UNIK计划:丹麦创建世界一流大学的经验及其启示
|
摘要
处于全球化、大学资助体系改革、大学治理改革、大学合并等现实环境下,丹麦政府着手实施UNIK计划,旨在建设世界一流大学。UNIK计划的设计过程是缜密的,专家小组历经多轮磋商、审核。UNIK计划的特征是:择优式、合并式一流大学建设路径并举,兼顾政策制定过程取向与政策因果取向,赋予科研机构相对独立的管理权,采纳项目资金式资助类型。UNIK计划的成效主要有十个方面,这些方面体现为输入额外性、行为额外性、职业额外性、机构额外性和产出额外性五种特性。当然,丹麦创建世界一流大学的经验为我国"双一流建设"提供了宝贵借鉴。
Under the realistic background of globalization, university funding system reform, university governance reform, and university merging, the Danish government embarked on a UNIK Initiative to build the world-class university. The design process of the UNIK Initiative is meticulous and the expert team has undergone several rounds of consultations and reviews,which is characterized by a combination of optimal and merged firstclass university construction paths, taking into account the policy-making process orientation and policy causal orientation, giving research institutions relatively independent management rights and adopting project-funded funding types. There are ten main aspects of the UNIK Initiative's effectiveness, which are reflected in five characteristics. Denmark's experience in building a world-class university provides valuable lessons for China's"Double-class Construction".
Under the realistic background of globalization, university funding system reform, university governance reform, and university merging, the Danish government embarked on a UNIK Initiative to build the world-class university. The design process of the UNIK Initiative is meticulous and the expert team has undergone several rounds of consultations and reviews,which is characterized by a combination of optimal and merged firstclass university construction paths, taking into account the policy-making process orientation and policy causal orientation, giving research institutions relatively independent management rights and adopting project-funded funding types. There are ten main aspects of the UNIK Initiative's effectiveness, which are reflected in five characteristics. Denmark's experience in building a world-class university provides valuable lessons for China's"Double-class Construction".
引文
[1]ENGWALL L..Lesuniversités entre l'état et le marché:évolution des modes de gouvernanceuniversitaire en Suède et ailleurs[J].Politiques et Gestion de l'enseignementSupérieur,2007,19(3):97-117.
[2]BOUDARD E.,WESTERHEIJDEN D.F..France:Initiatives for Excellence[M]//BOER H.D.,FILE J.,HUISMAN J.,et al.Policy analysis of structural reforms in higher education:Processes and outcomes.Cham,Switzerland:Springer Nature,2017:172.
[3]The Danish Government.Danmarkogglobaliseringen:Debatpjece om globaliseringensudfordringer for Danmark[EB/OL].(2005-06-19)[2018-08-23].http://www.stm.dk/multimedia/Danmark_og_globaliseringen.pdf.
[4]The Danish Government.Progress,innovation and cohesion:Strategy for Denmark in the global economy[EB/OL].(2006-05-13)[2018-08-23].http://www.stm.dk/multimedia/Pixi_UK_web.pdf.
[5]AAGAARD K..Kampen om basismidlerne[D].NordreRinggade:Aarhus University,2011:134.
[6]AGHION P.,DEWATRIPONT M.,HOXBYC.,et al.The governance and performance of universities:Evidence from Europe and the US[J].Economic Policy,2010,25(2):7-59.
[7]REIHLEN M.,WENZLAFF F..Institutional change of European higher education:The case of PostWar Germany[M]//FROST J.,HATTKE F.,REI-HLEN M..Multi-Level governance in universities:Strategy,structure,control.Cham:Springer,2016:19-48.
[8]Ministeren for Videnskab,TeknologiogUdvikling.Universitetsevalueringen 2009:Evalueringsrapport[EB/OL].(2010-04-19)[2018-08-24].https://ufm.dk/publikationer/2010/universitetsevalueringen-2009.
[9]于承平.欧洲大学整并经验探究与启示[J].清华教育学报,2017,(1):163-199.
[10]AAGAARD K.,HANSEN H.F.,RASMUS-SEN J.G..Mergers in Danish highereducation:An overview over the changing landscape[M]//PINHEIROR.,GESCHWIND L.,AARREVAARA T..Mergers in higher education:The experience from Northern Europe.Heidelberg:Springer,2016:73-88.
[11]ATV.V?kstaf de offentligeforskningsinvesteringer-Ny model for udm?ntningaf?gederessourcer[EB/OL].(2005-07-09)[2018-08-26].https://atv.dk/udgivelser-viden.
