谈比较音乐教育学理论与实际应用

比较音乐教育学是教育领域内正在兴起和形成的一门边缘学科，它是以比较法为主要方法，研究当代世界各国音乐教育的一般规律与特殊规律，以揭示教育的主要因素及其相互关系，探索未来音乐教育趋势的一门学科。     

The historical dimension: a contribution to conversation about theory and methodology in comparative education

After sketching in the background for conversation generally about theoretical and methodological issues in comparative education and more specifically about its historical dimension, the author seeks to identify theories that, despite widespread eclecticism and even support for atheoretical standpoints, appear influential, together with characteristic forms of historical analysis. With these preliminaries as a basis, he analyses strategies for clarifying the historical dimension. This leads him to focus both on the units/levels of comparison and on three structures that can be used for this purpose: the familiar (narrative) forms of diachronic analysis, the more in‐depth approaches opened up by synchronic analysis, and hybrid forms. The article also recognizes and explores problems associated with the use of the historical dimension, emphasizing those related to sources, interpretation, and periodization, while illustrating these problems and their possible solutions with specific examples from Hong Kong and elsewhere in the world. The article concludes by reaffirming the importance of the historical dimension of comparative education.     

主体性道德教育新论

主体性道德是培养和发展学生的道德主体的教育，而不是培养道德主体的教育。道德主体性的特征主要体现为创造性、整合性和开放性，因此，主体性道德教育的内容应立足于培养学生的道德性创造、学生的完整德性和学生自我教育的意向和能力。实施主体性道德教育的基本条件是：生活世界是主体性道德教育的根基，交往和实践是主体性道德教育的关键，平等尊重的师生关系是主体性道德教育的保证。     

The enculturation of new faculty in higher education: A comparative investigation of three academic departments

While studies on organizational entry have, for several decades, examined how individuals choose organizations and how organizations choose individuals (Lawler, 1973; Vroom, 1964; Wanous 1977), most have focused on the employee recruitment and selection processes primarily from the organization's standpoint. Although the academic profession may provide general identity for faculty, an individual's general value structure and the reciprocal nature of the socialization process have been largely ignored (Van Maanen, 1976). Because there is little disagreement that the academic profession provides general identity for all faculty, the concept of one academic profession has obscured the cultural differences of higher education institutions, the subcultural variations within and among disciplines, and the internalized normative pressures to meet organizational interests that arise as faculty enter new settings. Only recently has socialization been conceived as cultural learning in which the values, knowledge, attitudes, skills, and expectations of a particular culture are acquired by initiates (Corcoran and Clark, 1984). At the same time, culture is seen to evolve as it is shaped by the interaction of newcomers and culture bearers (Kuh and Whitt, 1988). While newcomers will integrate, to some extent, their own needs and values with what they perceive to be the institution's norms and values (Bess, 1978), the reciprocal nature of this cultural learning process is only now being recognized (Boice and Thomas, 1989; Tierney, 1988).     

远程教育的均等理论——来自美国的远程教育理论

本文分析了远程教育均等理论产生的背景和主要思想,并对构成均等理论的关键要素进行了详细的介绍。均等理论在界定了均等、学习经验、有效应用、学生和学习成果等五个关键要素的基础上,提出了远程学习者在学习中获得的学习经验与常规学习学生在学习中获得的经验越相等,则他们所取得的学习成果也越接近。这一理论对于我国现正进行的基于现代信息技术的远程教育理论研究和实践探索具有一定的启发意义。     

比较教育:话语与权力

比较教育作为一门解释不同民族国家教育现象的教育学科 ,其话语实践总是同民族国家的社会文化紧密联系在一起。并且这种话语实践往往隐含着不同民族国家在教育科学乃至社会文化方面话语权力的争夺。通过分析研究本土生活中的日常生活层面的教育话语、本土教育实践中活跃的教育话语、民族传统教育理论中具有生命力的教育话语和民族交流本身产生的教育话语 ,进而使之体系化 ,探索并逐步建立兼具第三世界本土特色和国际通用性的比较教育话语体系 ,在教育和文化解殖民方面具有特殊的意义     

Further education in England: the new localism,systems theory and governance

The paper explores the changing forms of governance currently being applied to the English further education sector – changes that emphasise the importance of locality. The paper sets the sector within its socio‐economic and policy context, examining current policy changes that intend to alter the way in which the sector is managed. It relates these changes to their contextual location and to a set of conceptual notions that derive from a particular understanding of systems theory and what has been described as the new localism. It concludes that whilst these changing forms of governance are in continuity with earlier policies that had a regional dimension, they remain set on the terrain of performativity and new public sector management. Nevertheless, there remains a residual potential to develop more democratic forms of engagement in these changes.     

