台灣高等教育國際化之課程探討: 一個敘事性批判民族誌研究

行政院國家科學委員會專題研究計畫 成果報告

台灣高等教育國際化之課程探討: 一個敘事性批判民族誌

研究

研究成果報告(精簡版)

計 畫 類 別 ： 個別型 計 畫 編 號 ： NSC 97-2410-H-004-184- 執 行 期 間 ： 97 年 10 月 01 日至 99 年 07 月 31 日 執 行 單 位 ： 國立政治大學英國語文學系 計 畫 主 持 人 ： 黃怡萍 計畫參與人員： 此計畫無其他參與人員 報 告 附 件 ： 出席國際會議研究心得報告及發表論文 處 理 方 式 ： 本計畫涉及專利或其他智慧財產權，2 年後可公開查詢

中 華 民 國 99 年 09 月 15 日

行政院國家科學委員會補助專題研究計畫

■ 成 果 報 告

□期中進度報告

台灣高等教育國際化之課程探討: 一個敘事性批判民族誌研究

計畫類別：

■

個別型計畫

□ 整合型計畫

計畫編號：NSC 97－2410－H －004 －184 －

執行期間：

98 年

10

月 01 日至

98

年 07 月 31 日

計畫主持人：黃怡萍

成果報告類型(依經費核定清單規定繳交)：

■

精簡報告 □完整報告

本成果報告包括以下應繳交之附件：

□赴國外出差或研習心得報告一份

□赴大陸地區出差或研習心得報告一份

■

出席國際學術會議心得報告及發表之論文各一份

□國際合作研究計畫國外研究報告書一份

處理方式：除產學合作研究計畫、提升產業技術及人才培育研究計畫、

列管計畫及下列情形者外，得立即公開查詢

□涉及專利或其他智慧財產權，□一年

■

二年後可公開查詢

執行單位：國立政治大學

中

華

民

國

98

年

09

月

15

日

English Abstract: Due to the lack of qualitative research on the English-medium instruction (EMI) curriculum designs in Taiwan and the ambiguities in the role of English as the only medium in language learning/teaching, this qualitative case study examined the EMI curriculum designs (i.e., English-taught courses for a Junior Year Abroad) at the levels of official, intended, enacted, and experienced curriculum in one university in Taiwan. Semi-structured interview data were

gathered from two administrators, five content-area teachers, and 36 students, and analyzed based on Thornton’s(1988)framework ofcurriculum consonance.Theresultsshowed both consonance (e.g., similar views of the usefulness of English-taught courses for the Junior Year Abroad) and dissonance (e.g., dissimilar views of the way the EMI curriculum should be designed) in terms of the official, intended, enacted, and experienced curriculum, suggesting that the design of

English-taught courses for the Junior Year Abroad enabled students to increase their levels of not only English proficiency but also maturity and critical thinking and also that some modifications are required to enable students to fully participate in the international community of academia. Suggestions for curriculum designs, teacher development, and teaching are made. Direction for future research is given.

Keywords: Internationalization of Higher Education; English-Taught Courses; Curriculum Design 中文摘要: 雖然高等教育國際化儼然成為教育發展趨勢，然而，大部分研究皆採取文獻探 討或量化研究方式，鮮少指出高等教育國際化課程在台灣之執行現況與遭遇困難；尤有甚 者，高等教育「全英語授課」課程設計之檢討付之闕如。此外，文獻也已顯示行政人員、 教師與學生對於高等教育「全英語授課」課程設計未必有相同的看法與感受。因此，本研 究 旨 在 採 取 質 性 研 究 方 法 ， 在 Thornton (1988) 的 課 程 協 調 或 統 合 （ curriculum consonance）的框架下，探討台灣一所大學國際化課程中「全英語授課」與「大三出國」 之設計，並分項研究其官方課程設計為何(official curriculum)？教師所設計之課程 (intended curriculum) ？ 其 實 際 執 行 狀 況 (enacted curriculum) ？ 學 生 之 經 驗 (experienced curriculum)？與上述各種課程中的相互關係、實施成效、及其影響因素為 何？本研究之對象，含括一所大學之行政人員（2位）、教師（5 位）與學生（36位）。資 料收集將歷時兩年，以個人訪談及文獻資料收集為主要方式。資料分析採用 Carspecken (1996)的reconstructive analysis，在Thornton的框架下加以分析。研究結果顯示，課程 的設計方式、執行方式、與成效，皆有統合與不統合之處；雖然為「大三出國」所設計之 「全英語授課」課程有其必要之處，卻也點出在英語教學課程設計、全英語授課執行方式、 與教師專業發展都有待改善空間。吾人相信研究結果因更加瞭解行政人員、教師、學生之 觀點，而裨益於未來高等教育國際化之課程設計。 關鍵詞: 高等教育國際化、全英語授課、課程設計 II