[12]AAGAARD K.,BOER H.D..Denmark-Creating university centres of excellence:the UNIK-initiative[R].Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union,2015:4.
[13]SALMI J..世界一流大学:挑战与途径[M].孙薇,王琪译.上海:上海交通大学出版社,2009:7.
[14]吴政达.教育政策分析:概念、方法与应用[M].台北:高等教育出版社,2002:15-18.
[15]OECD.Promoting research excellence:New approaches to funding[R].Paris:OECD Publishing,2014:53.
[16]LEPORI B..Coordination modes in public funding systems[J].Research Policy,2011,40(3):355-367.
[17]BLOCH C.,S?RENSEN M.,GRAVERSENE.,et al.Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding:A mixed methods approach[J].Evaluation and program planning,2014,43(2):105-117.
[18]Annual report 2014 and final evaluation from the UNIK Expert panel[R].Copenhagen:Minister for Higher Education and Science,2015:15.
[19]Was UNIK unique?Evaluation of effects from the Danish research excellence initiative UNIK[R].Copenhagen:The Danish Agency for Science,Technology and Innovation,2016:25.
[2]BOUDARD E.,WESTERHEIJDEN D.F..France:Initiatives for Excellence[M]//BOER H.D.,FILE J.,HUISMAN J.,et al.Policy analysis of structural reforms in higher education:Processes and outcomes.Cham,Switzerland:Springer Nature,2017:172.
[3]The Danish Government.Danmarkogglobaliseringen:Debatpjece om globaliseringensudfordringer for Danmark[EB/OL].(2005-06-19)[2018-08-23].http://www.stm.dk/multimedia/Danmark_og_globaliseringen.pdf.
[4]The Danish Government.Progress,innovation and cohesion:Strategy for Denmark in the global economy[EB/OL].(2006-05-13)[2018-08-23].http://www.stm.dk/multimedia/Pixi_UK_web.pdf.
[5]AAGAARD K..Kampen om basismidlerne[D].NordreRinggade:Aarhus University,2011:134.
[6]AGHION P.,DEWATRIPONT M.,HOXBYC.,et al.The governance and performance of universities:Evidence from Europe and the US[J].Economic Policy,2010,25(2):7-59.
[7]REIHLEN M.,WENZLAFF F..Institutional change of European higher education:The case of PostWar Germany[M]//FROST J.,HATTKE F.,REI-HLEN M..Multi-Level governance in universities:Strategy,structure,control.Cham:Springer,2016:19-48.
[8]Ministeren for Videnskab,TeknologiogUdvikling.Universitetsevalueringen 2009:Evalueringsrapport[EB/OL].(2010-04-19)[2018-08-24].https://ufm.dk/publikationer/2010/universitetsevalueringen-2009.
[9]于承平.欧洲大学整并经验探究与启示[J].清华教育学报,2017,(1):163-199.
[10]AAGAARD K.,HANSEN H.F.,RASMUS-SEN J.G..Mergers in Danish highereducation:An overview over the changing landscape[M]//PINHEIROR.,GESCHWIND L.,AARREVAARA T..Mergers in higher education:The experience from Northern Europe.Heidelberg:Springer,2016:73-88.
[11]ATV.V?kstaf de offentligeforskningsinvesteringer-Ny model for udm?ntningaf?gederessourcer[EB/OL].(2005-07-09)[2018-08-26].https://atv.dk/udgivelser-viden.
[12]AAGAARD K.,BOER H.D..Denmark-Creating university centres of excellence:the UNIK-initiative[R].Luxembourg:Publications Office of the European Union,2015:4.
[13]SALMI J..世界一流大学:挑战与途径[M].孙薇,王琪译.上海:上海交通大学出版社,2009:7.
[14]吴政达.教育政策分析:概念、方法与应用[M].台北:高等教育出版社,2002:15-18.
[15]OECD.Promoting research excellence:New approaches to funding[R].Paris:OECD Publishing,2014:53.
[16]LEPORI B..Coordination modes in public funding systems[J].Research Policy,2011,40(3):355-367.
[17]BLOCH C.,S?RENSEN M.,GRAVERSENE.,et al.Developing a methodology to assess the impact of research grant funding:A mixed methods approach[J].Evaluation and program planning,2014,43(2):105-117.
[18]Annual report 2014 and final evaluation from the UNIK Expert panel[R].Copenhagen:Minister for Higher Education and Science,2015:15.
[19]Was UNIK unique?Evaluation of effects from the Danish research excellence initiative UNIK[R].Copenhagen:The Danish Agency for Science,Technology and Innovation,2016:25.