美国密尔沃基市公助教育券政策个案研究
|
摘要
在过去二十年里，公立学校的质量引起美国公众的普遍不满，基础教育领域里发生了“择校运动”等一系列的深刻变革。择校运动经历了从公立学校之间的选择、公立学校与私立学校之间的选择、到教育券问世的发展轨迹。本文旨在通过分析美国最为典型的公助教育券——密尔沃基家长选择计划(Milwaukee Parental Choice Program，以下简称MPCP)，尝试为我国部分地区正在进行的教育券改革提供借鉴。
本文共分五章。第一章阐述个案研究的背景，详尽分析了密尔顿·弗里德曼的教育券思想、择校运动与教育券的关系以及教育券的不同类别。第二章主要讨论影响MPCP制定的政治因素与教育背景、MPCP的主要内容。在分析影响MPCP制定的政治因素时，本文从美国民主党与共和党在教育券政策上的不同主张入手。第三章从三个时间段即1990—91学年到1994—95学年(政策的局部试验阶段)、1995—96学年到1997—98学年(政策的扩展阶段但遭受禁令并未实施)、1998—99学年到现在(扩展计划的全面实施)详细阐述MPCP的实施状况，而在实施过程中不停的法律诉讼与法庭判决则是贯穿本章的重要内容。第四章主要从政策文本、政策执行、政策效果三方面评价MPCP。对于MPCP政策效果的评价，本文采用亨利·列文的自由选择、效率、公平、社会融合四维度的分析框架进行效果的评价。尽管参加MPCP的学生的学业成绩并不显著高于就读于MPS学生的分数，但是，MPCP的社会效果却不可否认，不容忽略。第五章将MPCP与在中国浙江省长兴县自2001—2002学年开始实施的教育券政策进行比较，尝试为长兴县正在进行的教育券改革提供有益启示。
本文从历史的、比较的角度得出以下结论：为进一步完善长兴教育券政策，完备的法令、稳定的财政投入、配套的政府管理与独立的评估机制必不可少；在中国特定的社会背景中，教育券为促进基础教育均衡发展、扩展职业高中与平衡普职高比例、拓宽民办学校投资渠道、完善教师继续教育培训机制、解决流动人口子女就学等特定教育问题提供可能的解决途径。
The Americans, dissatisfied with the quality of public schools, has witnessed a series of profound and radical reforms aiming at overthrowing the Berlin Wall of the public school system's monopoly in elementary education in the past two decades, and the school choice movement is one of them. The school choice movement has experienced the choice among public schools, the choice between public schools and private schools, the appearance of the school voucher. This thesis tries to obtain some valuable insights beneficial to the reform of School Voucher in certain provinces in China through analyzing the case of Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, the most typical publicly funded school voucher policy in America.
This whole thesis is organized into five chapters. The first chapter, an analysis of the context of MPCP, illustrates Milton Friedman's ideology of school vouchers, the relationship between school choice movement and school vouchers, the categories of school vouchers. MPCP, the case in this thesis, is a publicly funded and regulated school voucher in the elementary education. Chapter 2 mainly deals with the factors influencing the enactment of MPCP and the main content of the MPCP. In Chapter 3, the author illustrates the implementation of MPCP that is divided into three phases: from 1990-91 to 1994-95; from 1995-96 to 1997-98; from 1998-99 until nowadays. Chapter 4 mainly evaluates MPCP from three aspects that are the text, the implementation and the outcome of MPCP. This article adopts the framework of Henry Levin and evaluates the outcome of MPCP from the following four aspects: freedom to choose, efficiency, equity and school cohesion. Although it is not so notable that the test scores of students attending MPCP is much higher than those of students in MPS (Milwaukee Public Schools ) , the social effects of MPCP is undeniable and cannot be overlooked. The last chapter compares MPCP with the school voucher policy in Changxing County, Zhejiang Province that has being put in practice since the school year of 2001-2002.
