大學社區夥伴關係和學術研究：結合課程和社區發展
Community-Campus Partnerships and Scholarship: Integrating Academic Curriculum with Community Development
Shu-chuan Liao, Asia University, Taiwan
Abstract: The purpose of this longitudinal study was to document how the integration of academic curriculum and community development happened. Three aspects of students, the university and faculty, and the community were investigated. The findings suggested that community-campus partnerships were beneficial for three parties.
Introduction（前言）
In response to the Outstanding Teaching Plan 2006 in Asia University of Taiwan, the Department of Social Work proposed a plan called “Community Underprivileged Families Caring Plan” to echo the university’s devotion to community services. This plan eventually became a course with 30 students and five faculty members working with three local community organizations who serve underprivileged families with different projects.
The three-credit course design includes one hour classroom lecture and two-hours of community-based learning. Students, faculty members and community work together through the whole semester. The program has been continuously supported by the university based on the concepts of community-campus partnerships and scholarship.
Purpose of the study（研究目的）
This paper is to document what I have participated in this course work. I have been continuously involved in teaching for three semesters since Fall 2006. The integration of curriculum and community development became an agency to link academic resources to communities in a reciprocally beneficial manner. Students and faculty engaged the community fully in the process of problem definition, need assessment, problem analysis and action taking. I experienced students’ significant learning through their participation in campus and community activities. I investigated the significance of students and community members learning from each other in the community context.
Significance of the study（研究重要性）
Faculty members have a three-fold duty to teach, conduct research and facilitate social services. One of the best ways for academic faculty members fulfilling the mission is to integrate curriculum with social service and strengthen the relationships between theories, research, and practices. Students and faculty were involved in community-based learning by serving communities. In so doing, knowledge production through community-based participatory research would be different from that of through academia only. Students and community members could also become knowledge producers.
Literature review（文獻回顧）
Literature about community and campus partnerships in integrating curriculum has been broadly discussed. Forrest (2004) examined the effectiveness of a social work course that integrates class and fieldwork to influence students' development in end-of-life care practice. Students were able to synthesize the course materials and identify their social and personal roles; volunteers feel useful, becoming a teacher in their relationships with students; and agencies are encouraged by the college’s willingness to be creative. The results showed that all participants got significant benefits from this program. Deans (1998) created community/university partnerships through which college writing is paired with community action. He proposed a typology for community-based writing pedagogies, and invited participants to write for, about and with the community. Belliard Alban (2002) argued that integrating service with scholarship helped students’ praxis and drives faculty community engagement work that led to a shared responsive and partnership community-campus vision. Green (2004) investigated that service-learning pedagogy could help bridge academic affairs and student affairs areas and achieve institutions’ mission relative to teaching, research, and public service. Crowe (2003) conducted service-learning assessment research and claimed that integrating classroom and community learning enhanced students’ classroom learning by serving with nonprofit organizations. The university-nonprofit organization alliance worked together and developed curriculum. Shaffett (2002) conducted a study on community organization staff perceptions about the importance of selected practices in building effective community-university service and learning partnerships. The results showed seven primary concerning factors—university institutional context, community organization context, preparation/training, community partner roles, faculty partner roles, relationship/communication, and evaluation/outcomes. Curry and Cunningham (2000) argued that co-learning as constructing knowledge in the community. It is one way to equalize power relationships and to deny socially constructed privilege or the privileging of one knowledge over another. Liao (2004) showed the service learning experiences with the concepts of learning by doing, which led them to better understand themselves and their social roles.
Belliard Alban
The literature showed that university-community partnerships were beneficial for students’ learning by integrating curriculum with communities and organizations. There is little, if any, research on learning from the community and faculty’s perspectives. My research further investigated how the community and faculty actors learned from participation in the integration of curriculum and community development.
Methodology（研究方法）
In this study, I conducted qualitative research. Through qualitative research, I would be better able to determine whether participants developed particular benefits of their learning process from integrating curriculum with community development. This study was community-based participatory research
I chose the Gio-che Community as my research partner context. There are two reasons I chose the Gio-che Community: first, since I have been working with the Gio-che Community Development Association for a period of time, the community development work that they have done was quite impressive. Community development in the Cio-che was ongoing, including community heath care, community education, employment and environmental issues. The dynamics shown within the Community lead me to do further exploration. I valued it as a suitable learning space for students. Secondly, the fact that women were leading this community organization encouraged further exploration. Men in Taiwan, especially in the rural communities, typically dominate leadership positions in community organizations. Women approach leadership roles within organizations differently than men. I was interested in inquiring the leadership capabilities of women in the community.
