美国学术职业工会化评析

学术职业的不断市场化趋势使美国大学放弃了合作型和学院式的学术管理,逐步仿效商业管理的模式,从此学术专业应有的自由与自治受到了严重的冲击,学术职业者的学术专业权力明显缩小。在这种背景下,学术界逐步诉求工会组织进行集体谈判来维护自身权益。本文对美国三大教师工会组织:美国大学教授协会、美国教师联合会和全美教育协会组建工会参与集体谈判的经过以及特征进行了介绍,并对学术职业工会化的结果进行了评价。     

Unionization and the canadian university: Historical and personal observations

In 1949–50 Canadian professors, reacting to historically low salaries and inadequate pensions, founded the Canadian Association of University Teachers. Although its early concerns were economic, by the late 1950s the interest of the organization was spreading to issues of academic freedom and tenure and, related to it, university government. Having opened a national office in Ottawa, the CAUT soon championed an increased role for professors in governing their institutions. The bookA Place of Liberty (Whalley, 1964) eloquently made the claim for faculty empowerment. This movement also gained strength from the shortage of qualified staff in the 1960s and the resulting need of universities to improve terms and conditions of employment. Although faculty involvement in governance grew, by the mid-1970s many faculty members were embracing faculty unionization. This initiative had for years repelled most professors because it seemed unprofessional. However, deteriorating finances created a condition in which especially junior staff turned to faculty unions for protection. Not all Canadian universities became unionized. In spite of dire warnings about the effects of unionization, it does not seem that unionized universities today offer less scope for faculty participation in governance than the non-unionized.     

美国大学集体谈判制度的形成与发展

集体谈判是大学管理当局与教师代表通过协商谈判,雇佣双方达成关于各自应该履行的责任和权利、义务关系等方面的协议.美国大学集体谈判制度产生的主要原因是保障高校教师的经济、职业安全,争取学术自由与终身聘任制等方面的合法权益.美国教师联合会和全国教育协会的积极推动促成了集体谈判制度的建立,美国大学教授协会的认可则是集体谈判制度得以推行的重要影响因素.集体谈判制度在保护高校教师的学术自由与终身聘任制权利方面发挥了十分重要的作用,成为美国高校教师管理中较有特色的一种制度.     

A collective bargaining election: Issues and faculty voting behavior

Following the election of a faculty collective bargaining agent at the 14 Pennsylvania state colleges, the authors administered a survey questionnaire to a 50% sample of the bargaining unit. The objectives of the research were to identify relationships between faculty choice of a bargaining agent and several collective bargaining issues: attitudes about the contending associations, the extent to which internal versus external governance matters influenced voting behavior, attitudes about the scope of negotiations, attitudes about the defined bargaining unit, attitudes about faculty strikes, and demographic faculty characteristics. The authors provide primarily a narrative of the research findings and end with a succinct general summary of their findings. A brief discussion is also presented on the potential impact on elections of voters who fail to vote their conscience.     

How and why the CAUT became involved in collective bargaining

Despite a persistent belief to the contrary, most Canadian universities prior to the 1960s did not operate collegially. They were run autocratically. Collective bargaining arose as a means of ensuring true collegiality through negotiations between equals, legally entrenching due process and academic freedom, and providing a clearer and stronger mechanism for dealing with salaries and benefits. This was a revolution from below in the governance of universities. Although the sixties are widely regarded as the age of student revolt, in Canada it was the faculty, not the students, who secured a dramatic change in the power structure of the university through collective bargaining.     

学术权力与行政权力的对抗游戏——论美国高校教师与高等院校之间的集体谈判

20世纪80年代以来,美国高校教师面临行政权力越来越强的控制.为了维护和捍卫自身权益,高校教师不惜参与或组织工会,与校方进行集体谈判.但由于教师群体内部对组织工会持有不同意见,更是由于法院否决了私立院校教师组织工会、开展集体谈判的权力,高校教师企图通过集体谈判对抗行政权力的战略性努力遭遇了失利.     

Culture,democracy, and the university

This paper examines recent claims that the bodies of knowledge, the standards, and the methods of rational inquiry promulgated by the university are undemocratic, representing a hegemony of Western, middle-class, male culture. It argues that such a view is based on a social construction view of knowledge and points out several problems with this view. It further argues that democracy is not simply a matter of consensus but presupposes rational debate and such rationality is embedded in our cultural traditions of knowledge and inquiry. These traditions are not simply monolithic and static, but are arenas of controversy and debate, and their critical modes of inquiry provide the possibility for evolution and for critique of the traditions themselves. Thus even the criticisms brought forth by the critics of the traditions have grown out of and presuppose the very traditions which they seek to undermine. There is a strong case for investigating the social influences on what has been excluded from the canons of the culture, for reclaiming valuable works which have been neglected, and for critically examining the methodologies of the disciplines. Nonetheless the rejection of rational modes of inquiry seriously undermines the possibility for democracy.     