The following findings are concluded in the historical and comparative analysis: in order to improve the school voucher policy in Changing, complete laws, stable revenues, corresponding governmental administration and independent evaluations is indispensable. On the other hand, according to the particular context in China, maybe School Voucher can be one of the possible solution to the following problems: balanced development of elementary education, the expansion of vocational high schools and then leading to the appropriate proportion of vocational high schools and common high schools, the increase of investment in private schools, the improvement of in-service teacher education, the guaranteed enrollment of the floating population's children.
本文共分五章。第一章阐述个案研究的背景，详尽分析了密尔顿·弗里德曼的教育券思想、择校运动与教育券的关系以及教育券的不同类别。第二章主要讨论影响MPCP制定的政治因素与教育背景、MPCP的主要内容。在分析影响MPCP制定的政治因素时，本文从美国民主党与共和党在教育券政策上的不同主张入手。第三章从三个时间段即1990—91学年到1994—95学年(政策的局部试验阶段)、1995—96学年到1997—98学年(政策的扩展阶段但遭受禁令并未实施)、1998—99学年到现在(扩展计划的全面实施)详细阐述MPCP的实施状况，而在实施过程中不停的法律诉讼与法庭判决则是贯穿本章的重要内容。第四章主要从政策文本、政策执行、政策效果三方面评价MPCP。对于MPCP政策效果的评价，本文采用亨利·列文的自由选择、效率、公平、社会融合四维度的分析框架进行效果的评价。尽管参加MPCP的学生的学业成绩并不显著高于就读于MPS学生的分数，但是，MPCP的社会效果却不可否认，不容忽略。第五章将MPCP与在中国浙江省长兴县自2001—2002学年开始实施的教育券政策进行比较，尝试为长兴县正在进行的教育券改革提供有益启示。
本文从历史的、比较的角度得出以下结论：为进一步完善长兴教育券政策，完备的法令、稳定的财政投入、配套的政府管理与独立的评估机制必不可少；在中国特定的社会背景中，教育券为促进基础教育均衡发展、扩展职业高中与平衡普职高比例、拓宽民办学校投资渠道、完善教师继续教育培训机制、解决流动人口子女就学等特定教育问题提供可能的解决途径。
The Americans, dissatisfied with the quality of public schools, has witnessed a series of profound and radical reforms aiming at overthrowing the Berlin Wall of the public school system's monopoly in elementary education in the past two decades, and the school choice movement is one of them. The school choice movement has experienced the choice among public schools, the choice between public schools and private schools, the appearance of the school voucher. This thesis tries to obtain some valuable insights beneficial to the reform of School Voucher in certain provinces in China through analyzing the case of Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, the most typical publicly funded school voucher policy in America.
This whole thesis is organized into five chapters. The first chapter, an analysis of the context of MPCP, illustrates Milton Friedman's ideology of school vouchers, the relationship between school choice movement and school vouchers, the categories of school vouchers. MPCP, the case in this thesis, is a publicly funded and regulated school voucher in the elementary education. Chapter 2 mainly deals with the factors influencing the enactment of MPCP and the main content of the MPCP. In Chapter 3, the author illustrates the implementation of MPCP that is divided into three phases: from 1990-91 to 1994-95; from 1995-96 to 1997-98; from 1998-99 until nowadays. Chapter 4 mainly evaluates MPCP from three aspects that are the text, the implementation and the outcome of MPCP. This article adopts the framework of Henry Levin and evaluates the outcome of MPCP from the following four aspects: freedom to choose, efficiency, equity and school cohesion. Although it is not so notable that the test scores of students attending MPCP is much higher than those of students in MPS (Milwaukee Public Schools ) , the social effects of MPCP is undeniable and cannot be overlooked. The last chapter compares MPCP with the school voucher policy in Changxing County, Zhejiang Province that has being put in practice since the school year of 2001-2002.