Introduction & Literature Review

Although English-taught courses have been prevalent in tertiary education due to the trend of internationalization (e.g., Marginson & van der Wende, 2007; Nunan, 2003), there exists a discrepancy between administrators’and teachers’preferences (e.g., Brender, 2005), as well as teachers’and students’expectations (e.g., Paseka, 2000) and perceptions (e.g., Huang, 2009; Vinke et al., 1998). Brender (2005) found that some teachers might be unwilling to compel students to talk in English, since they disagreed with the underlying ideologies behind the system of punishment in South Korea. Paseka (2000) showed that while the EMI teachers expected to increase their students’knowledge of subject matter in English, most students came to study to improve their English proficiency. Vinke et al. (1998) even found that the EMI students might not perceive the effectiveness of teaching as well as their teachers. These mismatches in the

expectations between students and teachers, teachers and administrators show the importance of examining the consonance in the EMI curriculum at the official, intended, enacted, and

experienced levels.

Following Brown’s(2007)study, this study used Thornton’s(1988) notion of curriculum consonance (i.e., the intended, enacted, and experienced curriculum) with an additional official curriculum.Curriculum consonance refers to the correspondence among what teachers intend and enact to teach, what students experience, and what the official curriculum prescribes. To be more specific, in this study, the official curriculum refers to the policies germane to the

English-medium instruction and internationalization mandated by the target university. The

intended curriculum refers to both documents and teacher stories about their interpretation of the official curriculum and decision making in planning the EMI courses. The enacted curriculum

refers to both documents and teacher stories concerning the implementation of the intended curriculum, such as challenges, resolutions, student feedback, and emotions. The experienced curriculum refers to student stories reflecting how they experience and what they felt about the enacted, intended, and official curriculum, as well as their suggestions.

Research Methods

A qualitative case study was adopted for the current study to attain thick description of contexts (see Merriam, 1992). Following Carspecken’s (1996) guidelines, this study was conducted in a new campus in a comprehensive Taiwanese university that has adopted two popular mechanisms for internationalization: (a) 90% of the whole curricula is taught in English and (b) all the juniors need to study abroad for one year (Junior Year Abroad). That is,

English-taught courses were designed as scaffoldings for juniors to study abroad. This site was chosen because of its long-term commitment to internationalization and because it is unique in the Taiwan higher education system.

A total of two administrators, five teachers, and thirty-six students (nine freshmen, seven sophomores, ten juniors, and ten seniors) were recruited. Administrators were recruited based on their familiarity with policies; teachers on their willingness to participate in the study, their length of EMI teaching experiences, and gender; and students on their gender, proficiency levels, and schools they attended when abroad.

Data were collected from two sources: (a) syllabi, autobiographies, and regulations related to EMI practice and (b) individual semi-structured interviews. After recruiting the student and teacher participants, approximately 2-hour semi-structured interviews were held with each participant. The interviews were conducted by phone, via Skype, or in person, depending on the accessibility of the location to the student research assistant. The purpose of this initial interview was to collect information on the participants’life-histories and their perceptions of the EMI curricular designs, plans, and implementation in the institution. A second interview was held with each participant1. The purposes of these second interviews were to supplement the previous analyses, to provide consistency checks and member checks, and to examine some other issues relevant and not found previously.

