期刊文献+

去科层化悖论:疫情下英国高等教育治理的逻辑与困局 被引量:5

The Paradox of De-bureaucratization: the Logic and Dilemma of British Higher Education Governance under the Covid-19 Epidemic
原文传递
导出
摘要 新冠疫情加剧了英国大学面临的财务风险,暴露出高等教育治理中的科层化痼疾。为此,英国政府出台长期政策,延续新公共管理路线以减轻研究与创新的科层负担,推动大学与社会经济复苏。然而,自英国实施新公共管理改革推进去科层化以来,高等教育治理体系不仅未能消除科层化弊端,反而更加科层化,表现为去科层化的悖论。究其根源,去科层化的实质是对科层制的修正而非推翻,在矛盾的外部环境与社会需求下,科层化与去科层化并存。但是,疫情下的新政也为应对这一困局提供了契机。为此,有必要澄清分化的科层化性质,划定问责边界,塑造多元的资助模式。 The COVID-19 epidemic has aggravated the financial risks faced by British universities and exposed the bureaucratic problems in the governance of higher education.The British government issued a long-term policy to continue the new public management route to reduce the bureaucratic burden of research and innovation and promote the recovery of universities and the economy.However,rather than eliminating the problems of bureaucracy,the higher education governance system in the United Kingdom becomes more bureaucratized with the implementation of the new public management reform aiming at promoting the demarcation of bureaucracy.This is the paradox of de-bureaucratization.The reason is that the essence of de-bureaucratization is to modify rather than overthrow the bureaucracy.Under the contradictory external environment and social demands,bureaucracy and de-bureaucratization coexist.However,the new policies under the epidemic also provide an opportunity to deal with this dilemma.It is necessary to clarify the bureaucratic nature of differentiation,delimit accountability boundaries,and shape diverse funding models.
作者 刘业青 林杰 LIU Ye-qing;LIN Jie(Institute of International and Comparative Education,Beijing Normal University,Beijing,100875)
出处 《清华大学教育研究》 CSSCI 北大核心 2021年第2期92-105,共14页 Tsinghua Journal of Education
基金 教育部高校国际和区域研究2020年度课题“新冠疫情对欧美高校的冲击及中国留学生风险评估”(2020-N37)。
关键词 疫情 英国高等教育治理 新公共管理 科层制 COVID-19 British higher education governance new public management Bureaucracy
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献43

  • 1马文.彼得森.大学和学院组织模型:历史演化的视角[J].北京大学教育评论,2007,5(1):109-137. 被引量:19
  • 2[法]克罗齐埃.《被封锁的社会》.狄玉明,刘培龙译.北京:商务印书馆,1999年版,第128-144页.
  • 3Henry Mintzberg.( 1991 ). The Professional Bureaucracy. Organization and Governance in Higher Education. edited by Marvin W Peterson. Lexington, MA : Ginn Press. pp. 53-59.
  • 4[美]彼得·布劳与马歇尔·梅耶.《现代社会中的科层制》.马戎等译.学林出版社,2001年版,第139页.
  • 5Richard H. Hall. (1963). The Concept of Bureaucracy: An Empirical Assessment, The American Journal of Sociology. Vol. 69, No. 1, pp. 32-40.
  • 6William C. Fels. (1959). Modem College Usage or What is the Public Relations Office Saying? Columbia University Forum, Vol. Ⅱ, No. 3, 58.
  • 7Paul Goodman. (1962). The Community of Scholars. New York: Random House, p. 98.
  • 8Herbert Hewitt Stroup. (1966). Bureaucracy in Higher Education. Non-fiction. Publisher: New York, Free Press, p. x, 15-23,4-7,41-50,64-66,80-81, 123-124,113,128-129,134-135,136-142,148-152,168-170,8-10,208-210,174-178,216- 217,203-204,156-157,195-196,200-201 ,p. vii.
  • 9Max Weber. ( 2001 ). Bureaucracy, Classics of Organization Theory ( Fifth Edition), edited by Jay M. Shafritz, Harcourt College Publishers, pp. 73-74.
  • 10Kenneth J. Meier; George A. Krause. (2003). The Scientific Study of Bureaucracy: An Overview, www. press. umich. edu/pdf/0472113178-ch1. pdf, pp. 1-2.

同被引文献93

引证文献5

二级引证文献8

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部