My data came from three primary sources: 1) my field observations, action and reflection, 2) students’ weekly reflection journals, meeting records and term papers for three semesters, and 3) in-depth interviews of the community leader and staff. The process of data analysis started along with data collection. The themes were emerging through reading the texts over and over again, which interacted with my thoughts in the mean time. This led to an intersubjective relationship between the texts and my own thoughts. The whole picture gradually became clear after the appearing fragments found their own places.
Findings
I categorized themes into three aspects: students, university and faculty, and the community. I describe the themes that emerged from these three categories.
For students. First, They were able to synthesize the course materials through participation in the community development. They were able to work with community people for collective investigation of community needs and problems, collective analysis and collective action. Communities became learning sites with many learning points for students to discover. Through learning by doing, they better understood the course work, such as casework, group work, family system, interpersonal relationship, program design, community work, community organization and community development. In the community, they served the elderly and became closed to them. In so doing, they better understood the elderly, who might be lonely and need intensive care while also being happy and talkative. Students found that the elderly in the community very much resembled their grandparents.
Second, they realized there are large gaps between theory and practice. For instance, a well-designed questionnaire with all aspects for the community needs, ability and skills, and perspectives about community development would not work well as they conducted face-to-face contacts with the “real” people. They also found their limitation, especially the language barriers. Rural communities in Taiwan mainly use Taiwanese language. Without speaking Taiwanese, students would not be accepted in rural communities.
Third, they became confident by identifying themselves as helpers in the community. Working with the community, they were able to integrate their course materials with the real people’s lives in the community. Their weekly reflection journals and term papers documented knowledge gained through their experiences in attending the activities and the problem-solving process. That led them from knowledge consumers to knowledge producers.
For the community people:
The community-campus partnerships were mutually beneficial. People enjoyed students bringing dreams, ideas, enthusiasm and skills to their community. Students came to the community with what they have learned in the classroom; and they wrote grant proposals by working with the community people. The curriculum systematically took ongoing community development with which the life-oriented styles of the community were affected. Consequently, community volunteers who worked with students had to learn the students’ methods.
Students were creative and energetic, which brought out the potential resources within the community. In so doing, community development was able to expand more community services for the residents. The long-term integrating curriculum with community development created sustainable community work. As community people created space for students’ learning, in the meantime, they motivated more participation from more community residents.
Time was a constraint because of the limitation of students’ class hours. Two fixed hours each week in the community required adjusting life schedule for students as possible. Respect was mutual in order to get things done. Inspiration was also mutual driving achievement of each other.
For the university and faculty:
The scholarship that the university and faculty concerned has been revealed in this research. The university’s mission of teaching, research and services was fulfilled through the partnerships. Service learning pedagogy became a useful teaching instruction. Faculty practiced theories in the field and adjusted teaching methods based on the field assessment. Faculty perceived that knowledge production happened not only in the classroom, but also in the community contexts. Faculty perceived that learning from both lived experiences and interacting with what they have learned before and what the textbooks write about.
Faculty served as a facilitator, a communicator, a drum-beater and an enabler. Faculty has committed to the community development for a better life by joining community people together to raise community consciousness and then enhance the ability of participation in public affairs and public policy which affected their lives.
（教師的角色是一個促進者、溝通者、敲邊鼓打氣者、和使能者，教師投入社區發展，與社區一起工作，提升社區意識和能力來參與公共事務，和參與影響他們生活的公共政策。）
The concepts of action/reflection and learning by doing were practiced during the curriculum was ongoing. Experiential learning brought students to real world and share experiences with those who lived in the community. In so doing, students know better selves, and then learn more about the society.
The characteristics of female leadership shown in community development were impressive, including persistence, assertiveness, positive thinking, down-to-earth attitudes, pragmatism, responsibility, a rejection of power and titles, and a strong sense of social justice. In so doing, more residents were willing to attend the community activities and further became volunteers to serve the people who needed special care. As the curriculum integration initiative was successful, as the research was in process, more curriculum integration from university was ongoing.
Discussion and conclusion
University students in Taiwan are a special group who are confined in the campus and self-isolated from the communities at which they locate. The university, which I serve, is a newly-established one that is dedicated to build the relationship with communities. I have continuingly drawn my students to communities and made there as learning sites. This longitudinal study of curriculum and community development showed that students worked with the community and sustained its development. In the meantime, the curriculum was developed spontaneously (Crowe, 2003). The partnership provided students the opportunities to work for and with the community (Deans, 1998). As I intentionally looked at community services as part of scholarship, I attended every community meeting and discussed with students and community people. Comprehensive involvement enabled me to be able to hear them and see them and for them to give voice to their perspectives. Being a faculty member, I was aware of my privileged status in the community therefore I tried my best to assimilate and share the vision of university with community. I helped students take action and reflection during their work in the community (Belliard Alban, 2002).
