[[alternative]]A Study on the Indicators of Equity of Higher Education in Taiwan

[[abstract]]高等教育公平為我國高等教育擴張後所面臨的重要課題之一，為提升高等教育之公平性，本研究旨在參酌歐美先進國家經驗，建置一套適用於我國高等教育的公平指標系統，以供未來教育主管部門決策之參考。為達研究目的，本研究採文獻探討、文件分析、專家諮詢座談會議與三回合德懷術調查等方法，建構出一套分為社經脈絡、入學機會、教育過程與學習結果等四大構面、11個次構面，共45個指標細項的「我國高等教育公平指標系統」，做為評估我國高等教育公平程度的專門指標。此外，並根據研究結果提出以下結論：一、我國高等教育發展迅速，但教育公平理想仍有待落實；二、高等教育公平指標應與一般高等教育發展指標有所區隔；三、CIPP模式可做為我國高等教育公平指標系統之參考架構；四、為描繪高等教育公平全貌宜兼顧量化與質性指標。[[abstract]]Higher education in many advanced countries have been expanded greatly since 1980s, and transformed from the traditional “elite” pattern, to a “mass,” or even an “universal” one, according to Martin Trow's terms. Access to higher education has become wider along with the expansion of higher education, but whether such a wider access means a more equal provision of higher education remains to be questioned, and the equity of higher education has still been an issue with great concern. In order to promote the equity of higher education, a number of advanced countries, such as the USA and the UK, have tried to construct a set of indicators measuring the equity of higher education in their own countries. Higher education in Taiwan has also expanded tremendously in the recent decades, so how to develop or construct a set of indicators suitable for measuring the equity of higher education, becomes crucial to the promotion of equity or equality of higher education in Taiwan. This study mainly aimed to explore the possibility of constructing indicators for assessing the equity in higher education. The methods used in this study include methods of literature review, document analysis, experts' consultative meeting, and the Delphi method, which selected a panel of 10 experts to answer the revised questionnaires, modified primarily according to the consultative suggestions from the experts, in a total of three rounds. Finally, a set of 45 indicators is constructed in four main dimensions, namely, the socio-economic contexts, the opportunity of access, the education process, and learning outcome, and these four main dimensions are further divided into 11 sub-dimensions.[[incitationindex]]TSSCI[[booktype]]紙