【2013大師講座 x SHS Profile】張忠謀暢談大學教育 強調博雅大學為領袖培育之搖籃

翻譯｜張郁笛、童靜瑩（科學人文跨科際人才培育計畫）
整理｜童靜瑩、楊玲（科學人文跨科際人才培育計畫）

編按：SHS科學人文跨科際人才培育計畫「達人學苑」平臺5月4日假國立國立臺灣大學舉辦「大師講座」活動。特別邀請臺灣積體電路製造股份有限公司董事長張忠謀、臺灣綜合大學系統總校長朱經武、國立東華大學校長吳茂昆以及兩位美國國家科學院士等重量級人物分享自身經驗及對當今教育的看法。

其中張忠謀董事長對當今大學教育針砭鏗鏘有力，SHS計畫【跨科際對話平臺】部落格與SHS Profile團隊將當天張忠謀董事長英文口述的演講內容整理成中英版全文刊登，盼能給予大眾一些深入啟發。

張忠謀董事長非常關心當今教育議題。（拍攝：楊玲）

Do you want me to be standing up?I only conduct a test for us: how many of you are college students? Please lift your hand up. 123456… about 12.
想先跟大家做個小調查，在座各位有幾位是大學生？請舉手。1,2,3…大概12個。

How many college students want to be future leaders? 1234… I think we have more leaders than students.
有幾位大學生未來想成為領袖？1,2,3…領袖比起學生還更多呢。

I conducted this test about 6 years ago. There were more 100 students sitting in front of me.
六年前我也做過這樣的小調查，當時有100多個學生坐在我面前。

Very few hands went out when I asked the question whether they will gonna be leader.
當我問他們想不想成為領袖時，只有寥寥幾隻手舉起而已。

So time has changed. That’s good.
時代改變了，很好。

Today I want to talk about education, college education in Taiwan. We have several fundamental problems in Taiwan.
今天我想談談關於台灣的大學教育。台灣有幾個根本的關鍵問題。

First one, there is mismatch of expectations. In 1990, about 21 20 years ago, there were only 600,000 college students at that time, 600,000 young men and women that were college students at that time. Now, there’re about 1.3 million , more double of the number of 20 years ago.
第一是期待落差。在1990年，約21, 20年前，當時台灣有50萬大學生，只有60萬青年男女是大學生。現在有130萬，比20年前的數量還多一倍。

20 years ago, the parents all thought that college education for the children was a permanent meal ticket. Anybody that graduated from college would have a good job and would have a good life. Therefore, they tried very hard to send their kids to college.
20年前，父母認為孩子上了大學，等於是拿了一張永久飯票。任何大學畢業生都可以找到好工作、過個好生活。所以他們努力想辦法把孩子送進大學。

Now, with almost double the number of college students and therefore graduates, keep in mind, this is the eligible age group actually has decreased because of decreased birth rate in Taiwan.
現在，儘管大學生總數比當年多上一倍，但畢業生們要知道合格的菁英人數比率其實是在下降的。主因還是台灣的出生率日漸降低。

600,000 students in 1990 represented a smaller percentage of the eligible group than the 1.3 million. I wonder if I’m right. Now so more people are going to college now, and college education is no longer a permanent meal ticket. That’s first part.And young people getting out college couldn’t get a job, and they are getting disillusion.
1990年的60萬大學生所占的比率比現在130萬大學生所占的還小。也許我說地不對 。現在有更多的人上大學，但大學教育不再是永久飯票，這是第一部分。年輕人從大學畢業後沒辦法找到工作，幻想也就此破滅。

The second problem we have is that we have mismatch of skills. There’re many jobs waiting, but there are fewer applicants that really have the skills. In the last 20 years, I think Taiwan has a very much elected  trade education, trade training, trade schools.
第二個問題則是技能人才分配不當。外頭有很多工作缺人，但有更少的應徵者真的會所需的技能。在過去二十年，我想台灣投入太多的優質貿易教育，包括貿易培訓班，或貿易學校等。

Alright. And the third problem is that. We don’t really have good colleges that develop future leaders. Taida (NTU) is perhaps the best university we have in Taiwan, some people may argue that, but let’s assume that. But I think that NTU is still not the very good school in developing leaders.
好，再來第三個問題是我們沒有好的大學來培養未來領袖。台大可能是我們台灣最好的大學，也許有人不這麼想，但就先這樣假設吧。不過，我覺得台大在培養領袖部分也沒有做得很好。

Now I want to concentrate on that point, the point of a good school which develops leaders.I think it’s a liberal arts college. I think a good school which develops leaders is a liberal arts college.
我想聚焦一下，我們應把重心放在一間可以培養領袖的好學校上。也就是博雅大學。我認為一間能培養領袖的好大學，是一間博雅大學。

And my role model for that kind of education would be the Oxford and Cambridge in the 19th century in England. And the Ivy League colleges, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford in 20th century.
這類教育的理想典範包括19世紀的英國的牛津和劍橋以及20世紀的常春藤名校如哈佛、耶魯、普林斯頓、史丹佛等。

In the 21st century, I think most of the good schools in the US, the one I mentioned, will continue to be good role models. And all of those, what I would consider liberal arts colleges. The undergraduate part, anyway, liberal arts colleges.
在21世紀，我想美國大部分的名校，如我剛剛提到的，會一直是大家的榜樣。這些學校，我都認為是博雅大學的學校.他們的大學部，總之，就是博雅教育模式。

Now what does in liberal arts colleges do?I don’t think I can say it better than a report from the dean of Harvard college in 2006.
那麼這些博雅大學都做些甚麼呢？我想最好的詮釋就在2006年一篇哈佛校長的訪問稿中。

