新自由主义常识与全球性大学：高等教育中的知识商品化

知识是组织高等教育活动的基本材料和学术生活的基础。传统上作为公共产品的知识正在发生转向,其商品属性和交换价值趋于增强,成为兼具公共产品与私人产品性质的一种混合型产品。在高等教育领域,知识商品化具有多种表征形式,侵蚀了高等教育的公共性。本文结合哈贝马斯和布迪厄的理论框架,阐述了以下观点:知识的公共产品性质是高等教育的公益性、高校的公共形象和学术人的公共身份的基础,也是基础研究的核心价值观之一。坚持知识的公共产品性质,抵制知识商品化的消极影响,既是知识的内在要求也是高等教育的内在要求。     

知识商品化及其对高等教育公共性的侵蚀

知识是组织高等教育活动的基本材料和学术生活的基础。传统上作为公共产品的知识正在发生转向,其商品属性和交换价值趋于增强,成为兼具公共产品与私人产品性质的一种混合型产品。在高等教育领域,知识商品化具有多种表征形式,侵蚀了高等教育的公共性。本文结合哈贝马斯和布迪厄的理论框架,阐述了以下观点:知识的公共产品性质是高等教育的公益性、高校的公共形象和学术人的公共身份的基础,也是基础研究的核心价值观之一。坚持知识的公共产品性质,抵制知识商品化的消极影响,既是知识的内在要求也是高等教育的内在要求。     

后现代知识与高等教育的转变——读利奥塔《后现代状态——关于知识的报告》

利奥塔认为,进入后现代社会以后,由于受技术理性的影响,知识的性质和传播方式都会发生改变.在后现代社会,知识将被信息化、商品化并与权力结合.随着后现代时代知识性质的改变,高等教育的合法性、目的、受教育者、教育内容、职能、"学术自治"、教师地位都将有所改变.     

知识商品化及其对高等教育公共性的侵蚀

在全球化和知识经济的双重背景下,受新自由主义这一管理全球经济和构建世界新秩序的思想意识形态的波及,世界各国"竞争型政府"强调知识的经济价值,导致知识的公共产品性质弱化,私人产品和商品性质增强,知识逐渐演变成兼具公共与私有性质的混合产品,乃至成为可在市场上交换的国内商品和可贸易的国际商品。在过去二三十年间,高等教育商品化、商业化和市场化趋势,均可看做是知识商品化的体现。     

知识商品化:高等教育的福音还是灾难

正在全球化和知识经济的双重背景下,受新自由主义这一管理全球经济和构建世界新秩序的思想意识形态的波及,世界各国"竞争型政府"强调知识的经济价值,导致知识的公共产品性质弱化,私人产品和商品性质增强,知识逐渐演变成兼具公共与私有性质的混合产品,乃至成为可在市场上交换的国内商品和可贸易的国际商品。在过去二三十年间,高等教育商品化、商业化和市场化趋势,均可看做是知识商品化的体现。     

高深知识的生产变革与高等教育绩效评价

目前针对高等学校实施绩效评价在理论上是否合理的研究主要借鉴的是管理学和经济学等对企业实施绩效评价的研究。然而,高等教育自身的独特性、复杂性和内隐性决定了在高等学校中实施绩效评价与在企业中实施绩效评价有着根本性的不同。本文以高等教育的逻辑起点——高深知识——为切入点,结合高等教育系统的内外部特征,通过梳理知识生产模式变化与高等教育质量管理诉求变迁的关系,揭示了在当今高等教育领域中实施绩效评价的必然性和合理性。     

论高深知识与高等教育

高等教育研究通常不关注高深知识,而高深知识却是高等教育的基础所在。本文主要论述了:第一,高等教育学的实践取向使其忽视高深知识;第二,高深知识与高等教育的关系至为密切,高等教育研究不能忽视高深知识;第三,对高深知识的外部和内部特征进行了初步的讨论。对高深知识的研究不仅能为高等教育改革提供更好的依据,而且对完善现有高等教育研究的理论体系有着重要意义。     

后现代知识状况与高等教育--解读利奥塔《后现代状态--关于知识的报告》

法国当代哲学家利奥塔在《后现代状态———关于知识的报告》中,把对“元叙述”的怀疑定义为“后现代”,认为在西方发达的后工业社会,知识的性质和地位已经发生变化,知识信息化、商品化的性质、知识与权力的结合以及知识内部的等级划分危及了知识的合法性,动摇了传统大学的制度基础。相应地,高等教育呈现大众化、国际化、市场化、政治化的发展趋势,大学教育目标、学习方式、教学过程中师生关系也有所改变,大学体制正处于转变之中。     

知识观转型视野下高校课程改革

当代社会巨大变革的背景下,面对知识经济时代的挑战和高等教育自身发展的需要,高校课程改革势在必行。本文从知识本身变化所引发的知识观的变革出发,对知识概念和知识观界定的多角度研究作了梳理,并深入探讨了现代知识观向后现代知识观转型关照下进行高校课程改革所需要的相关调整,以期高校教育培养出的高层次人才能够以高度的适切性面对复杂多变的现代社会。     

知识观转型视野下高校课程改革

当代社会巨大变革的背景下,面对知识经济时代的挑战和高等教育自身发展的需要,高校课程改革势在必行。本文从知识本身变化所引发的知识观的变革出发,对知识概念和知识观界定的多角度研究作了梳理,并深入探讨了现代知识观向后现代知识观转型关照下进行高校课程改革所需要的相关调整,以期高校教育培养出的高层次人才能够以高度的适切性面对复杂多变的现代社会。     