The interviews were tape-recorded, transcribed, and coded, unless the participants

indicated otherwise, based on the above conceptual framework of curriculum consonance. That is, the data were organized under each curriculum type, within which a few common themes, such as attitudes toward EMI curriculum designs, plans, implementation, effectiveness, were identified. The codified themes were then organized, compared, and contrasted across cases and with the previous literature as the fieldwork proceeded. Peer reviews, member checks, and triangulation were used for validation. It was not possible to conduct students’member checks due to time limitations.

Results

The results showed both curriculum consonance and dissonance at the levels of official, intended, enacted, and experienced curricula.

Curriculum Consonance

The findings showed a match between students’experienced curriculum and the official curriculum in terms of the design of the EMI courses for the Junior Year Abroad. The students, especially those who had returned from the Junior Year Abroad, viewed attendance in

English-taught courses as a necessity for them to be able to study abroad in their junior years in accordance with the expectations of the administrators. In particular, these students expressed that they became more independent, broadened their horizons, understood more about the local

cultures and felt their English improved (e.g., confidence in expressing in English) by going abroad. They especially appreciated their teachers’insistence on teaching content all in English and their instruction in academic reading, writing, and oral communication, although they reported that they felt that they had suffered a lot in their freshman and sophomore years,

ironically rendering many of them to promote English-taught courses for the Junior Year Abroad. Curriculum consonance also existed between the students’experienced and some teachers’ intended and enacted curricula germane their aims to inspire students. That is, as some teachers stressed the importance of critical thinking and combated the equation of internationalization with the increase of English proficiency, these students gradually came to understand that “internationalization”did not mean proficiency in speaking good English; that learning to view things from multiple perspectives was as important as learning English; and that an understanding

1 _{A few students, including four transfer students, one senior who joined the army, and one sophomore who went}

of our own cultures was a significant step for understanding other cultures. That is, these teachers’ use of questioning, discussion, and international and local materials, as well as the transnational, cross-cultural learning experiences successfully helped students to learn to become more mature, open-minded, and critical, as their teachers (and administrators) intended and planned to teach.

Curriculum Dissonance

Despite the curriculum consonance, mismatches among the official, intended, enacted, and experienced curriculum still existed. Whether or not the EMI curriculum should be taught all in English was at issue. In order to help students who were to study abroad to communicate in international academic communities in English, 90 percent of the courses was supposed to be taught in—and only in—English in a transitional way in that the total number of the EMI courses increased and climaxed in the sophomore year prior to the junior year of going abroad.Almost all the courses were taught in English, except for such courses as Chinese, Physical Education, and a few courses in General Education, mostly offered in the freshman year. For fear that if

code-switching were to occur frequently, the EMI courses might become Chinese-mediated ones, the full implementation of the monolingual policy was emphasized. Additionally, four required two-creditEnglish classes,including ‘Writing,’‘Reading,’‘OralCommunication,’and

‘TOEFL/IELTS’, were designed to help students enhance their ability in English and to obtain good TOEFL/IELTS grades so as to be able to take university classes abroad. Remedial courses were offered to those who were unable to adjust to the English-only environment in the form of a one-credit course taught by graduate students or by taking an evening course given by the

instructor.

