美国私立学校办学经验对我国民办教育的启示

当前我国民办教育的发展面临困境,举步维艰.美国私立学校办学经验对我国民办教育的发展有如下启示:第一,政府时营利性和非营利性的民办教育要加以区分并实行分类管理,加强对非营利性民办学校的资助;第二,鼓励教育家和社会名流办学,以先进的理念引导民办学校的办学方向;第三,民办学校要树立服务意识,发挥办学机制灵活的优势,办出特色.     

论民办教育发展的第三条道路

第三条道路是在所谓的营利性民办学校和非营利性民办学校之外,允许并支持介于上述二者之间的一类民办学校得到发展,以扩大民办学校发展的空间,巩固民办教育发展基础的做法.第三条道路是我国民办教育发展的必然选择,民办学校分类管理应当为第三条道路发展民办教育留下空间.现阶段我国民办教育的主体具有公益性和营利性的双重属性,在现实国情下,民办教育政策应当支持大力开拓第三条道路,鼓励民间资本投资办学,更好地维护民办教育持续快速发展的局面.     

对《民办教育促进法》及其实施条例"合理回报"解读与思考

《民办教育促进法》确立了民办教育合理回报原则，《实施条例》则进行了细致规范。允许合理回报是我国民办教育立法的一项创新，具有重要的现实和法律意义。随着世界教育理论和实践的发展，营利性学校已存在，应进一步解放思想，允许开办营利性的民办学校。营利性民办学校的存在不会损害教育的公益性原则，相反有利于教育机构的多样化。     

民办教育顶层制度设计之争

完善民办教育的顶层制度设计是破解当前民办教育发展难题不可回避的课题。民办教育的顶层制度设计之争始于20世纪90年代末期国家民办教育立法至今。贯彻实施《国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年)》以来开展的新一轮民办教育顶层制度设计之争,集中在是否取消"合理回报"制度,如何推进营利性和非营利性民办学校分类管理,如何界定营利性和非营利性民办学校的边界,如何界定与保障民办学校非捐赠性出资人的权益。目前应明确界定营利性和非营利性民办学校分类标准,完善分类的配套扶持政策和管理办法,对于现有民办学校,由其自愿选择是否申请营利性或非营利性的学校性质,给其留出充足过渡期,这将有利于民办教育事业的发展。     

深水区教育改革背景下的民办教育顶层制度设计

《国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年)》开启了新一轮我国教育领域的综合改革,教育改革逐步进入深水区。完善民办教育的顶层制度设计是破解当前民办教育发展难题不可回避的重大课题。民办教育的顶层制度设计之争始于20世纪90年代末期国家民办教育立法并延续至今。在《国家中长期教育改革和发展规划纲要(2010-2020年)》研究制定和贯彻落实过程中,民办教育的顶层制度如何设计,是目前尚无结论的话题。民办教育发展艰难的根本原因是"制度上的顶层设计不足和政策上的系统配套不够",实践已经表明,《中华人民共和国民办教育促进法》设计的"合理回报"也没有彻底解决民办教育顶层制度设计欠缺的问题。在民办教育的顶层制度设计中,是否取消"合理回报"的条款、是否全面实行营利性和非营利性分类管理两个问题本身是表面的现象,不是问题的本质。当前,关键要深入论证回答"应不应该和可不可以"让民办学校与公办学校在法人类型上"并轨"、允许社会力量以非捐赠性出资方式举办或参与举办非营利性学校、允许非营利性学校的举办者和出资人从办学结余中取得经济收益、明确划定营利性学校在各级各类教育中准入的边界、赋予民办学校更充分的办学自主权五个问题。目前重在界定营利性和非营利性民办学校分类标准、完善分类的配套扶持政策和管理办法,对现有民办学校不做强行要求站队,由民办学校自愿选择是否申请营利性或非营利性论证的办法,留有充足过渡期,更有利于改革推进和民办教育事业长远发展。     

《民办教育促进法实施条例》修订的动因、重心及立法建议——兼评《民办教育促进法实施条例(修订草案)(送审稿)》

为了贯彻落实党的十九大精神、贯彻落实上位法的要求和促进民办教育的稳定健康发展,必须修订2004年公布并施行的《民办教育促进法实施条例》。对该条例的修订涉及的重点问题包括营利性民办学校和非营利性民办学校的含义、民办教育的政府规制和民办学校内部治理结构的完善,修改时应遵循立法规律,并注意对营利性民办学校和非营利性民办学校的含义及法律性质应在总则中进行明确界定。     

民办教育分类管理的现实诉求与实现路径北大核心

由于分类管理长期缺失,民办教育发展遇到诸多问题。面对解决民办学校系统的内部矛盾、落实政府对民办教育的扶持政策和破除民办教育发展瓶颈的现实诉求,近期,我国已在法律层面明确了要对非营利性民办学校和营利性民办学校实施分类管理,并将其作为民办教育创新改革的核心。由此,需要进一步基于民办教育分类原则,通过确立民办学校分类标准、实行民办学校分类登记制度和明确各类民办教育的扶持政策等路径来实现分类管理的基本目标。     

