的首要之務便是先明暸這些國家跨國高等教育的發展趨勢，並掌握我國大學在各種跨國高等教育服務型態的樣貌，俾做為未來發展策略之指引。本文先經由文獻探討研析出含括各類跨國高等教育服務型態的問卷內容，繼而進行兩回合德懷術問卷的調查。在統整與分析所有專家意見之後，建構出一套包含三個要素、七個構面、41個子項目的我國跨國高等教育服務型態指標系統。此外，本文建議，政府權責單位應採取適切政策引導跨國高等教育服務指標之發展，並透過本文的服務指標做為檢核工具，落實相關政策的執行，如此一來，非但可推進我國高等教育國際化之進程，同時可達成國家延攬國外優秀人才之戰略規劃。

The recent development of transnational higher education has been driven by the forces of knowledge economy and globalization. The provision of transnational higher education also took new forms thanks to the request by WTO on its members to open up domestic education market. Universities from advanced countries have been rushing to expand their educational services abroad through the export of curriculum, online education, and overseas branch campus. Taking advantage of the expanded provision of transnational higher education from advanced countries, Singapore and Malaysia have been able to transform themselves into regional education hubs by first attracting international students to study then stay and work there after graduation. If Taiwan wants to catch up with her neighbors in the development of transnational higher education, authorities concerned should first have a comprehensive grasp of the situation of transnational higher education in Taiwan before drawing up a grand strategy. This paper tries to develop a framework of indexes for conducting such a comprehensive investigation. In order not to be constrained by existing indexes designed by domestic institutions, the authors adopt indexes used by international organizations and scholarly research to construct a Taiwanese transnationality index for higher education. After two rounds of Delphi questionnaires, the authors arrive at a framework of indexes with a total of 41 indexes for measuring transnational higher education in Taiwan. The authors suggest that the authorities should make wise use of this index, not only for the advancement of internationalization of higher education in Taiwan but also to incorporate this index into a national “brain gain” strategy.