以跨平臺資料庫整合探究國內高等教育機構國際化現況：支持校務研究為導向

To Explore the Current Status of Internationalization of Domestic Higher Education Institutions through Cross-Platform Database Integration: A Support-Oriented Institutional Research

陳繼成(Chi-Chen Chen)；蘇盟惠(Meng-Huey Su)

校務研究 ； 高等教育國際化 ； 跨平臺資料庫整合 ； cross-platform database integration ； institutional research ； internationalization of higher education

測驗學刊

68卷1期（2021 / 03 / 31）

25 - 51

繁體中文

高等教育機構國際化往往是評定高等教育機構辦學品質的重要指標之一。過去的相關研究指出，高等教育國際化包含了教師、學生、學術與課程等內涵，依其形式可分為在地國際化與國外國際化。考量主流的世界大學排名國際化指標僅聚焦於國際師生比例與國際合作數量，本研究進一步串聯「大專校院課程教學網」、「大專校院校務資訊公開平臺」、科技部「學術統計資料庫」，以及「Scopus 學術資料庫」，整合出四個國際化指標，以探究不同大學的國際化現況：「大學國際化環境營造（國內）」、「學術環境國際化（國內）」、「國際化學術交流（國外）」，以及「國際學術合作交流」。本研究除探究此測量模式之效度，並建議以此作為大學國際化相關決策支援方向，亦藉此指標調查目前國內高等教育機構之國際化情形。結果顯示，此測量模式具備建構效度與效標關聯效度。在國內大學的表現上，一般大學在所有指標上之表現均優於科技大學、公立大學，亦均優於私立大學。此外，受「邁向頂尖大學計畫」補助之十二所大學在所有國際化指標上顯著高於其他大學。本研究提供了國內高等教育機構評估大學國際化之模式，並進行國際化現況之初步調查，藉以提供高等教育機構之決策者在調查自身所屬機構國際化時，有更佳之測量模式與更充足的資訊做運用與決策。

The internationalization of higher education is often one of the key indicators to evaluate the quality of higher education institutions. It includes the connotation of the academic parts, curriculum, teachers, and students, which can be further divided into domestic and abroad internationalization. The present study accessed the databases, ＂(Higher Education) Course Information website＂, ＂Information Platform for College and University Institute Research＂, ＂Academic Statistics Database of Ministry of Science and Technology＂, and ＂Scopus＂ to generate four internationalization indicators: ＂university internationalization environment construction (domestic)＂, ＂internationalization of academic environment (domestic)＂, ＂international academic exchange (abroad)＂, and ＂international academic cooperation and exchange＂, to explore the current status of internationalization of universities in Taiwan. The structure and validity of this measurement model can be used to support university internationalization related decisions, and the indicators are employed to uncover the internationalization of domestic higher education institutions. The results connote measurement quality in both construct and criterion-related validity. Results show that general universities perform better than all universities of science and technology on all the four indicators, with the public universities performing better than private ones. Besides, the 12 universities in ＂Aim for Top University Project＂ perform significantly better than all the other universities. This also witnesses the effectiveness of the ＂Aim for Top University Project＂. This study provides a model with four indicators to help explore the status quo of internationalization, and a preliminary probe on the internationalization of domestic higher education institutions. This endeavor seeks to render more robust measurement models along with adequate information required for decision making in higher education institutions with reference to internationalization.