新《民办教育促进法》评析:成就、不足及完善思考

新修订的《民办教育促进法》,对于民办教育的规范与发展具有重要意义,主要表现在:确立了民办学校分类管理的发展路径、界定了营利性学校与非营利性学校的标准、增强了民办学校中党的建设、加强了对教职工权益的保护和强调了对民办学校的相关规制。同时,新法还存在一些不足,包括禁止义务教育阶段设立营利性民办学校、对营利性学校的有关规定还很欠缺,需要在今后逐渐加以完善。     

民办学校分类管理的现实基础与基本路径

在我国民办教育领域投资办学和捐资办学并存的局面下,分类管理的缺失带来了诸多困境。现今,无论从民办教育发展内部矛盾来看,还是从经济环境、思想基础和政策走向观之,实施分类管理都具备了一定的可行性。分类管理要坚持多元性取向,允许营利性与非营利性民办学校和谐共存;坚持公益性取向,重点发展非营利性民办学校;坚持公平性取向,为两类民办学校采取有针对性的管理措施。其实践思路是在合理划分营利性与非营利性民办学校基础上,完善分类登记制度,将非营利性民办学校同公办学校一样登记为事业单位法人,将营利性民办学校登记为企业法人,并基于整体扶持与区别对待相结合的原则跟进配套政策。实施过程中,要借鉴发达国家经验,求索本土管理模式;打破各自为政局面,部门地方通力配合;推行地方先行试点,汲取经验总结教训。     

试析我国民办教育投资回报的相关政策

我国民办教育的公共政策定位为非营利性机构,民办学校的会计核算、民办教育合理回报的界定与规制以及税务处理等必须以此为前提。从目前民办教育的发展情况看,已经到了一定要把营利性及其合法性界定清楚的地步。应在《中华人民共和国教育法》中明确承认营利性教育的合法地位,同时依据营利性,由《学校法》直接把学校分为营利性与非营利性两类。     

浅析民办二级学院办学中资本寻利性与教育公益性的矛盾

教育的产业属性在资本的运作上追求利润的最大化 ,这与教育的公益属性形成一对矛盾。它在公办高校中表现不明显 ,但在民办二级学院的办学中 ,由于其投资主体与办学主体的不一致而被凸现了出来。本文分析了教育产业属性在高投入、高消费、高收益和高回报等方面的具体表现 ,并从“营利”与“盈利”在词义上的不同含义 ,对我国现行法律法规中规定的“不以营利为目的”的条文提出新的认识。本文认为民办二级学院在办学投资上的盈利或结余是必要的 ,但为解决好资本寻利性与教育公益性的矛盾 ,对于民办二级学院自身来说 ,更应该在办学的投资体制、领导体制、运行机制等方面认真加以规范 ,以制约“以营利为目的”的办学。     

解读民办学校:产权经济学的视角

所谓民办学校是指以非政府组织或个人为办学主体，利用非财政性教育经费，学校产权归属及其安排不同于公办学校的专门提供系统教育服务的民间办学机制。我国民间办学存在营利型，准营利型和非营利型三种不同类型的民办学校，其中以准营利型民办学校居多。从产权经济学的视角来看，民办学校只有组成非营利性的教育组织，才是节约教育服务交易成本的一种最佳的制度安排。     

关于民办学校的非营利性和产权问题探讨

通过对民办产的微观分析，澄清了关于民办学校的产权，非营利性和投资回报等问题中的错误认识，指出民办学校的非营利性是指学校的剩余利润不能被分配，也就是说没有人拥有民办学校的学校所有权，非营利性民办学校是没有经济学中军政府的所有的，对非营利性民办学校的投资可以获得国家的合同收入；并对如何明晰我国民办学校的财产权提出建议；最后，进一步论证指出目前我国民办教育发展的方向应是大力发展非营利民办学校，严格限制营利性民办学校的发展。     

Decision: Reform in Adult Education (1987)

Promoting adult education is a human resources development with short cycles and quick effects and that calls for a certain amount of funds and investment. Starting this year, adult education will be included in the state budget for revenues and expenditures as an additional item. When making arrangement for education expenditures, local financial departments should also incorporate funds needed for adult education in their budgets and allow the funds to increase as the economy moves forward and regular revenues grow. Enterprises should disburse funds needed for employee education according to a prescribed ratio. In addition, shortfalls can be made up in the following ways: Expenses for technological training involving the development of new technology or research on new products may be disbursed directly as a part of the production cost; expenses for staff training may be disbursed from the retained percentage of profit, surplus from block-grant expenditures, and after-tax profit; training expenses for projects of technological development, introduction of foreign technology, and technological innovation, or projects of optimizing the service of certain products (including expenses for sending employees abroad for advanced training) may be disbursed from the project funding itself. Funds for staff education in enterprises should be handled and disposed of by its educational division under the supervision of financial departments. If there is surplus in the funding that cannot be spent in the same year, the surplus can be carried over to the next year. For small-sized enterprises that cannot afford to offer staff education on their own and enterprises that do not run staff education programs efficiently, the departments in charge can set up concentrated staff education facilities and support such facilities with funds taken from respective staff education expenditures. When planning for either urban community construction or newly built enterprises in the future, we should, at the same time, plan for the construction of basic facilities for adult education and incorporate such projects in the investment plan for infrastructure investment projects. The various ministries and regions should set up a few key adult education bases that are better equipped and of a higher quality. In the area of peasant education, expenses that involve eliminating illiteracy, training of teachers, compiling of textbooks, exchange of experience, activities, and so forth, should all be disbursed from educational expenditures by education departments at different levels. Funds for county-run peasants' secondary specialized schools and peasants technical schools of different specialties and types should be raised by the county people's governments under unified arrangements and according to their respective financial strengths. The departments concerned, however, should lend the local governments certain financial aid. Funds for peasants' cultural and technical schools run by townships (towns) can be drawn as a certain percentage from the rural education surcharge, pooling funds from the people, collecting tuition fees, or launching work-study programs.     