The following findings are concluded in the historical and comparative analysis: in order to improve the school voucher policy in Changing, complete laws, stable revenues, corresponding governmental administration and independent evaluations is indispensable. On the other hand, according to the particular context in China, maybe School Voucher can be one of the possible solution to the following problems: balanced development of elementary education, the expansion of vocational high schools and then leading to the appropriate proportion of vocational high schools and common high schools, the increase of investment in private schools, the improvement of in-service teacher education, the guaranteed enrollment of the floating population's children.
引文
1．王长纯主编：《国际基础教育比较研究》，中国审计出版社，1996年版。
2．袁振国著：《教育政策学》，江苏教育出版社，2001年版。
3．张国庆著：《现代公共政策导论》，北京大学出版社，1997年版。
4．弗瑞德·C·伦恩伯格、阿兰·C·奥斯坦著，孙志军等译：《教育管理学——理论与实践》，中国轻工业出版社，2003年版。
5．李战鹰著：《美国学券制理论争议探析》(硕士论文)，北京师范大学图书馆京师书库，1999。
6．约翰·E·丘伯、泰力·M·默合著，蒋衡等译：《政治、市场和学校》，教育科学出版社，2003年版。
7．杰夫·惠迪、萨莉·鲍尔、大卫·哈尔平合著，马忠虎译：《教育中的放权与择校：学校、政府和市场》，教育科学出版社，2003年版。
8．密尔顿·弗里德曼著，高榕、范蘅山译：《弗利德曼文萃》，北京经济学院出版社，1991年版。
9．密尔顿·弗里德曼著，张瑞玉译：《资本主义与自由》，商务印书馆，1986年版。
10．张民选著：《理想与抉择——大学生资助政策的国际比较》，人民教育出版社，1999年版。
11．康永久著：《教育制度的生成与变革——新制度教育学论纲》，教育科学出版社，2003年版。
12．孙绵涛等著：《教育政策论——具有中国特色的社会主义教育政策研究》，华中师范大学出版社，2002年版。
13．曾天山著：《义务教育阶段“择校生”现象剖析》，广西师范大学出版社，1999年版。
14．马慧：《美国择校中的学券制》，《比较教育研究》，01／2001。
15．王德林：《美国的“教育券”计划》，《外国中小学教育》，05／2001。
16．王宏芳：《美国的学券制述评》，《开放教育研究》，01／2002。
17．季苹：《密尔顿·弗里德曼教育凭证思想及其影响》，《教育研究》，04／2002。
18．周飞：《教育券，能否洋为“中用”》，《中国教育报》，10／20／2002。
19．顾明：《教育券在上海可行吗》，《上海教育》03A／2003；《聚焦教育券》，《上海教育》01A／2003。
20．文新华等：《关于“教育券”的分析》，《教育发展研究》，01／2003。
21. Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, Jan. 2003.
22. Legislative Audit Bureau, State of Wisconsin, An Evaluation: Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, Feb. 2000.
23. United States General Accounting Office, School Vouchers: Publicly Funded Programs in Cleveland and Milwaukee, Aug.2001.
24. United States General Accounting Office, Schools Vouchers: Characteristics of Privately Funded Programs, Sep.2002.
25. Greene, Jay P., Peterson, Paul E., and Jiangtao, Du. (1996, August). The Effectiveness of School Choice in Milwaukee: A Secondary Analysis of Data from the Program's Evaluation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
26. Rouse, Schools and Student Achievement: More Evidence from the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, Economic Policy Review, Vol. 4, No.l, 1998.
27. John F. Witte, Achievement Effects of the Milwaukee Voucher Program, Revised 2/7/97.
28. John F. Witte, Troy D. Sterr and Christopher A. Thorn, Fifth-Year Report the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, 1995.
29. John F. Witte, Christopher A. Thom, Kim M. Pritchard and Michele Claibourn, Fourth-Year Report the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, 1994.
30. John E. Chubb and Terry M. Moe, Politics, Markets and America's Schools,Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1990.
31. Paul E. Peterson and Bryan C. Hassel, Learning from School Choice, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998.
32. John F. Witte, The Market Approach to Education: an Analysis of America's First Voucher Program, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2000.