Students are a treasure of the university that does its best to make meaningful learning possible. A community as learning site means that the learning content comes from life (Lindeman, 1961). The experiences they have had in the community helped them better understand their course work in the classroom (Dewey, 1938). As they have the opportunities with the face-to-face contact with people, especially the aged, they empathize and understand better of people whom they will serve in the future.
That community people accepted students to take their place as a learning site was a great gratitude to me. The Gio-che is a newly created community organization devoted to building residents’ better lives. They received grants from the government to develop their community. The female leader created a very warm and open space for residents to share her power with them (Liao, 2003). The characteristics of female leaders helped sustain long-term community development.
Implications to adult education（對成人教育的啟示）
Implications of this research study to adult educations are three-fold. First, students made their learning meaningful through the community-based participatory research. They looked at community as their learning site. They worked with community people and got closed to their real lives. Community development became the catalyst for both community and university to work together for a better life. Second, co-learning occurred when students, community members and faculty member learned together in the community with mutual respect for all. The knowledge constructed by students, community members and the faculty member would be equal without privilege of one knowledge over another. Students and community members made knowledge initiatives.
Finally, the theories, research and practice have been strengthened through service learning pedagogy. The scholarship made it possible for integrating theories and practices. Good theories come from good practices. Good practices need good theories. Integrating academic curriculum with community development not only creates community and university partnerships but also enhances scholarship through the study.
（本研究對成人教育的啟示有三方面：第一，學生經由以社區為主的參與式研究讓學生做更有意義的學習，他们把社區看成學習場域，與社區居民一起工作，因此更貼進他们的生活，社區發展因此成為學生與居民的接觸煤劑。第二，當學生、教師與社區居民在社區互相尊重，一起學習時，就會出現共同學習的情境，由三方面建構的知識是同等重要的，不會有任何一方的知識壓過其他人，學生和社區居民一樣可以創造知識。最後，理論、研究和實務經由服務學習教學法而強化，學術研究使理論結合實務成為可能，好的理論來自好的實務，好的實務要有好的理論，結合課程與社區發展，不但創造社區和大學的夥伴關係，同時提升學術研究的品質。）
References
Belliard Alban, J. C. (2002). A formative evaluation of the community engagement of a private health professions university. (Doctoral dissertation, The Claremont Graduate University). ProQuest: Dissertations & Theses: A&I, AAT 3065491.
Community-based participatory research. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community-based_participatory_research
Crowe, D. C. (2003). Service-learning assessment in management education: The development of a protocol. (Doctoral dissertation, Saint Louis University). ProQuest: Dissertations & Theses: A&I, AAT 3102885.
Curry, R., & Cunningham, P. (2000). Co-learning in the community. In M. Eisen & E. J. Tisdell (Eds.), Team teaching and learning in adult education (pp.73-82). New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education (87). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Deans, T. A. (1998). Community-based and service learning college writing initiatives in relation to composition studies and critical theory. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts Amherst). ProQuest: Dissertations & Theses: A&I, AAT 9841860.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Macmillan.
Forrest, C. (2004). Social work education about end-of-life care: Assessment of one approach for action. (Doctoral dissertation, University of South Carolina). ProQuest: Dissertations & Theses: A&I, AAT 3157136.
Freire, P. (1993). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum.
Green, G. R. (2004). The institutionalization of service-learning as a pedagogical tool for campus engagement at public versus private higher education institutions. (Doctoral dissertation, Union Institute and University). ProQuest: Dissertations & Theses: A&I, AAT 3160267.
Hsu, T. (2004
Liao, S. (2003). Taiwanese women's participation in social movements—A case study of Homemakers' Union and Foundation (HUF) at Taiwan . Convergence 36(2), 29-49.
Liao, S. (2004). The exploration on service learning experiences of Wu-feng youth summer workshop. In Lin Chi-sain (Ed.), The re-exploration on the relationships of schools and communities (pp. 258-274). Taipei, Taiwan: Soochow University.
Lindeman, E. (1961). The meaning of adult education. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma.
Shaffett, B. R. D. (2002). Community organization staff perceptions about the importance of selected practices in building effective community-university service and learning partnerships. (Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana State University and Agricultural & Mechanical College). ProQuest: Dissertations & Theses: A&I, AAT 3
上一篇：台中霧峰舊正社區調查研究
教官學生疾病運送車資、賃居登錄補助、教育服務課鐘點費、違憲校外會”簽名、領錢、敘獎"、打擊國軍士氣！
1.(蔣孝嚴)委員提到疊床架屋軍訓制度很精闢.謝謝!
