中国式“教授治校”和“教授治学”的理论分歧与制度耦合  

Faculty Governance and Academic Governance in China:Theoretical Difference and Institutional Coupling

作　　者：史吉海 史华楠 SHI Jihai;SHI Huanan(School of Educational Science,Yangzhou University,Yangzhou 225002,Jiangsu,China;Institute of Higher Education,Yangzhou University,Yangzhou 225002,Jiangsu,China)

机构地区：[1]扬州大学教育科学学院,江苏扬州225002 [2]扬州大学高等教育研究所,江苏扬州225002

出　　处：《复旦教育论坛》2023年第4期36-42,共7页Fudan Education Forum

基　　金：国家社会科学基金2020年度教育学一般课题“‘反教育行为’的多元治理研究”(BGA200056)。

摘　　要：大学内部治理模式中,“教授治校”和“教授治学”在历史渊源、内涵界定、权力侧重以及价值诉求等方面都存在差异,既呈现理论上的分野,也有着制度上的耦合。实现“教授治校”与“教授治学”的制度耦合,是当代中国大学内部治理改革的基本逻辑和必然发展,也是立足国情、化繁为简、平复争议的有效路径和可行方案。在“治校”和“治学”制度耦合的整体设计上,不但要保持两种模式灵活转化的张力,也要在维护教授权力的基础上避免行政化管理惯性,促进学术的民主与自由。在“治校”和“治学”制度耦合的路径策略上,可以从完善行政管理体制和改革学术管理组织出发,整合学校教授群体的资源,构筑教授权力的实现平台,建立教授主体参与的保障机制,以增强教授治校和教授治学制度耦合的可行性与有效性。As the two modes of university governance,"faculty governance"and"academic governance"are different in historical origin,connotative definition,power spectrum and value appeal.However,they have not only theoretical divergence,but also institutional coupling.It is the basic logic and inevitable choice to realize the institutional coupling of the two modes for modern Chinese universities to deepen the internal governance reform.The institutional coupling of the two modes may also provide a feasible solution to settle the controversy based on China's national conditions.The overall design of the institutional coupling needs to focus on the flexible transformation between the two modes,avoid excessive administration by safeguarding the authority of faculty,and promote academic democracy and freedom.In order to realize the institutional coupling,it is imperative to improve the administrative management system and reform academic governance organizations by integrating faculty resources,constructing platforms for faculty members to use their authority and establishing mechanisms to ensure the participation of faculty members.

关 键 词：大学内部治理 教授治校 教授治学 理论分歧 制度耦合 中国模式 

分 类 号：G647[文化科学—高等教育学]