1. 湯堯,黎士鳴(2019)。全球化校園之芻議：以移動力為基礎。學校行政雙月刊，123，99-120。
   連結：
2. 楊正誠(2018)。高等教育國際化的概念框架與策略發展：評《紛亂中的高等教育：改變中的世界的國際化》一書。當代教育研究，26(1)，115-127。
   連結：
3. 戴曉霞(2004)。高等教育的國際化：亞太國家外國學生政策之比較分析。教育研究集刊，50(2)，53-84。
   連結：
4. Altbach, P. G.,Knight, J.(2007).The internationalization of higher education: Motiva-tions and realities.Journal of Studies in International Education,11(3-4),290-305.
5. Awang, Z.(2012).Structural equation modeling using AMOS graphic.Malaysia:PenerbitPress.
6. Beelen, J.,Jones, E.(2015).Redefining internationalization at home.The European Higher Education Area: Be-tween critical reflections and future policies
7. Brewer, E.(2004).From student mobility to internationalization at home.conference on New Directions in International Education: Building Context,Connections and Knowledge,WI:
8. Browne, M. W.,Cudeck, R.(1993).Alternative ways of assessing model fit.Testing structural equation models,New-bury Park, CA:
9. Chang, D. F.,Lin, N. J.(2018).Applying CIPO indicators to examine internationaliza-tion in higher education institutions in Taiwan.International Journal of Educational Development,63,20-28.
10. Chin, M. C.,Ching, G. S.(2009).Trends and Indicators of Taiwan’s Higher EducationInternationalization.The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher,18(2),185-203.
11. Ching, G. S.,Chin, M. C.(2012).Managing higher education institution internationali-zation: Contemporary efforts of a university in Taiwan.International Journal of Re-search Studies in Management,1(1),3-16.
12. Crowther, P.,Joris, M.,Otten, M.,Nilsson, B.,Teekens, H.,Wachter, B.(2000).Inter-nationalisation at home: A position paper.Amsterdam, The Netherlands:EAIE.
13. de Wit, H.,Hunter, F.,Howard, L.,Egron-Polak, E.(2015).Directorate-general for in-ternal policies, policy department B: Structural and cohesion policies: Culture andeducation.Internationalisation.
14. Fornell, C.,Larcker, D. F.(1981).Structural equation models with unobservable vari-ables and measurement error: Algebra and statistics.Journal of Marketing Research,18(3),382-388.
15. Hair, J. F.,Black, W. C.,Babin, B. J.,Anderson, R. E.,Tatham, R. L.(2006).Multivariatedata analysis.New Jersey, NJ:Prentice-Hall.
16. International Association of Universities. [IAU] (2006). Towards a century of cooperation:Internationalization of higher education IAU statement. Retrieved form http://www.unesco.org/iau/tfi_statement.html
17. Knight, J.(2006).Internationalization of higher education: New directions, new chal-lenges.Paris, France:IAU.
18. Knight, J.(2003).Updated definition of internationalization.International Higher Educa-tion,33,2-3.
19. Knight, J.(Ed.) ,Wit, H.(Ed.)(1999).Quality and internationalisation in higher educa-tion.Paris, France:Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
20. Knight, J.,de Wit, H.(2018).Internationalization of higher education: Past and future.International Higher Education,95,2-4.
21. Kovács, I. V.,Tarrósy, I.(2017).The Internationalisation of higher education in a globalworld.Joint modules and in-ternationalisation in higher education,Frankfurt am Main, Germany:
22. Mandinach, E. B.,Gummer, E. S.(2013).A systemic view of implementing data literacyin educator preparation.Educational Researcher,42(1),30-37.
23. Mestenhauser, J. A.(2003).Building bridges.International Educator,12(3),6-11.
24. Quacquarelli Symonds. [QS] (2020). QS world university rankings: Methodology. Retriev-ed from https://www.topuniversities.com/qs-world-university-rankings/methodology.
25. Schumacker, R. E.,Lomax, R. G.(2004).A beginner’s guide to structural equation mo-deling.Mahwah, NJ:Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
26. Times Higher Education. [THE] (2020). THE world university rankings 2020: Methodo-logy. Retrieved from https://reurl.cc/WExxdZ.
27. Tóth, J.,Tarrósy, I.(2002).Co-operation between science and economy in Hungary: Theplace and role of universities.Der Donauraum,42(4),62-72.
28. 王保進(2016)。建立確保學生學習成效品質文化之校務研究機制。評鑑雙月刊，60，13-17。
29. 何希慧(2015)。大學建立校務研究體制之建議：以學習成效評估及提升機制為例。評鑑雙月刊，57，38-41。
30. 李家宗(2018)。我國校務研究議題發展與個案研究。高等教育研究紀要，9，17-46。
31. 姜麗娟(2011).大學國際化評鑑.臺北市:高等教育評鑑中心基金會.
32. 張珍瑋(2015)。國家教育研究院教育改革研究機制整合型研究國家教育研究院教育改革研究機制整合型研究,未出版
33. 教育部（2019 年 9 月 5 日）。高等教育深耕計畫。取自 https://reurl.cc/v5aa3l。
34. 教育部（2014 年 3 月 21 日）。邁向頂尖大學計畫期中考評結果與新申請學校審議結果公布。取自 https://reurl.cc/GdjjZp。
35. 彭森明(2013).高等教育校務研究的理念與應用.臺北市:高等教育.
36. 黃建翔(2018)。校務研究應用於高等教育校務經營發展策略規劃與展望。教育行政論壇，10(1)，21-40。
37. 劉孟奇(2016)。以校務研究為校務決策之本。評鑑雙月刊，60，10-12。
38. 蘇彩足(2006)。行政院研究發展考核委員會委託之專題研究成果報告行政院研究發展考核委員會委託之專題研究成果報告,行政院研究發展考核委員會。

1. 廖恩彩,陳婉琪,馬國勳(2022)。新冠疫情下大專生的家庭經濟狀況、心理狀態、學習困境與知覺到的學校資源。調查研究-方法與應用，49，187-264。