【作者】 郭卉；

【导师】 刘献君；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 教育经济与管理， 2006， 博士

【摘要】 在高等教育改革过程中，大学治理问题逐步突显，现已成为研究现代大学制度的核心论题。大学治理本质上是关于大学决策权力的分配和行使。当前大学办学自主权逐步落实，大学外部权力关系正步入良性轨迹，但是，大学内部的权力结构没有相应的变化和调整，权力分配呈现高度集中局面。其中，最突出的问题是大学教师处于无权地位。权力背后体现的是利益诉求。权力与利益的内在关联促使研究的关注点由教师权力转向了教师利益表达和实现机制。教职工代表大会制度和学术委员会制度是中国大学教师利益表达的两个基础性结构。研究通过对教代会和学术委员会的历史背景、组织结构和功能的分析，揭示出大学教师利益表达的特点、利益组织化结构，以及利益表达制度的功能。研究总体上采用的是经验研究范式。首先在宏观层面分别梳理了教代会和学术委员会产生和发展的背景、状况以及存在的问题。然后以案例大学的经验材料呈现了教代会和学术委员会的组织结构和制度运行情况。最后，在经验研究的基础上进行解释和归纳得出结论。大学教代会的出现是党和国家知识分子政策曲折发展的产物，也是充分借鉴企业职代会经验的结果。教代会制度与国家政权建设密切相关，国家希望通过教代会把教师群体整合，在行政主线之外形成上传下达的途径，完善国家对基层的控制。案例大学教代会的组织结构显示，它不是一个纯粹的教师身份聚合体，而是个行政主导的混合性组织，因为几乎全部校级领导和中层干部都以不同类别的代表身份参与其中，并且占据了教代会的职权位置。此外，教代会由外部机构工会负责组织工作，工会并不完全代表教师利益，而是教师与行政之间的联系纽带。国家将监督大学领导干部的权力交给教代会，而大学管理者又能对教代会实施控制，囿于权力结构的矛盾，教代会的监督职能往往失效。大学管理者对于教代会持“功利”态度，迎合其政治保险功能的一面，拒绝其阻碍效率的一面。在大学管理者的支配下，教代会成为改革合法化机制，民意表决机制，以及象征机制。对大学教师而言，教代会是部分表达其利益的渠道。教代会处理的利益，从形态上看，主要是物质利益，进一步可分为社会福利和工作活动资源；从主题上看，包括教师切身利益和大学—教师“双方利益”。教师的切身利益主要指社会福利，大学—教师“双方利益”则是指工作活动资源。在争取切身利益时，利益表达呈现组群结构，在争取工作活动资源时，利益表达呈现院系结构。大学管理者试图将教代会的议题引向“双方利益”事务，避免过多讨论社会福利。这说明行政希望将利益竞争控制在院系部门之间，减少身份群体之间的利益冲突。利益的实现有赖于大学行政的选择，行政所考虑的主要是利益需求广度和资源供给能力。众多代表提出的要求，以及行政有能力满足的要求会得到优先实现。大多数利益要求只能得到象征性的答复。学术委员会是学术利益表达的机构。学术利益是大学组织内特有的利益诉求，它属于精神利益范畴，是作为“学术共同体”的教师群体所共有的价值认同意识，其核心价值是学术自由。学术委员会产生和发展的历史反映出中国大学治理变革中的重要问题：大学办学自主权经历了失而复得的历程，但是大学教师的权力自失未得!学术委员会的出现并非是为了分化权力，它是国家知识分子新政策的体现，此外，大学学术力量的增强，学术利益认同的强化，是其发展和变革的内在动力。学术委员会不是一个教师群体的代表性机构，也不是教师身份的聚合体，它主要由“双肩挑”人员组成，学术委员会的组织呈现泛行政化状况。学术委员会的职能主要是对学术事务进行审议、评定和咨询。其中，评定职能最能体现学术利益的表达和实现。中美大学教师聘任制的比较研究，揭示出中国大学治理中存在着学术利益表达不畅通，学术利益无法实现的基本问题。学术委员会委员的双重身份使他们在利益表达时出现了角色冲突。在具体的情景中，往往“行政的考虑”压倒了“学术的考虑”，学术委员会被用来表达院系利益。在学术与行政的博弈中，行政权力极度膨胀，学术利益的实现缺乏专门权力的保障。权力结构失衡将带来大学的文化危机和自我认同危机。中国大学教师利益组织、表达和传递的基本情况可以归纳为：双重利益表达制度，“矩阵”利益组织结构，行政控制的利益表达机制，以及防护性和象征性制度功能。教代会侧重于处理物质利益诉求，学术委员会用于表达学术利益。利益组织呈现出院系结构和组群结构，二者构成了一个“矩阵”结构。其中，院系结构占主导，组群结构比较微弱。院系结构体现出利益传输和行政管治功能的合一。整体而言，制度化的利益表达深受行政控制，行政基本上控制了利益表达的内容和过程，并通过人员渗透，从内部改变利益表达的性质。对体制而言，教代会和学术委员会能够部分起到传递利益需求的作用，但它们并不是压力制造者，而是体制危机的防护性制度。在制度功能上，比起教代会，学术委员会更具有象征意味。随着国家经济体制和政治体制改革的深化，大学的政治性角色淡化，专业职能增强，大学教师的身份群体特征突显，群体意识强化，大学内部治理势必走向分权之路。构建合理高效的大学法人治理结构，是建立现代大学制度的必经之途。更多还原

