关于综合性大学研究型学院学科建设的思考

在综合性大学当中,研究型学院是一个十分重要的学院,对于综合性大学的全面发展具有重要的意义。而在研究型学院当中,学科建设是学院发展的核心内容,对于社会服务、科学研究、人才培养等发挥着十分巨大的作用。相比于其他的学院,研究型学院更加注重知识体系的创新和建设。本文结合研究型学院的内涵与特征,阐述其学科构建基本目标,进而为综合性大学研究型学院学科建设提出几点建议。     

学院人群体的生存困境与价值追寻

知识社会的到来,一方面意味着知识成为人们在社会上实现自身价值的重要资本,另一方面也促使更多的知识人进入体制,成为一名学院人。当前,人们认可知识的重要性,却质疑学者、教授们的话语权威性,从而产生知识与知识人的权威失衡的矛盾现象。了解学院人群体在目前大学体制内的生存状况和心理困境能为人们理解这种矛盾现象的产生,提供一种独特的现实视角,制度环境的改善成为学院人重拾担当精神的重要前提。     

“学院办大学”:一个教师人力资本合约的制度安排北大核心

在大学与其学院的关系解释及其治理上,高教界倾向将学院治理看成象征性而非实质性的。在知识市场条件下,大学本质上是知识生产和知识消费的一体化合约;学院受大学委托,构成专门知识生产和知识消费的专业化合约。学院作为“中心签约人”,既承包了对所属教师进行人力资本激励和约束的合约功能,又承担了向所教学生提供专门知识与教学服务等的交易责任。大学与学院的教师人力资本合约具有一体化交易的“双边治理”属性,大学可通过“可置信承诺”“激励性约束”和“控制权分配”等实施机制,释放学院的教师人力资本激励优势,推进学院治理实质性转变,从而深化“学院办大学”的制度安排。     

提高综合性大学研究型学院教学质量的对策研究

研究型学院对综合性大学的发展具有重大意义,本文着重分析影响研究型学院教学质量的因素,并有针对性的提出对策建议,以期为提高综合性大学研究型学院教学质量提供借鉴。     

学科视角下的中美研究型大学学院设置比较分析

显的学科格局.在覆盖率上,美国研究型大学并不是学科齐全的大学,我国大学学院设置有贪大求全的现象.建议从规范学院设置、建立弹性化基层组织、建立超文本组织等方面调整我国研究型大学学院设置.     

美国研究型学院运行机制的启示

文章指出美国研究型大学内部专业学院运行机制给我国加快研究型学院建设的步伐以莫大的启示。我国研究型大学研究型学院必须从学院内部各种责权利关系入手,实行目标管理,建立健全学院内部领导体制,实行院长负责制度,规范院系领导岗位设置,推进并加快院长职业化进程;同时坚持学术权力的中坚地位和教授治学的决策机制,并推行跨学科研究发展。     

建设研究型学院争创国内一流大学

在综合国内、外研究型大学分类与定义的基础上,结合东北大学实际,提出建设国内一流大学必须首先建设研究型大学,而研究型大学建设可以从研究型学院的建设开始.通过确定研究型大学框架下的二级学院的重要指标,给出建设研究型学院的若干建议.     

中美研究型大学学院设置之比较

中美研究型大学在学院设置上差别明显,原因在于两国大学宏观政策导向、院长权力构成和人才培养目标等方面存在差异.学院设置应有利于促进人才培养,有利于推动学科发展,有利于提高管理效率.因此,应取消院长行政级别,实行教育职员制度;减少学院数量,以学科群设立学院;淡化专业色彩,组建本科生学院.     

美国研究型大学学院层面的管理模式及启示——以伯克利加州大学文理学院和自然资源学院为例

美国研究型大学的发展模式是世界上成功的大学发展模式之一,其内部管理模式也非常有特色。美国研究型大学学院层面的管理模式包括行政管理体系和学术管理体系两部分。美国研究型大学学院具有较强的独立性和较大的自主权,是行政权力和学术权力二元结构的统一体,它们拥有相对完备的规章制度,其内部各机构职责分明、权责明确。     

美国研究型大学学院层面的管理模式及启示——以伯克利加州大学文理学院和自然资源学院为例

美国研究型大学的发展模式是世界上成功的大学发展模式之一,其内部管理模式也非常有特色。美国研究型大学学院层面的管理模式包括行政管理体系和学术管理体系两部分。美国研究型大学学院具有较强的独立性和较大的自主权,是行政权力和学术权力二元结构的统一体,它们拥有相对完备的规章制度,其内部各机构职责分明、权责明确。     

Building commitment: an examination of learning climate congruence and the affective commitment of academics in an Australian university

The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between learning climate congruence and the affective commitment of university academics. The strategy of inquiry for this research is quantitative, involving a non-experimental design for the survey research. A non-probability sample of 900 academics from a large Australian university was selected, with a response rate of 30.33%. The major conclusion drawn from this study was that the congruence between current and preferred learning climate was related to the affective commitment of university academics. More specifically, academics’ level of affective commitment was enhanced in a learning climate where they were encouraged to take risks, had plenty of time to learn new tasks and were encouraged to openly express their ideas and opinions. This study is important in a practical sense for academic managers and universities to build relationships and develop better connections with their academics.     