美国大学教师的学术自由权利:历史的视角

美国大学教师的学术自由权利经历了"学院时代"与"大学时代"两大历史时期的发展。美国大学教师学术自由权利的争取过程,同时也是赋予学术自由权利以认识论和政治论意义的过程。历史证明,学术自由权利是保障大学教师从事知识创新与探索活动的基本权利,是保护教学与研究工作免受各种不合理干扰和限制的必要权利,是赋予大学教师适当社会地位和必要经济保障的重要权利,也是一项与学术责任相伴生的有限权利。     

Reward systems,faculty alienation,and militancy: Academic dilemmas in the middle of the academic procession

The study examines the effect of alienation resulting from discrepancies between departmental goals and reward policies on faculty attitudes toward collective bargaining. Analysis of structural data derived from official records of a large, public university and of attitudinal data consisting of faculty responses to a survey, shows that alienation from reward systems has a significant independent influence on faculty attitudes towards collective action. The observed trends in militancy are interpreted in terms of institutional context and framework of unionization movement.     

The university and democracy: Interlocking learning and governing

This paper examines the relationship between learning and governing. It does so by positing that systems of social organization become reflective of theories of mind. It argues that, as systems of higher education are institutions most reflective of mind, the organization of higher education becomes a critical factor in determining and securing the strength of democratic systems of governance. The paper presents this theory in terms of philosophical argument, historical analyses, and present political practices. It sets out specific recommendations for designing systems of higher education that might reflect the comprehensive mental operations and thereby enhance democratic rule. And it builds upon such discoveries to suggest new forms of governance that might enfranchise rather than alienate diverse population groups.     

教授治校:建设一流大学的战略选项

建设一流大学是我国许多研究型大学努力奋斗的目标。要达到此目标,关键是要遵循一流大学的内在逻辑、解放大学生产力和凸显大学独特个性,这些改革目标的实现都需要"教授治校"的制度设计。笔者就"教授治校"是建设一流大学的一种战略选项观点进行了简要的理性思辨。     

大学教师:大学文化的守护者

大学教师是大学文化传承与发展的守护者。大学教师不同的大学精神选择对大学文化的守护和传承产生不同的影响和作用,以知识为志业的知识人抉择守护着大学文化,以政治为志业的政治人抉择偏离了大学文化,徘徊于知识人与政治人之间的冲突性角色知觉到了大学的本真文化精神。为守护大学文化,大学教师应该回归本位,实现知识人与政治人角色的整合性认同。     

大学教学的学术性及其强化策略

学术是专门的系统性学问,大学是学术生成与传播的主要场所,大学教学与科研是内在统一的,都优先服务于专门人才培养。从大学教师专业发展与教学活动来说,大学教学应以研究为基础,使教学成果呈现出创新性、专门化与可交流性等特征,体现出学术性。目前需要通过更新观念,确立大学教学学术性地位;通过加强制度建设,促进教师潜心教学;通过深化大学教学研究,增强大学教学学术性。     

普通高校教师资源管理的几点建议

目前，高素质教师资源的匮乏，已成为制约部分高校提高自身竞争能力的主要因素。高校要加强教师资源的管理，实花教师聘任制，形成适应市场经济环境的人才评价激励机制，才能使教师的整体素质不断提高，增强普通高校的竞争能力。     

中国式“教授治校”和“教授治学”的理论分歧与制度耦合

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。     

基于尊严与善治的安徽高校内部治理研究

尊严是一种普遍的人权,是任何个人或组织都无法剥夺的永恒的普遍权利。建立尊严的平等性是建立公正、平等、宽容社会的基石。虽然有尊严的生活已经成为全社会的共识,但以官僚强权践踏普通教职员工尊严的情况在安徽高校治理中依然存在。面对不容商讨的官僚作风,我们需要捍卫尊严的圣洁性,坚守尊严不可讨价还价的底线,以民主管理,公正、人道的高校治理理念,宽容的心态等善治理念捍卫普通教职员工的尊严。     

Further thoughts on unionization and university governance

David Cameron's response to Barbara Anderson's review completes the symposium on Cameron'sMore Than an Academic Question with a justification of his opposition to faculty unionization on both moral and professional principles and reiteration of the need to strengthen university governing boards.     

谈高校学报编辑的学术权利与学术权力

高校学报是反映学校教学科研水平和成果的窗口。因此有其特定的功能,这就是编辑要正确使用学术权力和捍卫自身及作者的学术权利。     

论研究型大学教师队伍的国际化

教师队伍的国际化是研究型大学发展的先决性条件。研究型大学教师队伍国际化应着重解决四个问题:一是理性认识教师队伍的国际化;二是建立与国际接轨的教师管理机制;三是加强国际化教师的引进与培养;四是切实提高教师的英语应用能力。     

Universities and collective bargaining

The author disagrees with Cameron's suggestion that democratization and decentralization were a mistake. As chief lobbyist of the Canadian Association of University Teachers, he argues for collective bargaining. He counters Cameron's support of the continuation of mandatory retirement with reference to the U.S. experience and points to the Supreme Court's defence of tenure.