不同所有制幼儿园服务行为分析及其政策启示

An Empirical Study on ECEC Institutions' Behaviors in China

大力发展公办园还是积极扶持民办园,是困扰地方政府学前教育发展规划的重要问题。和很多公共问题一样,两种主张各有支持者,彼此缺乏共识空间。从企业行为和政府管制理论的角度分析,公办园应呈现同一、规范和瞄准低收入人群的行为;民办园应针对高端需求,具备创新能力,但可能夸大服务信息;转制园则由于以契约为基础,难以产生稳定预期,所以更可能关注"变现"的能力。本研究采用混合研究方法,针对7所不同所有制幼儿园所做的访谈和问卷调查结果表明,转制园服务行为符合上述理论推断,公办园、民办园在延伸服务、收费、招生宣传方面的行为也符合预期,但是在服务人群上有明显偏差,这说明制度环境未能有效促进公办园、民办园的不同定位和细分市场。在各学段教育中,学前教育的多种所有制并存特征最为明显,改革学前教育"供给侧结构"的呼声最为迫切和强烈,这给地方政府制订学前教育发展规划带来了不少难题。如何通过合适的行政工具,造就一个多种所有制并存的供给结构,满足多样化的需求,需要学前教育政策制定者和研究者转变观念,无论采用什么样的公办、民办比例,都需要在理论框架下,立足不同所有制幼儿园的行为研究和实地调研,分析不同所有制幼儿园在服务行为上的差异,再立足社会公众的社会经济地位,判断不同地方学前教育需求的层次和类别,根据供给与需求匹配的原理,做出各自学前教育发展道路的选择。

Whether is more reasonable, public kindergartens orientation or private institutions preference？ It is a strategy challenge faced by Chinese local governments when they draw their own ECEC planning to match national level ＂three-year action plan on ECEC＂. Like any public topic, there are two extremely different opinions toward the above issue and seems no common sense in their mind. Based on firm＇s behavior theory, public kindergartens are supposed to provide their services under regulation, with a low innovation motivation and target people with low income. Private kindergartens are then deduced to exag- gerate their service quality with higher innovation motivation and prioritize the group with higher income. Transformed kindergartens operate on a short term agreement with owner and then should result in an uncertain expectation, which may lead to a strong tendency on current benefits. The survey taken by the authors showed that the results were generally consistent with above theoretical inference except public and private kindergartens showed reverse in delivering their services to target people. The deviation ap pearing in target group indicated the institutional settings are failed to encourage the public and private kindergartens to coordinate each other in a segment market. ECEC in China now is the one with most distinguished characters of diversified ownerships, which lead to an urgency of supply-side reform. The local governments should introduce more administrative tools to facilitate a provision system with different ownership. No matter which ratio local governments take, it＇s a policy outcome other than a start point ECEC planning should adapt without doubt. The precondition that policy makers should hold is to identify the behaviors in delivering ECEC services among kindergartens with different ownerships based on the conceptual framework of firm behavior analysis and examine their behaviors in social survey. Finally, local governments make their own choice based on their conclusion on analyzing the local demands on ECEC in term of size, level and distribution to ensure the match or equilibrium between provision and demands.