Women academics and research productivity: an international comparison

In the prestige economy of higher education, research productivity is highly prized. Previous research indicates, however, a gender gap with respect to research output. This gap is often explained by reference to familial status and responsibilities. In this article, we examine the research productivity gender gap from an international perspective by undertaking a gendered analysis of the Changing Academic Profession Survey. We suggest that family is not, in all cases, operating as a form of negative equity in the prestige economy of higher education. In addition, we argue that an over-reliance on an explanatory framework that positions family-related variables as central to the research productivity gender gap might well be drawing our attention from significant structural and systemic discriminatory practices within the profession.     

Organisational commitments and teaching styles among academics in mainland China

This research pioneered the investigation of the predictive power of organisational commitments for academics’ teaching styles. Participants were 370 faculty members from 15 higher educational institutions in Beijing, the People’s Republic of China. Results showed that academics’ organisational commitments as measured by the Organisational Commitment Inventory statistically significantly predicted their teaching styles as assessed by the Thinking Styles in Teaching Inventory over and above their gender, age, taught academic discipline and academic rank. Practical implications of the findings are proposed for academics and for university senior managers.     

Emotions and teaching styles among academics: the mediating role of research and teaching efficacy

The key purpose of this research was to investigate the mediating role of academics’ self-efficacy in teaching and research (termed ‘academic self-efficacy’) in the relationship between emotions in teaching and teaching styles. Two hundred and thirty-two academics from 13 higher educational institutions in Shanghai, mainland China, responded to three self-report inventories, each assessing academics’ emotions in teaching, efficacy in teaching and research, and teaching styles, respectively. Results showed that academics’ emotions in teaching statistically predicted teaching styles, both directly and indirectly – through academic self-efficacy. Findings have enriched the literature on emotions in teaching, that on teaching styles, and that on teacher/academic self-efficacy. Practical implications are proposed in relation to academics and university senior managers.     

治理视角下的大学制度研究

现代大学的目标是传承知识、创造知识与服务社会,但这个目标不是自动实现的,需要一系列制度安排来实施,这种制度安排就是大学治理。它包含内部治理和外部治理两个方面,除正式制度安排外,文化在大学治理中也发挥着重要作用。     

大学学科等级制度的建构逻辑

大学各门学科地位差异的形成,源于不同主体建构的一整套评价标准。学者们按照专门化、规范化、理论化标准判定学科的学术地位;政府、大学和求学者等社会主体则根据各门学科对各自的功能意义对大学学科赋予不同的等级。在学科等级规范得到规定者和参与者的广泛认同后,等级标准遂演化为一种社会公意,控制着学科建设实践并将其制度化。     

Exploring the hermeneutic foundations of university life: Deaf academics in a hybrid `community of practice'

This paper derives from a study oforganizational socialization and induction inuniversities. It uses some of the data fromthat study to critique social practice theoryand to further develop a model to illuminatethe characteristics of professionalknowledgeability and practices underpinningdaily life in universities. This is donethrough the analysis of a case study of oneunusual sub-departmental workgroup in anunchartered English university: one thatcomprises both Deaf and hearing academics.Using such a case study highlights factors thatare less evident in hearing-only situations,displaying important features in exaggeratedform which exist less palpably in mostmicro-social situations in universities. As aresult it offers a suitable locus for themodelling of the processes underlying muchwhich is taken for granted in universities'daily life. The structure of the paper is asfollows: it outlines the broader study fromwhich this is derived and makes some generalcomments about using `unusual' case studies. Itthen goes on to describe the characteristics ofworkgroups in university contexts through thecase study example and to explore theirtheoretical corollaries. Finally the paperconsiders the implications for aspects of themodel developed, particularly in terms of localleadership.     

Quality criteria of research perceived by academics in social sciences at higher education

The purpose of this study is to examine the problem of research quality in social sciences at higher education. Quality of research produced at higher education started to be questioned more often as research became the major factor determining academics＇ promotion and fund allocation to universities. In the study, we aimed to reveal how academics perceive research quality and what they identify as the main problems that make it difficult to achieve quality in research. Data were collected through interviews with 25 academics from 7 disciplines （educational sciences, sociology, communicational sciences, law, history, management and political science） in 7 universities. Six of the academics interviewed were professors, 7 were associate professors, 10 were assistant professors and 2 were doctors. Interviews were carried out in 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 academic years, and each lasted about one hour on average. Data collected were analyzed through content analysis. Study findings revealed that academics referred most often to methodological issues as the most important quality criterion of research, followed by issues of theoretical background and originality. Academics definitions of sub-criteria related to these were tackled in more detail in the study. As the most important hindrances that make it difficult to achieve quality in research academics mentioned lack of a long-established research culture, problems of research resources and the pressure caused by academic promotion criteria. Some recommendations related to the problems were made to develop research quality in the light of the study findings.