And I’ll just read it.
我就直接讀了。

He said:“We commit ourselves to liberal education. Liberal education resumes a broad education that liberates the individual in several ways: by offering opportunities for foundational knowledge, reflection and analysis, artistic creativity, and an appreciation for the precession of the scientific concepts and experiments. It resists pleasures for early specialization and professionalization.”
他說：「我們投身於通識教育。通識教育提供較廣泛的教育基礎，並以數種方式啟蒙學生：包括提供基礎知識學習、自省、分析、藝術創意學習的機會，培養具有區辨科學觀念與實驗精神的慧眼人才。因此通識教育反對過早的科目專精與專業化。」

I think that’s an important point: the liberal education resists pleasures for early specialization and professionalization. Professional education is in the proud tradition of many universities.” What you have in NTU is a professional education.It’s in the tradition of the universities.
我覺得關鍵重點在於：通識教育反對過早的科目專精與專業化。專業教育是很多學校引以為傲的傳統，你們在台大擁有的也是專業教育，這是是大學傳統的主流。

Let me just continue on: “But it is not the mission of Harvard college. Our students will develop some significant parts of their time to special and concentrate to the thinking or learning.But we aspire a bubble that they graduate as curious, reflective and independent thinkers would a commitment to serve the wider world and a lifetime of learning still before them. That’s what we mean when we welcome our graduates to the fellowship of educated women and men.”
我繼續念下去：「但這不是哈佛大學的任務。我們的學生會把大部分時間用來特別專注於思考與學習。我們期許我們的畢業生是有好奇心、有自省能力的獨立思考者，並能夠承諾去服務更廣的世界，以及在未來持續終身學習。這就是當我們提及:歡迎畢業生加入知識分子行列時，所指的意涵。」

I really think that’s a soaring statement for liberal arts colleges, liberal education. Now, I think I got about five more minutes.What in my mind should the liberal arts college do in developing future leaders;
我真的認為這是對博雅大學、通識教育一份振奮人心的宣言。我想我還有五分多鐘。我有一些關於博雅大學應該如何培養未來領袖的想法。

First of all, in admission. Here I’m speaking from my personal experience. I had spent just one year at Harvard undergraduate. And I have said many times since then that that was perhaps the most meaningful year I have in all my life. And what did I think so?I learnt just as much from fellow students as I did from the classroom, so fellow students are very important, a very important part of the education at the liberal arts colleges.
第一，入學評量。我從我自身經驗來說，我在哈佛大學不待過一年，我曾說過很多遍，那應該是我人生中最有意義的一年。為什麼呢？我從同儕身上學到的跟我從教室裡學到的一樣多。所以同儕是非常重要的，是博雅大學教育中很重要的一部分。

Therefore, I think the admission standards should not be just academic excellence. Admission standards, in fact, should weight more leadership traits and the kind of characteristics that Professor Greene just mentioned, ability to communicate with people, with other people, to work with other people and those things, and creativity, entrepreneurship, those kinds of things.
因此，我認為入學的評量標準不能只考慮學業表現。在評量標準上，其實，我們更該重視領袖特質，以及剛剛Greene教授所提到的一些人格特質如溝通能力、團隊合作能力，以及創意、企業家精神等等。

Now I think that has to be a very difficult job to set admission standards across these wide expectations of requirements, but I think it can be done.You know~I think colleges like Harvard, Yale, Princeton, they do do it.
我知道很難去設立評量標準，尤其是要滿足這麼多的條件和期望，但我覺得做得到，像哈佛、耶魯、普林斯頓，他們就做到了。

And now, once you have that kind of admission standards, the students, when they come in, will find, they’ll learn more from their fellow students than even from the classroom. Now also, I think the student body should be diversified: foreign students, students from all kinds of families. I think that’s very important, too. I think that, naturally, the faculty, the school, the college administrators must share the same philosophy that this is a liberal arts college; this is a place where they intend to develop future leaders of society.
當你有了這樣的入學標準，當學生們進來時，他們會發現他們可以在同儕身上學到甚至比課堂上更多的東西。另外，學生群體的背景也應該更加多元：外籍學生、來自不同社會層面的學生等，這很重要。我想自然地，教職員工、學校、學校管理人都必須有這樣共同的哲學，也就是認同這是一間博雅大學，這是一個要培養未來社會領袖的地方。

I think it should be requirement for undergraduates to live in dormitories. You need to…I think the undergraduates have to spend all the time in school.
接著，我要談的是宿舍。我認為有必要要求所有大學生都住宿舍，我覺得大學生必須待在學校。

I think the dormitories should serve not just as a place to sleep; to sleepingDormitories should be a place for the students to live, for the student to live, to study, to socialize, and not just a place to live in.so I think a lot of universities spend what money they get on  research equipment and so on.I said: why don’t you spend some on improving your dormitories?
宿舍不應該只做為一個睡覺的地方，宿舍應該是一個讓學生生活、念書、社交的地方，而不只用來住。很多學校把經費花費在購買研究設備等，但我主張：為什麼不花錢在改進宿舍環境上呢？

And , student activities.They should definitely include studying,they should definitely include things like P.E. sports, the other speaking, debating, and culture activities as well. Those are the undergraduate four years are very valuable, golden four years.And let’s use them to stimulate the students’ mind to just as the statement I read: create educated men and women, create their independent thinking ability, their lifetime learning, lifelong learning habit, develop their curiosity, their reflective ability etc.
還有，學生的社團活動。學生除了讀書，也應該要參加運動、談論、辯論、文化活動等社團活動。這樣一來才能把大學四年，造就為黃金四年。讓我們要利用四年來刺激學生的心靈，就像我剛剛唸的一樣：造就知識分子，造就他們獨立思考的能力、終生學習的習慣、激發他們的好奇心、自省精神等。

Thank you.
謝謝。

2013大師講座系列報導

SHS Profile系列人物