33. Steuerle, Eugene, Vouchers and the Provisions of Public Services, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2000.
34. Terry M. Moe, Schools, Vouchers and the American Public, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2001.
35. William G. Howell, Paul E. Peterson, Patrick J. Wolf and David E. Campbell, The Education Gap: Vouchers and Urban Schools, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2002.
36. Frederick M. Hess, Revolution at the Margins: the Impact of Competition on
Urban School Systems, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2002.
37. Nathan Lewin, Are Vouchers Constitutional? Policy Review, Jan./Feb. 1999.
38. John F. Witte, The Milwaukee Voucher Experiment: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Phi Delta Kappan v81 n1 p59-64 Sep. 1999.
39. What We Know about Vouchers: The Facts behind the Rhetoric, West Ed Sep. 1999.
40. Finn, Chester E.; Gau, Rebecca L, New Ways of Education, Public Interest, Win 1998.
41. Howard L. Fuller, School Choice in Milwaukee: 1990-1998, Current Education Issues: No. 98-1, June 1998.
42. Howard Fuller, Evidence Supports the Expansion of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, Phi Delta Kappan, Jan 2000.
43. Howard Fuller, The Continuing Struggle of African Americans for the Power to Make Real Educational Choices, Released at the Second Annual Symposium on Educational Options for African Americans, March 2-5, 2000.
44. Elizabeth T. Lugg, Andrew R. Lugg, Vouchers as School Choice: an Analysis of Jackson v. Benson, the Milwaukee Choice Program. Journal of Law and Education, Apr.2000.
45. Charles Fried, Five to Four: Reflections on the School Voucher Case, Harvard Law Review, 2002.
46. Jeremy Learning, Voucher Revival, Church and State, Feb.2003.
47. 查阅的主要网站与网页：
www.ep-china.net
www.friedmanfoundat ion.org
www.rethinkingschools.org
www.publicpolicyforum.org
www.gao.gov
www.edweek.org
www.WestEd.org/policy
www.uwm.edu/EPIC/
www.legis.state.wi.us/lab
www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dfm/sms/choice.html
dpls.dacc.wisc.edu/choice/choice index.html
2．袁振国著：《教育政策学》，江苏教育出版社，2001年版。
3．张国庆著：《现代公共政策导论》，北京大学出版社，1997年版。
4．弗瑞德·C·伦恩伯格、阿兰·C·奥斯坦著，孙志军等译：《教育管理学——理论与实践》，中国轻工业出版社，2003年版。
5．李战鹰著：《美国学券制理论争议探析》(硕士论文)，北京师范大学图书馆京师书库，1999。
6．约翰·E·丘伯、泰力·M·默合著，蒋衡等译：《政治、市场和学校》，教育科学出版社，2003年版。
7．杰夫·惠迪、萨莉·鲍尔、大卫·哈尔平合著，马忠虎译：《教育中的放权与择校：学校、政府和市场》，教育科学出版社，2003年版。
8．密尔顿·弗里德曼著，高榕、范蘅山译：《弗利德曼文萃》，北京经济学院出版社，1991年版。
9．密尔顿·弗里德曼著，张瑞玉译：《资本主义与自由》，商务印书馆，1986年版。
10．张民选著：《理想与抉择——大学生资助政策的国际比较》，人民教育出版社，1999年版。
11．康永久著：《教育制度的生成与变革——新制度教育学论纲》，教育科学出版社，2003年版。
12．孙绵涛等著：《教育政策论——具有中国特色的社会主义教育政策研究》，华中师范大学出版社，2002年版。
13．曾天山著：《义务教育阶段“择校生”现象剖析》，广西师范大学出版社，1999年版。
14．马慧：《美国择校中的学券制》，《比较教育研究》，01／2001。
15．王德林：《美国的“教育券”计划》，《外国中小学教育》，05／2001。
16．王宏芳：《美国的学券制述评》，《开放教育研究》，01／2002。
17．季苹：《密尔顿·弗里德曼教育凭证思想及其影响》，《教育研究》，04／2002。
18．周飞：《教育券，能否洋为“中用”》，《中国教育报》，10／20／2002。
19．顾明：《教育券在上海可行吗》，《上海教育》03A／2003；《聚焦教育券》，《上海教育》01A／2003。
20．文新华等：《关于“教育券”的分析》，《教育发展研究》，01／2003。
21. Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, Jan. 2003.