创新教育论

创新教育是素质教育发展的必然要求,是一种新的教育理念。其主旨是培养具有创新精神和创新能力的创新型人才。良好的社会环境、学校环境和家庭环境是实施创新教育的重要保证。     

The microeconomic theory of education

The main objective of this monograph is to propose a structural view of the microeconomics of education as a logically consistent whole formed by interdependent components, and to organize systematically the work done on the subject since about 1960 within that structure. Two basic criteria are used to characterize the subject: (a) its object of study is assumed to be the rational behavior of persons acting in the roles of prospective student, student, prospective teacher, teacher and educational administrator, and (b) the analysis of their behavior should be done based on the assumptions and methods of general microeconomic theory. The emphasis on integration and restructuring leads to the identification of existing gaps in the theory and of opportunities for future research. The main conclusion reached is that the microeconomic theory of education could be as important an instrument as pedagogy and educational psychology for the determination of appropriate forms of behavior in classrooms and schools.     

Sociology and comparative education: A comparative educationist's perspective

The thesis examined in this paper is that comparative educationists, far from following intellectual trends, have introduced new dimensions to methods of enquiry developed first by historians, then by social scientists and, finally and perhaps marginally, by conceptual philosophers. In so far as comparisons can be made, it is asserted that, in the twentieth century, paradigms in comparative education reflect revolutions in the natural sciences, and that to the extent that these preceded shifts in social science paradigms after about 1900, comparative educationists debated and rejected positivism before sociologists did, in the Anglo-Saxon world at least.A second assumption which is examined is that comparative educationists have anticipated issues which subsequently became important in the growth of national and parochial research in sociology, and for that matter in political science.A disclaimer is necessary: little attempt has been made to examine the causal influences in either field or between comparative educationists and sociologists. The history of such interaction at a personal and institutional level is very recent, the participants in the interchanges are, in many cases, still alive, and a substantive recent history of comparative education has yet to be written, although to some extent E. Shils' analysis of the history of sociological enquiry provides a schema against which the growth of comparative education can be compared.

---

Zusammenfassung In dieser Arbeit wird die These überprüft, daß vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaftler, weit davon entfernt, intellektuellen Trends zu folgen, neue Dimensionen für Untersuchungsmethoden eingeführt haben, die zuerst von Historikern, dann von Sozialwissenschaftlern und am Rande auch von konzeptuellen Philosophen entwickelt wurden. Soweit es möglich ist, Vergleiche anzustellen, wird dargelegt, daß im 20. Jahrhundert Paradigmen der vergleichenden Erziehungswissenschaft tiefgreifene Veränderungen in den Naturwissenschaften widerspiegeln. Softern diese den nach ca. 1900 stattfindenden Wandlungen in sozialwissenschaftlichen Paradigmen vorausgingen, haben vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaftler noch vor den Soziologen den Positivismus erörtert und verworfen, zumindest in der angelsächsischen Welt.Zweitens wird die Annahme überprüft, daß vergleichende Erziehungswissenschaftler Fragen vorweggenommen haben, die später in der Entwicklung nationaler und örtlicher soziologischer Forschung und auch in der Politologie Bedeutung erlangten.Eine Einschränkung muß noch gemacht werden: Der Autor hat weitgehend darauf verzichtet, die kausalen Einflüsse in den beiden Einzelbereichen sowie die gegenseitigen Einwirkungen von vergleichenden Erziehungswissenschaftlern und Soziologen zu untersuchen. Die Geschichte solcher Wechselwirkungen auf persönlicher und institutioneller Ebene ist noch sehr jung, die Teilnehmer an ihnen sind in vielen Fällen noch am Leben, und eine substantielle neuere Geschichte der vergleichenden Erziehungswissenschaft ist noch nicht geschrieben. Dennoch bietet E. Shils Analyse der Geschichte soziologischer Untersuchungen eine gewisse Grundlage für einen Vergleich mit der Entwicklung der vergleichenden Erziehungswissenschaft.

---

Résumé La thèse soutenue dans cet article est que les théoriciens de l'éducation comparée, loin de suivre les courants intellectuels, ont introduit de nouvelles dimensions dans les méthodes d'enquête élaborées d'abord par les historiens, puis développées par les spécialistes des sciences sociales, et enfin — marginalement peut-être — par les philosophes conceptuels. Pour autant que l'on puisse établir des comparaisons, on constate qu'au XXe siècle, les paradigmes de l'éducation comparée reflètent les révolutions qui surviennent dans les sciences naturelles et qu'ils se modifient avant même ceux des sciences sociales, aux alentours de 1900, au point que les théoriciens de l'éducation comparée contestent et rejettent le positivisme avant que les spécialistes des sciences sociales soient parvenus à cette démarche, du moins dans les pays anglosaxons.Une autre assomption de la thèse est que les théoriciens de l'éducation comparée ont anticipé des situations qui devaient se révéler importantes par la suite, avec le développement de la recherche sociologique nationale et locale, et également avec celui des sciences politiques.Il est juste de reconnaître néanmoins qu'une timide tentative a été faite dans l'intention d'étudier les influences causales, que ce soit dans chacun de ces domaines ou entre théoriciens de l'éducation comparée et sociologues. L'histoire d'une telle interaction au niveau individuel et au niveau institutionnel est très récente; les hommes qui ont participé à ces échanges sont encore pour la plupart vivants et une histoire récente autonome de l'éducation comparée reste à écrire. Toutefois, l'analyse que E. Shils a fate de l'histoire de l'enquête sociologique fournit, jusqu'à un certain point, une base permettant d'évaluer le développement de l'éducation comparée.