2.教官耗費教育經費一年百餘億(私校50億，應納入公立大學/大專/高中應再*2.5倍，未計學分費、書籍費等等雜支)教育經費，可聘用專業人員及照顧弱勢學生及做好12年國教!
3.請教官不要再說24小時保全，因為很多學校教官是不值班(甚至教官多的學校也有)，且學校放學空無一人，女教官多嚇的鋼門窗緊閉不敢出來! 鋼門窗內教官休閒、消遣自在遊!幾乎各校怨聲載道，學校有聘保全還要浪費資本門、經常門請教官睡高級套房!值班可領錢補休，部隊是不可能!
所有學生事件幾乎都是專業教育人員及警察、119處理，若千分之ㄧ事件有教官到現場也無濟於事，無專業、無能力、無公權力處理!私立正義高中教官病死案例，該校教官去年被媒體揭露，學校不聘導師，教官兼2-3個導師，支領導師費、行政津貼，這是教官界常態。義守大學教官半夜運送疾病學生途中，教官車禍撞死學校學生事件！（單就該校教官薪資可聘用40位專職人員全天候照顧學生)
4.因為教官界福利差異太大也有升遷誘惑，流動嚇人，到各環境都是新鮮人，所以常犯教育輔導大忌!
5.檢視整個軍訓教學內容亂無章法，尤其是大學，歐美先進國家，由各軍種輪派博士軍官到有需求學校教授軍事科學(輪派確符合瞭解國防新訊，感動優秀學生感動優秀學生投筆從戎歐美先進國家，由各軍種輪派博士軍官到有需求學校教授軍事科學(輪派確符合瞭解國防新訊，但我國卻多離開國防部數年以上，甚至從未在國防部服務，同一學校多單一軍種，如何傳授國防通識教育海優空優?
大法官釋字第四五○號解釋軍訓違憲，軍訓處希望各校教官爭取軍訓必修，以利教官界自肥，故私立學校多仍違憲列為必修，實為繳學費、買軍訓課本給國防部疏除軍人升官發財，並圖利老K黨幼獅出版社，故教官界也獲取幼獅出版社好處！
6.學生問題應由導師落實一級輔導、補足專業輔導人員執行二、三級輔導，才能落實學生心理、學業、情緒、前途全方位溝通；現在學校教官鐘點荒唐比導師少，軍訓教官教官鐘點即將降至約5節/週，不包括零鐘點/週的主任教官及生輔組長。很多單一學校教官人數比全縣市少年隊多、比社工師多、合計國中小專任輔導師多！各校一群無教育資格教官做國中小生教組長一人工作，故現階段教官外務多，人手一張校安證書或補助在職進修碩士！
軍訓處違法借調無教育行政資格教官處理教育部行政業務（借調2年可升軍訓教授），反霸凌卻是5班內編配一位教官、至少20校邊配一位社工師，一位教官薪資可編配3位社工師，軍訓界無疑謀殺社工師！
7、在學校處理那些特案學生(弱勢、情障、肢障、病痛纏身、幫派家庭)的導師、輔導老師、社工師、健康中心都倍極煎熬，這些更不是教官能力所及，經費應該落實2、3級輔導專業人力！
學生疾病運送該由專業醫護人員處理，可以處理運送期間學生身心照料，即使住宿學生學校亦應有此機制，重症學生教官無能力不敢載送，而且大多學校教官都爭取到處理每次載送學生費用！ (查證:教官(生輔組長或違反旋轉門條款月退俸7-9萬、補助100萬/員的軍退校安人員)自行簽文，載送學生費用甚至不輸TAXI車資!)，否則大多CALL119處理！(洽詢眾多默默更多接送學生並痛或緊急事件的老師，都低調稱是應該做的，不會領載送費!)；全國只有軍人才會渲染並想到領載送學生運費！
東華大學學生校外宿舍火警，被質疑全國「大有問題」的賃居訪視。軍訓界也流行簽文，有賃居訪視紀錄每案都有補助款，”登錄”越多補助越多！
8、軍訓處的專長不是教育也不是輔導，面對霸凌、幫派、毒品問題，應統籌教育、社政、民政和警政的專業團隊，來解決青少年學生問題。幫派學生教官也不敢管。
軍人服從性習性是最違反同理心的輔導原理。見識太多服從性高兵科之教官，只敢”如軍中為小事”兇那些在乎記過、父母責罵、學業的學生，帶兵習性