Although the teacher participants understood the intention of the official curriculum, they still felt surprised and frustrated about the strict rules for using English only in their classes. They disagreed that all courses should be taught only in English, since they felt that the nature of the subject matter should also be considered. Most of the teachers did not perceive the design of the EMI courses as providing a transition to a whole-English academic environment, presumably because all the professional courses, regardless of the nature of content, were required to be taught only in English. More transitional space should be provided to help freshmen transfer from the environment of learning-English-for-exams to that of learning-subjects-in-English, or from being passive learners in (English) learning to being active participants in class discussion. Due to the requirement to use a foreign language as a medium of instruction and the low (and mixed) proficiency levels of the students, the EMI teachers were unable to teach content as much or as deeply in English as in Chinese, plausibly hindering students from achieving the goals of communicating academic knowledge via English as planned in the official curriculum. In the enacted curriculum, most of the teacher participants still taught content in English, except that a summary in Chinese might be used at the end of the class. Very few teachers simply switched to Chinese when giving explanations. Remedial and the freshman English courses were viewed as ineffective or inappropriate.

Although the student participants deemed English-taught courses helpful for the Junior Year Abroad, most of them were worried that they did not learn sufficient subject matter in the English-only classes to become professionals in the fields, as their teachers were. Despite their worries about their own professional knowledge, they felt that their English had improved due to

participation in the immersion program in Taiwan and abroad. Such an effect was not predicted by either the school or the teachers. Many students felt frustrated that their teachers did not have the right to choose an appropriate medium-of-instruction in teaching, and proposed that more freedom should be given to the teachers to utilize more varieties of support. Regarding the design of the EMI courses, there was a discrepancy in the students’reports of their experiences as some deemed the current EMI curriculum design supportive as a few teachers (not the teacher

participants) might still teach in Chinese and since they gradually got accustomed to it, while others viewed it as harmful since many students gave up learning early due to their lack of English proficiency or their teachers’lack of ability to teach in English. Many of them also reported that they disliked it that the courses unrelated to their majors were taught in English. The effectiveness of the remedial courses was also at issue, particularly when the students who could not understand the content in class were unlikely to articulate their problems or be willing to make up classes. Whether or not the freshman English courses should be kept was also an issue, as some students viewed them as helpful for learning English, but others felt that they were redundant. Those who thought that such courses should be retained suggested that they could be taught to students at different levels of proficiency or be linked to the TOEFL/IELTS preparation.

Thus it can be seen that curriculum dissonance existed in terms of the perceptions of the EMI curriculum designs, implementation of the EMI courses, and the effectiveness of the EMI curriculum designs on the part of students, teachers, and administrators.

Discussion

The findings of both curriculum consonance and dissonance suggest that the design of English-taught courses for the Junior Year Abroad was supportive but required some modification so as better to prepare students for studying abroad. First, instead of English for general purposes (EGP) courses, English for academic purpose (EAP) courses should be offered to help students develop academic literacy in transition to the whole-English learning environment (e.g., Erling & Hilgendorf, 2006a, b). Since research on bilingual education has shown that English language learners (ELLs) require a much longer time to develop academic literacy than conversational skills, for the former is more cognitively demanding due to its decontexualized features (e.g., Cummins, 2000), a two-year EAP curriculum could be developed, including the required courses for freshmen (e.g., ‘Academic Listening and Speaking’and ‘AcademicReading and Writing’) and the elective courses for sophomores (e.g., ‘Journalistic English’, ‘Travel English’,

‘Interviewing’, and ‘World Englishes and Culture’). Second, content-area teachers who have never taught in English before should participate in mentoring programs or teacher development workshops prior to teaching EMI courses. Such programs can provide novices with opportunities to design an EMI course, to observe teaching by experienced EMI teachers, to conduct

mini-teaching, and to critically reflect on their own teaching. Specifically, consciousness-raising activities can be incorporated into task-based instruction in content-area teacher development (e.g., Feryok, 2009). Third, content-area teachers should have more freedom to decide if, and when, to incorporate L1 materials or to code-switch when deemed necessary, since research reveals the importance of incorporating students’expertise and funds of knowledge (e.g., Cummins, 2000; Hornberger, 2004; Martin-Beltran, 2009; Pawan, 2008).