加拿大高等教育的量变、质变及其特征

加拿大高等教育过去40年的数量发展主要表现为高等学校学生、教师及学校数量的显著增加,其质变主要表现为越来越强调应用研究、国际化和商业化等。加拿大高等教育体系的主要特征为:政府干预日益增多,大学与经济间联系日益加强,市场规则与机制逐步引入,大学集权管理不断加强,大学功能日益商业化。     

高校科技成果转化制度的道德经济意涵

高校科技成果转化制度包括法律层面的规制性制度与伦理层面的规范性制度。道德经济关注的是经济活动如何影响道德价值观和规范,以及这些规范如何反过来影响经济活动。高校科技成果转化制度是一种规范科技成果所有权和知识生产行为的道德经济制度,影响高校知识生产过程中的社会关系,不仅激发研究成果的转化,而且也明确了研究成果转化过程中权利和责任的分配。本研究通过论证高校科技成果转化制度的道德经济性质,展示了道德经济概念在当代大学变革研究中的相关性,从而有助于高等教育研究的推进。基于道德经济视角,高校科技成果转化制度与实践需要完善奖酬激励与分配正义机制,深化科技成果所有权归属制度改革以及协调开放科学与知识产权保护之间的平衡关系。     

新全球化时代与高等教育国际化--兼谈高等教育国际化与高等教育全球化的差异

通过对高等教育国际化的历史透视，我们可以看出，高等教育国际化的本质就是人们通过改造或变革组成世界高等教育系统的各要素而结成的国际间以高深知识为中心纽带的网络关系的交往实践。高等教育国际化的历时性特征是：始终都以承认知识的普遍性价值为根本动力，以高深知识在大学间的交流为普遍目的。而在新全球化时代背景之下，高等教育国际化与高等教育全球化的差异主要表现在：主导力量不同、前提条件不同、价值诉求不同。     

Overcoming Fragmentation in Professional Life: The Challenge for Academic Development

This paper portrays the fragmented nature of higher education, experienced in terms of a number of fractures. I have chosen to concentrate here on five of these fractures or fault lines: the diverse assumptions about the nature of higher education; the separation between teachers and learners; the separation between academic staff and those who manage them; the split between teaching and research; and the fragmented nature of knowledge itself. Policy initiatives have tended to aggravate these fractures. I suggest that the task for academic development is to work within these fractures, to attempt to create coherence in academic practice. To do this, we need to develop a series of critical conversations between teachers and learners, between academics and managers and between the disciplines. Such conversations might be seen as contributing to the development of a new academic professionalism. The first and foremost subject of this thinking together must concern the purposes of higher education itself.     

Knowledge society discourse and higher education

The growing importance of knowledge, research and innovation are changing the social role of universities in the globalized world. One of the most popular concepts used to approach these changes in post-industrial and post-modern societies is the concept of ‘Knowledge Society’. In this paper, we will analyse the roles higher education is expected to play with regard to various knowledge society discourses. We will begin with analyzing the uses of knowledge society as an intellectual device and continue by reflecting on how changes in higher education are related to knowledge society discourses in national, regional and global levels. In the final section we will reflect on current challenges and expectations generated within these discourses for higher education and the implications these expectations have for higher education research.     

论高等教育的本质

教育作为人的一种活动,其本质从属于人的本质,是围绕教育活动而形成的社会关系的总和。高等教育的本质是围绕知识、技能的传递与创新而展开的教学、科研、管理、服务等社会关系的总和。处理好高校师生与自然及社会的关系、教育资料的占有关系,行政权力与学术权力的关系、师生关系以及教师与教师、学生与学生的关系对高等教育的发展至关重要。     

The Treatment of Research

The recommendations of the Dearing Report concerning research organisation and content are critically examined. Many of them are seen to be benign and to adopt an appropriately pluralist approach to the objectives and working of the higher education system. The report is criticised, however, on several grounds. The Committee had a fragile grasp of the nature of knowledge and of its modes of production, and failed to remedy this by consulting sufficiently available international and national research. It is, therefore, inadequate as an example of the way in which research on higher education should be used in determining higher education policy. It takes for granted conventional wisdom on several key issues: the application of selectivity in research funding; the priority to be given to areas identified in the still largely unevaluated Technology Foresight programmes, and the relationships between uni- and multi-disciplinary work.     

Commercialization of research: a case study of Australian universities

Research commercialization is a crucial aspect of technological innovation and is a complex socio‐economic and technological process. This paper explores the commercialization of university research, drawing on an empirical study of the development of research commercialization by Australian universities. The study addresses three main research questions: (i) What are the recent major policy changes affecting the commercialization of university research in Australia? (ii) How much have Australian universities done in research commercialization over the past few years? (iii) What are the key barriers to the achievement of higher levels of commercialization in university research? The findings of this study show that there are two fundamental issues that universities have to address: (i) adequate financial support from governments, industries, and other stakeholders; and (ii) effective innovation management with academic entrepreneurship. Because the issues and problems covered in this study are common to many countries, the study has international applications and provides policymakers and practitioners with valuable information to assist them in the development of organizational strategies in the commercialization of innovative university research.     

Improving lecturers' assessment practice in higher education: a problem-based approach

This article reports on a project based on the authors' concerns about assessment practice in higher education in the United Kingdom. These concerns stem from their experience as university lecturers, and from knowledge of research evidence and policy issues relating to assessment in higher education. Given the complex nature of higher education, improvement rather than mere change in assessment procedures will require the full participation of people who possess intimate day-to-day contextual knowledge, including an understanding of those aspects of the situation which are not easily measurable or even readily observable. The article details (a) a Popperian problem-based approach to action research designed to facilitate improvements in higher education assessment practice, and (b) how this methodology was adopted, tested and developed at the University of Sunderland. The authors’ aim is to encourage colleagues in other higher education institutions to adopt and further test this methodology in subsequent research.[1]