Perfection of the Taxation System for Private Education on the Basis of a Binary Structure

Abstract

Given that private schools are institutionally divided into the binary structure of for profit and nonprofit, the existing tax laws and policies aimed at private education feature obvious flaws. Reforms to the taxation system for private education should bring it in line with the state’s binary structure for the division of private schools, highlighting the charitable nature of private education, and instituting a more refined and scientific taxation system for private education.     

论民办学校的范畴和性质

民办学校是指由公益法人或自然法人自筹经费、自主经营与管理的面向社会专门提供选择性教育服务的学校或教育机构。在国家正式制度缺位的条件下,我国民办学校实际存在非盈利型、准盈利型和纯盈利型三种不同的组织模式,其中以准盈利型的民办学校居多。根据新制度经济学产权理论,由于民办教育服务市场内部存在较大的交易成本,民办学校只有组成非营利性的教育组织形式,才是节约教育交易成本的一种有效的制度安排。     

Strengthening Top-Down Design,Fortifying Categorized Management,and Promoting Healthy Development—A Few Reflections on Discussions of the “Regulations for the Implementation of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Promotion of Private Education (Revised) (Draft for Review)”

Abstract

The “Regulations for the Implementation of the Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Promotion of Private Education (Revised Version) (Draft for Review)” issued by the Ministry of Justice triggered strong reverberations, drawing a high degree of attention in society. With respect to the revision process, main content, and logical thrust, its impact and effects have been positive and constructive. However, due to gamesmanship between interested parties in the course of public policy formulation, the inevitable reshaping of national policies on private education, efforts to firmly implement the policy of categorized management, the failure to appropriately handle lingering historical problems, the need for more concrete measures supporting the reform orientation, and other reasons, the relevant provisions have struggled to win universal approval within private education circles. To build a sturdy legal system for private education, we must unswervingly implement categorized management, firmly block the policy loopholes for nondistinction between for profit and nonprofit as well as inconsistency between names and reality, implement various measures to support the development of private schools, encourage localities to be boldly innovative with regard to private education policies, and strengthen the correct interpretation of laws and regulations for private education.     

DEWEY'S THEORY OF THE DEMOCRATIC PUBLIC AND THE PUBLIC CHARACTER OF CHARTER SCHOOLS

In this essay, Leonard Waks reconsiders the issue of the public character of charter schools, that is, schools funded through public taxation but operated by non‐state organizations such as nonprofit and for‐profit educational corporations and nongovernmental public interest organizations. Using John Dewey's conception of a democratic public as a framework, Waks examines the following questions: (1) Are schools chartered and funded by government, but operated by nonprofit nongovernmental organizations, ever appropriate instruments of a democratic public? (2) If so, what criteria might distinguish those that are appropriate from those that are not? (3) How might public education be re‐institutionalized so as to include the charter schools that are appropriate? Waks concludes that Dewey's theory of democratic publics can play a useful role in thinking about how to balance the democratic benefits of charter schools for the various subcommunities of our society with the democratic requirement of broad public discourse and intergroup education.     

Institutional innovation and systematic construction of teacher education in the transformational period

Teacher education in China has entered an important period of transformation which requires institutional innovation and systematic construction. Teacher education institutions should be gradually reshaped to meet the needs of elementary and secondary schools that are run on an autonomous basis. A system of teaching qualification certification and teacher education institution accreditation should be established. Further, a system of curriculum appraisal of teacher education as well as the performance assessment of teacher education institutions should also be set up. In the meantime, making corresponding policies is necessary to accommodate the reform and development of teacher education. __________ Translated from Educational Research, 2004:9     

质疑"民办教育不能以营利为目的"

"民办教育不能以营利为目的",这是现行教育政策与法规的指向和舆论导向,然而,社会力量投资民办教育的动力却是它的可营利性.一方面,我们需要大量的社会资金投入教育,以解决我国目前教育投入不足的窘状;另一方面,又对民办教育的营利性有着严格的规定.这势必造成民办教育已投资者的焦虑,并使得民办教育的有意投资者处于观望状态.这当然不是我们所期待的,我们希望和研究的是使参与博弈的双方--政府和民办教育能实现共赢.