【Abstract】 In the course of the reform of higher education, university governance becomes more and more important, which is one of the core issues of modern university institution. University governance, in the essence, refers to the distribution and exertion of university autonomy. Now, the Chinese universities are getting more and more autonomy, but the power structure inner university has no change, which means the power is centralized and the faculty has no power in hand. What behind power are interests, the inner relationship between power and interests changes my focus from power to the interests expressing of faculty. Staff and Faculty’s Representative Congress (SFRC) and Academic Committee are two basic structures for interests expressing of faculty. This study referred to the historical background, organizational structure and function of the two institutions, through which, explained the characters of the interests expressing of faculty, the structure of organized interests, and the function of the institutions of interests expressing.This study used empirical paradigm. Firstly, it explored the history, situation and problems of SFRC and Academic Committee, and then, used the case study to present the organizational structure and the institutional running of the two institutions. At last, it summarized and drew the conclusion.The appearance of SFRC was not only the outcome of the devious development of the intellectual policy, but also the result of learning from the Staff and Workers’ Representative Congress in workplace. SFRC had affinity with the construction of the regime. The state hoped SFRC to organize the faculty, through which the state would control the grass roots. The organization of SFRC reveals that it isn’t a true institution representing the faculty, it also includes lots of administrators, furthermore, though it is organized by labor union, the labor union doesn’t represent the interests of faculty, and it is the agency contacting the faculty and the administration.The state empowers SFRC to supervise the administrators in the university, but the administrators have the power to control SFRC, for the contradiction of the power structure, the supervising function of SFRC gets into disable. The administrators hold utilitarian attitude, which means that they want SFRC to insure the political safety, but at the same time, they reject the inefficiency of SFRC. Under the manipulation of the administration, SFRC becomes the legalization program of reform, the public opinion-votes program, and the symbolic program. From the perspective of the faculty, SFRC is the way of interests expressing. The interests that SFRC deals with, include social welfares and recourses for activity, which are divided from the type of the interests, and from the subject of the interests, are interests special to faculty and interests shared by faculty and university, furthermore, the interests special to faculty refer to the social welfares, and the interests shared by faculty and university are recourses for activity. When SFRC strives for the interests special for faculty, the interests expressing takes on class-structure, and when it strives for the interests shared by faculty and university, the interests expressing takes on department-structure. The realization of interests relies on the administration, and what the administration takes into account are the intension of the demands and the ability that they can afford the resource. The demands by many represents and the administration can fulfill will be realized preferentially. But lots of interests demands get only symbolically reply.The Academic Committee is the institution expressing of academic interests. The academic interests are the special interests in the university, and they are the value identity of the academic community, the core of which is academic freedom. The history of Academic Committee reflects some important problems of the university governance: the university autonomy came through a course of lose and regain, but the power of faculty had lost and never been gained again. The emergence of the Academic Committee was not to differentiate the power.The Academic Committee isn’t the representative institution of faculty, and it is made up of "dual identity person", who has the dual identity of faculty and administrator. So, to some extend, the organization of the Academic Committee is administrative extensive. The duties of the Academic Committee are discussion, assessing, and consultation of the academic affairs. This study compared the faculty employment and appointment system of American university and Chinese university, through which, it discovered the basic problems in the university governance in china. In the Academic Committee, the dual identity of the member causes the problem of role-conflict in the decision-making, and in the concrete situation, the role of administrator suppressed the role of scholar, which reduced the Academic Committee to express the interests of department. Between the struggle of faculty and administration, the power of administration is uttermost, and the realization of the academic interests has no special power to ensure. The unbalance of power structure will make for the cultural crisis of university.The organization, expressing and transmission of interests in the university can be concluded as four aspects, which are dual institutions of interests expressing, the matrix structure of organized interests, the administration controlling interests expressing, and the defending function of the institutions. SFRC emphasizes the interests of matter, and the Academic Committee stresses the academic interests. There have dual structures of organized interests, which are department-structure and class-structure, and they both constitute the matrix structure. The interests expressing is controlled by administration. To the whole system, SFRC and the Academic Committee take the duty of transmission interests demand, but they are not the maker of pressure, but the defense of the crisis. Compared with SFRC, the Academic Committee is more symbolic.With the development of the reform of economic system and political system, the political role of university will be weakened, and the cultural function will be strengthened. The university governance will tend towards to differentiating the power. Construction the university governance structure with high efficiency is the must way of building modern university institutions.更多还原