我國大學入學制度公平性之能力取向分析 Analyzing Social Justice in Access to University in Taiwan from the Capability Approach

Liu, Yu-Chih
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
我國自2002年實施大學多元入學方案以來,在入學機會及弱勢入學方面,均仍有許多公平問題值得深入探究。能力取向相較於其他教育公平理論關照更加全面,且能力取向在大學入學制度之研究尚待開拓,過去國內以能力取向探討教育問題之研究,均未建立分析架構,因此,本研究透過詮釋學方法及文件分析法,深入探討能力取向之個體殊異性、資源與轉化因素、抉擇(能動性)、能力與功能運作等核心概念後建立分析架構,並據以分析我國大學入學相關政策、法規及實務上的公平問題。研究發現分述如下: 一、大學入學機會:(一)雖然目前已有繁星推薦、個人申請、考試分發及特殊選才等入學管道,但其中只有個人申請及特殊選才能夠彰顯個體殊異性;(二)家庭經濟及文化資本是影響個體學業表現的重要資源,而個體身心健康、父母職業、高中教師資歷、個體所在縣市等,亦是重要的轉化因素;(三)即使入學管道相當多元,但家庭社經地位影響個體抉擇,且指定科目考試與學科能力測驗有其時間序,考生報考指定科目考試未必出自自由抉擇;(四)符合學力資格,且身心狀態都能符合大學招生規定者才有機會進入大學;(五)選才將個體的優勢條件視為準備好上大學的條件,忽視個體達成該項表現的過程,也未關注到大學入學後能成功的能力;(六)高等教育階層化,家庭社經地位較低的學生進入學費昂貴品質較差的大學。 二、弱勢入學:(一)以經濟或文化不利定義弱勢略顯狹隘,並且以身分界定弱勢也忽視個體殊異性;(二)資源補助以經濟為主,忽視個體不同需求,且未關注個體抱負的重要性;(三)入學管道僅個人申請及特殊選才能凸顯弱勢生的特殊境遇。 針對前述問題,本研究提出實務改革措施及後續研究建議如下: 一、大學入學機會:(一)達成教育機會均等的政策目標,不宜由入學率之量化數據來呈現,必須深入探討限制個體實現這項功能運作的原因,逐一審視資源、轉化因素、個體抱負等關鍵,並將個體就讀的大學之品質亦納入衡量指標;(二)個人申請及特殊選才最能彰顯個體殊異性與能動性,也能以更多元資訊評價學生,應給予大學擴充名額的空間,並持續辦理招生專業化,提升審查員知能,避免個人申請選才淪為積點競賽;(三)個人申請審查尺規之訂定,應更全面考量準備好進入大學的能力,而不是僅以學業表現或優勢條件來選才;(四)調整考試期程,讓考生能真正依照自己的傾向做選擇。 二、弱勢入學:(一)弱勢定義範圍應更為擴大,並且讓不符合現行法定弱勢身分,但受教育之能力確實受到剝奪之個體有陳述的機會;(二)必須察覺「多重弱勢者」其能力受限的程度更為嚴重,分配資源時,應更加細緻地排序;(三)部分大學優先或逕行錄取弱勢生的作法應予修正,可參照美國1978年的Allan Bakke案之後建立的兩階段審查模式;(四)大學校系在建立書審評量尺規時,可將能力、能動性、抱負等概念作為重要的選才構面。 針對後續研究,建議可更進一步採取訪談法,了解個別學生的處境,另外,本研究以外國研究成果提出「準備好進入大學」、「入學後能成功的能力」之能力清單,未來可進一步建構合於我國的能力清單。
Since the implementation of the College Multiple Entrance Program in Taiwan in 2002, there are still many fairness issues that are worthy of in-depth exploration, in terms of admission opportunities and disadvantaged admissions. The capability approach is more comprehensive than other educational equity theories; however, the study of the capability approach has yet to be fully explored. In the past, domestic research on the capability approach, which discussed educational issues, has not established an analytical framework. Therefore, this research uses hermeneutics methods and documentary research, making in-depth exploration of individual diversity, resource and conversion factors; choice (agency); capability and functioning; and other core concepts of the capability approach; and then establishes an analysis framework to analyze relevant policies, regulations and practices of university admissions in Taiwan on fairness issues. The research findings are as follows: 1. University admission opportunities: (1) Although there are currently four admission channels including the stars program, personal application, examination and placement, and special admission program, only personal application and special admission program can demonstrate individual uniqueness; (2) Family economic and cultural capital are important resources that affect individual academic performance; individual physical and mental health, parental occupation, the applicants’ senior high school teachers’ qualifications, and the individual's geographical location are also important conversion factors; (3) Even though the admission channels are quite diverse, the socioeconomic status of the family affects the individual's choice; moreover, the Advanced Subjects Test and the General Scholastic Ability Test have their time sequence, and candidates may not make free choices when applying for the Advanced Subjects Test; (4) Only those who meet the equivalent education level and meet the university admission regulations can have the opportunity to enter the university; (5) The selection considers the individual's meritocracy as a condition for university readiness, ignores the process by which the individual achieves the performance, and does not pay attention to the capabilities to succeed after admission to the university; (6) Stratification in higher education; students with lower family socioeconomic status enter universities with expensive tuition and lower quality. 2. Enrollment by the disadvantaged: (1) The definition of disadvantage by economic or cultural disadvantage is slightly narrow, andthe definition of disadvantage by identity also ignores individual diversity; (2) Resource subsidies are based on economy, ignoring the different needs of individuals, and failing to pay attention to the importance of individual aspirations; (3) Among the admission channels, only personal applications and special admission program can highlight the special circumstances of disadvantaged students. In response to the aforementioned issues, this study proposes practical reform measures and follow-up research recommendations as follows: 1. University admission opportunities: (1) Achieving the policy goal of equal educational opportunities should not be presented by quantitative data depicting the enrollment ratio. It is necessary to thoroughly explore the reasons that restrict individuals from achieving the actualization of this policy, and examine key factors, such as resources, conversion factors, and individual aspirations. The quality of the individual’s university should also be included as a measure. (2) Personal applications and special admission program can best demonstrate an individual's heterogeneity and agency, and can also enable students to be evaluated with more meta-information. The university should be given room to expand the number of places, and continue to handle admissions specialization, improving the knowledge of examiners, to prevent personal application selection from becoming a point race. (3) The establishment of personal application document review rubrics should take a more comprehensive consideration of the level of university readiness, instead of selecting candidates based on academic performance or meritocracy. (4) Adjusting the examination schedule so that candidates can genuinely choose according to their own preferences. 2. Disadvantaged admission: (1) The scope of the definition of “disadvantaged” should be expanded, so that individuals who do not meet the current statutory disadvantaged status, but whose capability to receive education is indeed deprived, have the opportunity to make a statement. (2) It is necessary to realize that"multiple disadvantaged persons" are more severely restricted in their capabilities. When allocating resources, they should be sorted more carefully. (3) The practice of some universities preferentially or directly enrolling disadvantaged students should be revised. The two-stage review model established after the Allan Bakke case in the United States in 1978 can be a reference. (4) When establishing document review rubrics, the university department can take concepts such as capability, agency,and aspirations as an important aspect of selection. For follow-up research, it is recommended to take further interviews to understand the situation of individual students. In addition, this research uses foreign research results to propose a capability list of"university readiness" and "capability to succeed after admission", which in the future can be further constructed into a capability list that fits the situation in Taiwan.
能力取向, 大學入學, 公平, capability approach, university admission, social justice