Two caveats should be addressed. First, this qualitative case study does not intend to make any generalization to all the cases in Taiwan. Instead, in using this qualitative method of research, it intends to provide rich and thick contextual description so that readers can make a judgment about whether or not, and to what extent, the conclusions in the study are valid or generalizable. Second, this study does not intend to make criticisms of any particular school or curriculum design, but attempts to provide a provisional understanding of the internationalization of university curriculum in Taiwan with a focus on EMI curriculum design in one university as a preliminary step to better facilitate EMI teacher development and curriculum design.

Self-Evaluation

The current case study of the internationalization of higher education in Taiwan focuses on the curriculum consonance of two popular mechanisms for internationalization (i.e.,

English-taught courses and study abroad) in one university in Taiwan. The results showed both curriculum consonance and dissonance, suggesting that the design of English-taught courses for the Junior Year Abroad was supportive not simply in increasing students’levels of proficiency but also their maturity, critical thinking, and international viewpoints, and that there should also be some modification to the courses to enable students to fully participate in the international community of academia. Suggestions for curriculum designs, teacher development, and teaching are made. The finding of curriculum dissonance reflects the necessity for future research through the use of needs analyses for the design of the curriculum of English-taught courses and the provision of EMI teacher development to better facilitate internationalization.

Adopting the reviewers’suggestions,the current study reorganized the previous literature review and now provides more focused research questions. Although many junior student participants had been, the prolongation of the current research for a year helped the researcher collect data from them when they returned to Taiwan. The feedback from various conferences was incorporated. For instance, more male students were recruited in the second year of study. Thus, except for the member checks with students, the current study was successful in achieving the goals established in the proposal.

Parts of the findings of this study have been presented at various conferences and also published in journal articles (see Appendix A).

References

Brender, A. (2005, November 11). Gyeongsang National University, South Korea has created an English-only zone on its campus. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52(12), A42-A42. Retrieved January 16, 2009, from Master FILE Premier database.

Brown, R. A. (2007). Curriculum consonance in technology education classrooms: The official,

intended, implemented, and experienced curricula. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,

Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana.

Carspecken, P. F. (1996). Critical ethnography in educational research: A theoretical and

practical guide. New York: Routledge.

Cummins, J. (2000). Language, power, and pedagogy. Bilingual children in the crossfire. Clevedon, England: Multilingual Matters.

Erling, E., & Hilgendorg, S. K. (2006a). Language policies in the context of German higher education. Language Policy 5, 267-292.

Erling, E. J., & Hilgendorf, S. K. (2006b). English in German university disadvantage or empowerment. In Weideman, A. & B. Smieja (Eds), Empowerment through

language and education: Cases and case studies from North America, Europe, Africa and Japan (pp. 113-128). New York: Peter Lang.

Feryok, A. (2009). Activity theory, imitation and their roles in teacher development. Language

Teaching Research, 13(3), 279-299.

Hornberger, M. H. (2004). The continua of biliteracy and the bilingual educator linguistics in practice. Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 7, 155-171.

Huang, Y. P. (2009). Effectiveness of English-Only Instruction in Postsecondary Education in Taiwan: Voices from Students. The Hwa Kang Journal of English Language and Literature,

15, 123-135

Hudson, P. (2009). Learning to teach science using English as the medium of instruction.

Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science & Technology Education, 5(2), 165-170.

Marginson, S., & van der Wende, M. (2007). Globalisation and higher education. OECD Education Working Papers, No.8.

Martin-Beltran, M. (2009). Cultivating space for the language boomerang: The interplay of two languages as academic resources. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 8(2), 25-53.

Merriam, S. (1992). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ninnes, P. & Hellsten, M. (2005). Internationalizing higher education: Critical explorations

of pedagogy and policy. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.

Nunan, D. (2003). The impact of English as a global language on educational policies and practices in the Asia-Pacific region. TESOL Quarterly, 37, 589-613.

Paseka, A. (2000). Towards internationalization in teacher education: An attempt to use English as the working language in a sociology course. Teaching in Higher

Education, 5 (3), 359-371.

Pawan, F. (2008). Content-area teachers and scaffolded instruction for English language learners. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24, 1450-1462.

