「學伴計畫」實施現狀研究：以中興大學為例

The Implementation Status Quo of “Buddy Program”: Taking NCHU as an Example

近年來，台灣高校吸引了不少內地赴台交換生。「學伴計畫」是中興大學的學生制度之一，旨在通過「學伴計畫」幫助部分陸生解決交換學習、生活中的適應問題，同時促進陸生和台生相互理解，建立友誼，並拓展視野。本研究主要採用焦點團體訪談法、參與式觀察法和文件分析法，對陸生、台生和國際處三個群體進行了研究，以認識「學伴計畫」在中興大學的實施現狀。研究結果表明，研究對象三方都存在互相資訊不通暢的現象；「學伴計畫」參與雙方聯繫不太緊密，發起方不太清楚交流細節問題；參與方彼此都需要對方的社會支持，發起方不清楚參與雙方社會需求的具體內容；參與方表示「學伴計畫」有調整的必要，發起方認為若需調整還需要充分的時間進行觀察。三方對於兩岸文化距離的認識存在差距，對文化距離是否影響「學伴計畫」的開展存在異議。基於研究現狀的分析，本研究提出以下建議：應增加各方的行事目標了解度；保持各方資訊暢通；製造誘因以調和參與方的體驗；發起方需要對參與方在形成何種共識方面進行輔導；「學伴計畫」的整個實施過程需要中立的第三方評鑒。

In recent years, colleges and universities of Taiwan have been attractive for many exchange students from Chinese Mainland. “Buddy Program” is temporarily solving adaptative problems of exchange students in their study and life in Taiwan. Aims of that is to enhance mutual understanding, build friendship, and broaden students’ horizons. This study adopts focus group interview, participant observation and document analysis by analyzing the viewpoints of students and international office staff who both have deep understanding of the status quo of “Buddy Program” at NCHU. According to research findings, the information flow of the three parties involved is not smooth. Most of the program participants do not show frequent contact with each other, and the program organizers lack the knowledge about intercourse details. The participants demand mutual social supports, whilst the organizers are not aware of the concrete contents of participants’ social needs. Part of the participants accepted the necessity for adjusting “Buddy Program”, and the organizers suggest that it requires sufficient time and observation to consider possible adjustment. There are differences in the understanding of cultural distance between Taiwan and Chinese Mainland, and objections exist when it comes to whether cultural distance affects the development of “Buddy Program”. Based on the above analysis, this study proposes suggestions as follows: to promote the understanding of each groups’ objectives; to smoothly facilitate information flow of three parties; to create incentives and mediate the participants’ experience; to counsel consensus of participants; to conduct a third-party assessment in future implementation process.