China Library Classification Number: G640? Document ID: A? Article number:1672-0717 (2015) 01-0064-05?
Date of receipt: 2014-11-20?
Professors' governance and professors' governance have always been controversial topics in China's academic circles, and no consensus has been reached so far. The Outline of the National Medium-and Long-Term Education Reform and Development Plan (20 10 ~ 2020) issued on 2010 puts forward that "give full play to the important role of academic committees in discipline construction, academic evaluation and academic development, explore effective ways for professors to study, and give full play to the role of professors in teaching, academic research and school management". This is the first time that the concept of professor scholarship appears in the official national education document. This formulation obviously highlights the professor's knowledge and downplays the professor's knowledge. Some scholars hit the nail on the head and pointed out that "teaching to study" is a very clever concept. On the one hand, it appeases professors' willingness to participate in university management, on the other hand, it does not destroy the basic leadership structure in universities and protects the vested interests of existing power holders "[1]. The official affirmation of professors' scholarship and the appeal of academic circles to professors' scholarship have produced a kind of conceptual conflict and contradiction, which further intensified the debate between professors' scholarship and professors' scholarship. To analyze the relationship between professors, we should not only get rid of the framework of complete opposition between them, but also avoid the mode of absolute equivalence between them, and even more, we should go beyond the discourse dispute between them, and see that the essence behind it is to think and explore the internal governance structure and governance mode of China University. ?
1. Scholarship, school management and university governance?
Historically, professor governance originated from the autonomy of scholars in medieval universities and has always been the governance tradition of western universities. However, in the development of higher education in China, professionalization is a localized concept with profound China context and realistic background. "The establishment of the governance system of university professors in China is still dominated by the government, rather than fighting for it through their own struggles like western university professors" [2]. The idea of professors running schools was first seen in the University Order issued in the early years of the Republic of China. 19 12, Cai Yuanpei, then Minister of Education of the Republic of China, presided over the promulgation of the University Order. At that time, the system of professor governance was mainly manifested in the setting of the Council and the professor's association. According to the university order, the Council is composed of presidents, seniors and representatives of professors from various disciplines. Matters to be considered include: (1) the establishment and abolition of various disciplines; (2) the type of lecture; (3) internal rules of universities; (4) Examining the scores of college students and the qualifications of degree applicants; (5) Consultation between the Chief Education Officer and the University President; (6) If the Committee has any opinions on issues related to higher education, it can make recommendations to the Minister of Education. The professors' meeting is composed of subject professors, and the contents of deliberation include: (1) subject courses; (2) Students' experimental projects; (3) Examining the scores of college students in this subject; (4) Examining the qualifications of those who submit papers and apply for conferring degrees; (5) The Chief Education Officer and the President of the University held consultations on this incident [3]. This regulation was formally implemented in 19 17 when Cai Yuanpei became the president of Peking University. ?
However, professorship is only a flash in the pan in the history of higher education in China. After Jiang Menglin 1930 became the president of Peking University, he was quickly replaced by a professorship. After Jiang Menglin came to power, he abandoned Cai Yuanpei's thought of "professor running the school" and promulgated the Outline of the National Peking University, which separated educational administration from administration and put forward the school-running policy of "president running the school, professor running the school, students running the school and staff running the school" [4]. When Jiang Menglin was in charge of Peking University, the University Council was abolished and replaced by the school affairs meeting. The school affairs meeting and the executive meeting decide on major issues including the university budget, the establishment and cancellation of departments and various internal regulations of the university. The Outline of the National Peking University Organization stipulates that the school affairs meeting "consists of the principal, the secretary-general, the principal, the librarian, the principals of each school, the department heads of each school and a number of representatives elected by all professors and associate professors, with the principal as the chairman"; The executive board "consists of the principal, the dean, the secretary-general and the person in charge of the school, with the principal as the chairman"; In addition, it is also stipulated that "the dean, secretary general, course director and librarian of each college shall be appointed by the dean from among professors" [5]. This series of regulations integrates the personnel power and decision-making power in university governance with the president, and the governance position of professors in school affairs is declining day by day, which is more and more limited to management academics rather than schools. President Jiang Menglin thinks that academics and administration are two completely different affairs, and scholars and administrators need to have different qualities. In university governance, academic affairs and administrative affairs should be completely separated, so that academics belong to academics and administration belongs to administration. From then on, the opposition between professors and administrators in China University began. ?
The legitimacy of professor research comes from professional authority, that is, the power of advanced knowledge. Power in academic affairs mainly comes from profound knowledge, which is not only the basic element of academic organization, but also the premise and foundation of academic governance. No matter what development period a university is in, "as long as higher education remains a formal organization, it is a social institution that controls advanced knowledge and methods." Its basic materials largely constitute the profound thoughts and related skills of that part of culture that is more profound in all ethnic groups "[6]. As a master of profound knowledge, professors have a deeper understanding and grasp of academic affairs such as personnel training and discipline construction, and know the contents of profound knowledge best, so they have the most say. On the other hand, the legitimacy of professor governance comes from stakeholder theory. As an important stakeholder of academic organizations, professors have the right and necessity to govern the affairs of academic organizations. Learning is the inherent right and work of academic personnel and the inherent requirement of academic organizations, so there are few differences and arguments. At present, the focus of controversy is mainly around whether professors should run schools and the relationship between learning and running schools. ?
In fact, there is no direct and inevitable relationship between academics and school management from the source, and the relationship between them stems from the organization of academic activities. Academics means the right to manage academic affairs, which is a kind of knowledge power; Governing a school refers to the right to manage academic organizations, which is an organizational power. University is essentially a collective organization of teaching and scientific research activities, that is, an organized place for knowledge production and dissemination. According to the principle of academic freedom, pure academic activities should be under the jurisdiction of scholars and should not be included in the management scope of academic organizations. The individual activities of academic personnel are constrained by the use of resources in academic organizations, so they must bear corresponding responsibilities and obligations. Therefore, only when scholars must carry out research in academic organizations, that is, academics must be realized in academic organizations, will research academics be related to academic governance, and academics will be related to academic organization governance (running schools).