Thornton, S. (1988). Curriculum consonance in United States history classrooms. Journal of

Curriculum and Supervision, 3 (4), 308-320.

Vinke, A., Snippe, J., & Jochems, W. (1998). English-medium content courses in

non-English higher education: A study of lecturer experiences and teaching behaviours.

Teaching in Higher Education, 3(3), 383-394.

Appendix A

Conference Presentations and Journal Articles

Journal Articles

Huang, Y. P. (2009). Effectiveness of English-Only Instruction in Postsecondary Education in Taiwan: Voices from Students. The Hwa Kang Journal of English Language and Literature,

15, 123-135. (THCI)

Under Review

Huang, Y. P. (2010). A Cultural Resistance Approach to English-Medium Instruction (EMI) in Higher Education: Teacher and Administrator Voices from the Periphery. Submitted to Teaching in Higher Education. (SSCI)

Huang, Y. P. (2010). English-Medium Instruction (EMI) Content-Area Teachers’Pedagogical Content Knowledge of Scaffoldings: A Vygotskian Perspective. Submitted to Taiwan

Journal of TESOL.

Conferences

Huang, Y. P. (2010). English-Medium Instruction: Teachers’Storiesfrom a Vygotskian

Perspective. Paper presented at the Ninth Annual Wenshan International Conference, Taipei,

Taiwan, May 29, 2010.

Huang, Y. P. (2010). English-Only Instruction in Postsecondary Education in Taiwan:

Teachers’Perspectives. Paper presented at 東吳大學外國語文學院校際學術研討會,

Taipei, Taiwan, March 27, 2010.

Huang, Y. P. (2010). English Imperialism?! A Study of English-Medium Instruction in

Postsecondary Education in Taiwan. Paper presented at the American Association

for Applied Linguistics (AAAL) Conference. Atlanta, GA, March 6-9, 2010.

Huang, Y. P. (2009). Effectiveness of English-Only Instruction in Postsecondary Education in

Taiwan. Voices from Students. Paper presented at the International Conference on

English Learning and Teaching. Taipei, Taiwan, May 2, 2009.

Huang, Y. P. (2009). Curriculum Consonance: Internationalizing Higher Education in

Taiwan. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA),

San Diego, California, April 14, 2009.

國科會補助專題研究計畫項下出席國際學術會議心得報告

日期：99 年 06 月 19 日

一、參加會議經過

1. AERA Division B Preconference: Co-Chaired in Graduate Student Mentoring Session on International/Comparative Curriculum Studies in AERA Division B: Curriculum Studies, 04/12-13/2009

2. AERA Division B: Presented parts of the results from the current study on curriculum consonance and gained precious feedback for data analysis (hidden curriculum)

Huang, Y. P. (2009). Curriculum Consonance: Internationalizing Higher Education in

Taiwan. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA),

San Diego, California, April 14, 2009.

3. AERA SIG Narrative Inquiry: Presented parts of the results from my dissertation research on international teachers’ power negotiation in cross-cultural teaching. Huang, Y. P. (2009). International Beginning Teacher Educators’ Self-Stories About

Power Struggle in Cross-Cultural Teaching: Double Consciousness?! Paper presented

at American Educational Research Association (AERA), San Diego, California, April 14, 2009.

4. Attended various sessions on qualitative research methodology, journal publications, and narrative inquiry

5. Book exhibition: Purchased new books concerning qualitative research, teacher education, and internationalization for current study

二、與會心得 計畫編號 NSC 97－2410－H －004 －184 － 計畫名稱 台灣高等教育國際化之課程探討: 一個敘事性批判民族誌研究 出國人員 姓名 黃怡萍 服務機構 及職稱 助理教授 出席國際會議時：淡江大學 目前：政治大學 會議時間 98 年 04 月 12 日 至 98 年 04 月 17 日 會議地點

San Diego, California, U.S.A.