22. Legislative Audit Bureau, State of Wisconsin, An Evaluation: Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, Feb. 2000.
23. United States General Accounting Office, School Vouchers: Publicly Funded Programs in Cleveland and Milwaukee, Aug.2001.
24. United States General Accounting Office, Schools Vouchers: Characteristics of Privately Funded Programs, Sep.2002.
25. Greene, Jay P., Peterson, Paul E., and Jiangtao, Du. (1996, August). The Effectiveness of School Choice in Milwaukee: A Secondary Analysis of Data from the Program's Evaluation. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University.
26. Rouse, Schools and Student Achievement: More Evidence from the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, Economic Policy Review, Vol. 4, No.l, 1998.
27. John F. Witte, Achievement Effects of the Milwaukee Voucher Program, Revised 2/7/97.
28. John F. Witte, Troy D. Sterr and Christopher A. Thorn, Fifth-Year Report the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, 1995.
29. John F. Witte, Christopher A. Thom, Kim M. Pritchard and Michele Claibourn, Fourth-Year Report the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, 1994.
30. John E. Chubb and Terry M. Moe, Politics, Markets and America's Schools,Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1990.
31. Paul E. Peterson and Bryan C. Hassel, Learning from School Choice, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 1998.
32. John F. Witte, The Market Approach to Education: an Analysis of America's First Voucher Program, Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2000.
33. Steuerle, Eugene, Vouchers and the Provisions of Public Services, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2000.
34. Terry M. Moe, Schools, Vouchers and the American Public, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2001.
35. William G. Howell, Paul E. Peterson, Patrick J. Wolf and David E. Campbell, The Education Gap: Vouchers and Urban Schools, Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2002.
36. Frederick M. Hess, Revolution at the Margins: the Impact of Competition on
Urban School Systems, Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press, 2002.
37. Nathan Lewin, Are Vouchers Constitutional? Policy Review, Jan./Feb. 1999.
38. John F. Witte, The Milwaukee Voucher Experiment: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly, Phi Delta Kappan v81 n1 p59-64 Sep. 1999.
39. What We Know about Vouchers: The Facts behind the Rhetoric, West Ed Sep. 1999.
40. Finn, Chester E.; Gau, Rebecca L, New Ways of Education, Public Interest, Win 1998.
41. Howard L. Fuller, School Choice in Milwaukee: 1990-1998, Current Education Issues: No. 98-1, June 1998.
42. Howard Fuller, Evidence Supports the Expansion of the Milwaukee Parental Choice Program, Phi Delta Kappan, Jan 2000.
43. Howard Fuller, The Continuing Struggle of African Americans for the Power to Make Real Educational Choices, Released at the Second Annual Symposium on Educational Options for African Americans, March 2-5, 2000.
44. Elizabeth T. Lugg, Andrew R. Lugg, Vouchers as School Choice: an Analysis of Jackson v. Benson, the Milwaukee Choice Program. Journal of Law and Education, Apr.2000.
45. Charles Fried, Five to Four: Reflections on the School Voucher Case, Harvard Law Review, 2002.
46. Jeremy Learning, Voucher Revival, Church and State, Feb.2003.
47. 查阅的主要网站与网页：
www.ep-china.net
www.friedmanfoundat ion.org
www.rethinkingschools.org
www.publicpolicyforum.org
www.gao.gov
www.edweek.org
www.WestEd.org/policy
www.uwm.edu/EPIC/
www.legis.state.wi.us/lab
www.dpi.state.wi.us/dpi/dfm/sms/choice.html
dpls.dacc.wisc.edu/choice/choice index.html