【作者】 杨晓霞；

【导师】 范先佐；

【作者基本信息】 华中师范大学 ， 教育经济与管理， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 20世纪80年代以来，对由国家垄断教育所造成的诸如教育体制僵化、教育效率低下、教育资源浪费等弊端的批评日益增多，西方各国教育改革中的市场化倾向也越来越明显。教育究竟应当定位于社会公益事业还是适用于市场原理的产业，成为许多国家发展教育不得不认真面对的一个重大问题。 当前，随着我国教育改革的不断深化，有关教育产业性与公益性的研究逐渐增多。本文以经济学和教育经济学的基本原理为依据，试图对教育公益性与产业性的关系及其理论基础与现实意义进行探讨，以求对这一问题形成比较系统深入的认识，并对我国教育改革实践提供一些建议和意见。全文共分四部分。第一部分从教育公益性与产业性的内涵界定入手，对当前关于二者内涵的讨论进行归纳和分析，并在此基础上形成本文对二者内涵的界定。即：教育的公益性是指教育面向全体社会成员，增进社会公共利益的一种属性；教育的产业性亦称教育的市场性，主要指将市场机制引入教育领域，运用市场法则和机制管理学校和其它教育机构。教育的公益性与产业性之间存在着矛盾对立的一面，但教育的公益性与产业性之间也并非简单的非此即彼关系，二者之间还存在着并存与互补的关系。不认识到这一点，就无法在实践中正确处理二者的关系。文章第二部分从三个主要方面探讨了教育的公益性与产业性作为一对关系范畴存在的理论依据。首先，从收益的角度看，二者分别对应于教育的社会收益与个人收益；其次，从资源配置的角度看，二者分别对应于政府与市场两种教育资源配置方式；最后，从公共产品理论的角度看，二者分别对应于教育的公共产品属性与私人产品属性。第三部分则运用上述理论对我国教育现状进行了分析，并将着眼点定位于政府教育职能。结果显示，无论从公益性还是产业性的角度来看，我国政府教育职能都存在着“越位”与“缺位”并存的问题。要使问题得到合理解决，就需要全面深入地认识教育公益性与产业性之间的关系，并在实践中理顺二者的关系。第四部分就如何在现实中恰当处理教育公益性与产业性关系作了具体阐述，即按公益性与产业性比重的不同对教育进行分类，分别确定政府教育职能的侧重点，实现政府教育职能的转变。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since the eighties of the 20th century, the countries have monopolized education, which caused a lot of drawbacks such as structure of education being rigid, educational efficiency being low, and educational resource being wasted. As a result, there are many criticisms of these drawbacks and the marketization in the educational reforms of the western various countries inclines to be more and more obvious. Should education be located as the industry that is suitable for the market principle or the public-welfare cause on earth? Many countries have to face this piece of great educational problem conscientiously.This text regards the basic principles of economics and economics of education as the basis, attempt to probe into the theoretical foundation and realistic meaning of the relation between public-welfare and industrial nature of education. The full text divides into four parts. Start with the intension definition of public-welfare and industrial nature of education, the first part sum up and analyze the discussion about two intension at present, and form definition of the two intension on the basis of this. The second part of article has been probed into the theoretical foundation from three main respects that the public-welfare and industrial nature of education exist as the category of a pair of relations. First of all, from the point of view of income, the two differentiate correspondingly in educational social income and personal income. Secondly, from the point of view of resource distribution, the two part correspondingly in two kinds of education resource distribution ways of the government and market. At last, from the point of view of public products theory, the two differentiate correspondingly in educational public products attribute and private products attribute. The third part use above-mentioned theories to analyze our country’s educational current situation and orientate the starting point as the educational function of the government. The result shows that no matter from the point of view of public welfare or the industrial nature, the questions that the" off side" and" lack the location " question coexist exists in our government education functions. To make problems get rational settlement; we need to know the relation between the public-welfare and industrial nature of education deeply and make the relation of the two in order in practice. The fourth part explains how to deal with the relation between the public-welfare and industrial nature of education appropriately in reality. We should classify education according to the public-welfare nature different from proportion of industrial nature, define the emphasis point of the educational function of the government separately and realize the transition of the educational function of the government.更多还原