會議名稱 (中文) 美國教育研究協會之國際會議

(英文) American Education Research Association Conference

發表論文 題目

(中文) 課程統整性? 高等教育國際化之個案研究

(英文) Curriculum Consonance: A Case Study of Internationalizing Higher Education

1. Learned an alternative approach to my data analysis; 2. Learned how to write for journal publications;

3. Gained insights from how to incorporate “caring” from Nel Noddings’ talk; 4. Invited Prof. David Flinders (Chair of Division B) for the upcoming conference in

Taiwan 三、考察參觀活動(無是項活動者略) N./A. 四、建議 N./A. 五、攜回資料名稱及內容 Proceedings 六、其他 N./A.

97 年度專題研究計畫研究成果彙整表

計畫主持人：黃怡萍 計畫編號： 97-2410-H-004-184-計畫名稱：台灣高等教育國際化之課程探討: 一個敘事性批判民族誌研究 量化 成果項目 實際已達成 數（被接受 或已發表） 預期總達成 數(含實際已 達成數) 本計畫實 際貢獻百 分比 單位 備 註 （ 質 化 說 明：如 數 個 計 畫 共 同 成 果、成 果 列 為 該 期 刊 之 封 面 故 事 ... 等） 期刊論文 1 0 100% 研究報告/技術報告 0 0 100% 研討會論文 3 0 100% 篇 論文著作 專書 0 0 100% 申請中件數 0 0 100% 專利 已獲得件數 0 0 100% 件 件數 0 0 100% 件 技術移轉 權利金 0 0 100% 千元 碩士生 1 0 15% 博士生 0 0 100% 博士後研究員 0 0 100% 國內 參與計畫人力 （本國籍） 專任助理 0 0 100% 人次 期刊論文 0 0 100% 研究報告/技術報告 0 0 100% 研討會論文 2 0 100% 篇 論文著作 專書 0 0 100% 章/本 申請中件數 0 0 100% 專利 已獲得件數 0 0 100% 件 件數 0 0 100% 件 技術移轉 權利金 0 0 100% 千元 碩士生 0 0 100% 博士生 0 0 100% 博士後研究員 0 0 100% 國外 參與計畫人力 （外國籍） 專任助理 0 0 100% 人次

其他成果

(

無法以量化表達之成 果如辦理學術活動、獲 得獎項、重要國際合 作、研究成果國際影響 力及其他協助產業技 術發展之具體效益事 項等，請以文字敘述填 列。) 無 成果項目 量化 名稱或內容性質簡述 測驗工具(含質性與量性) 0 課程/模組 0 電腦及網路系統或工具 0 教材 0 舉辦之活動/競賽 0 研討會/工作坊 0 電子報、網站 0 科 教 處 計 畫 加 填 項 目 計畫成果推廣之參與（閱聽）人數 0

國科會補助專題研究計畫成果報告自評表

請就研究內容與原計畫相符程度、達成預期目標情況、研究成果之學術或應用價

值（簡要敘述成果所代表之意義、價值、影響或進一步發展之可能性）

、是否適

合在學術期刊發表或申請專利、主要發現或其他有關價值等，作一綜合評估。

1. 請就研究內容與原計畫相符程度、達成預期目標情況作一綜合評估

■達成目標

□未達成目標（請說明，以 100 字為限）

□實驗失敗

□因故實驗中斷

□其他原因

說明：

2. 研究成果在學術期刊發表或申請專利等情形：

論文：■已發表 □未發表之文稿 □撰寫中 □無

專利：□已獲得 □申請中 ■無

技轉：□已技轉 □洽談中 ■無

其他：（以 100 字為限）

3. 請依學術成就、技術創新、社會影響等方面，評估研究成果之學術或應用價

值（簡要敘述成果所代表之意義、價值、影響或進一步發展之可能性）（以

500 字為限）

The finding of curriculum dissonance reflects the necessity for future research through the use of needs analyses for the design of the curriculum of English-taught courses and the provision of EMI teacher development to better facilitate internationalization.