高校内部行政化与教职人员工作绩效关系研究
|
摘要
近些年来,随着我国高等教育的不断发展,高校行政化开始显现。由于高校行政化引发了种种问题,社会各界对其关注度不断提升。高校行政化对于高校教师和行政管理人员的工作绩效的影响就是其主要问题之一。作为高校的有机组成部分,高校教职人员的工作绩效会直接影响到高校的整体绩效。
为了给高校去行政化改革提供科学的决策依据,提高高校的整体绩效,同时考虑到高校外部行政化涉及主体和内容广泛、研究难度大,本文本着可行性和便利性的原则,只对高校内部行政化展开研究,探讨高校内部行政化与高校教职人员工作绩效的关系。
通过对以往研究的回顾发现,目前学界对高校内部行政化的实证研究还很匮乏。基于这个现实,同时也为了提高研究的科学性,本研究选取了四所农林院校的教职人员作为样本,借助自己开发的高校内部行政化量表、成熟的高校教职人员工作绩效量表,对高校内部行政化、高校内部行政化与高校教师教职人员工作绩效的关系进行研究。
本研究基于理论回顾,提出了研究假设,并随机向四所农林院校的150位教职人员发放调查问卷。运用统计软件,通过描述性统计分析、探索性因子分析、差异性分析、相关性分析和回归分析等统计分析方法进行数据分析,基本验证了本研究提出的研究假设,得出的结论如下：本研究自行开发的高校内部行政化量表具有良好的信度和效度；高校教职人员的学历、年龄、工作岗位、职级和所属部门等个体特征在高校内部行政化存在显著差异,高校教职人员的性别和工龄特征在高校内部行政化差异不显著；高校内部行政化的三个维度与高校教职人员的工作绩效存在显著负相关关系,高校内部行政化能较好的预测高校教职人员的工作绩效。
最后,立足于研究结果,针对高校内部行政化的现状,本文系统的提出了高校去行政化的建议和对策,指出了本研究的不足,并提出了研究展望。
In last decades, the phenomenon of administration of colleges emerged in the process of the development of higher education in China, which has raised public serious concern. It is one of the main problems that internal administration of universities seriously affects the work performance of faculty in universities. As an organic part of colleges, the work performance of faculty affect the organization performance.
In order to provide scientific basis of decision making with respect to the reform of non-administration of universities and eventually improve the managing work performance of the whole universities, the questionnaires are made and issued. At the same time, taking the difficulty of the external administration research in colleges into account and basing on the principle of feasibility and convenience, this essay only study internal administration in universities and the relation between internal administration and the work performance of faculty.
Through the review of previous research, this essay founding that, at present the academic empirical research of internal administration in universities is still scarce. Based on this situation, in order to improve the scientific of this research, this research uses self-making internal administration of universities scale and mature Job performance scale to study internal administration in universities scale and the relation between internal administration and the work performance of faculty.
Based on the review of previous research, this essay indicates the research supposal and randomly issue questionnaires to150teachers and staff. Using statistical software, by using descriptive statistics, EFA, Variance analysis method, the correlation analysis and regression analysis to analyze data and test hypotheses, we draw the following conclusion:the internal administration of universities scale has good reliability and validity; different personal factors of teachers and staff such as record of formal schooling, age, post, grade and belonging department attribute internal administration of universities different, while, gender and the length of service have on different in internal administration of universities different; three dimensions of internal administration of universities have significant correlation with teachers'and staffs'work performance; internal administration in universities can well predict the work performance of faculty.
In the last, according to the research, based on the status of internal administration of universities, this paper proposes some suggestions and points out the shortcomings of this research, then put forward the research prospects..
为了给高校去行政化改革提供科学的决策依据,提高高校的整体绩效,同时考虑到高校外部行政化涉及主体和内容广泛、研究难度大,本文本着可行性和便利性的原则,只对高校内部行政化展开研究,探讨高校内部行政化与高校教职人员工作绩效的关系。
通过对以往研究的回顾发现,目前学界对高校内部行政化的实证研究还很匮乏。基于这个现实,同时也为了提高研究的科学性,本研究选取了四所农林院校的教职人员作为样本,借助自己开发的高校内部行政化量表、成熟的高校教职人员工作绩效量表,对高校内部行政化、高校内部行政化与高校教师教职人员工作绩效的关系进行研究。
本研究基于理论回顾,提出了研究假设,并随机向四所农林院校的150位教职人员发放调查问卷。运用统计软件,通过描述性统计分析、探索性因子分析、差异性分析、相关性分析和回归分析等统计分析方法进行数据分析,基本验证了本研究提出的研究假设,得出的结论如下：本研究自行开发的高校内部行政化量表具有良好的信度和效度；高校教职人员的学历、年龄、工作岗位、职级和所属部门等个体特征在高校内部行政化存在显著差异,高校教职人员的性别和工龄特征在高校内部行政化差异不显著；高校内部行政化的三个维度与高校教职人员的工作绩效存在显著负相关关系,高校内部行政化能较好的预测高校教职人员的工作绩效。
最后,立足于研究结果,针对高校内部行政化的现状,本文系统的提出了高校去行政化的建议和对策,指出了本研究的不足,并提出了研究展望。
In last decades, the phenomenon of administration of colleges emerged in the process of the development of higher education in China, which has raised public serious concern. It is one of the main problems that internal administration of universities seriously affects the work performance of faculty in universities. As an organic part of colleges, the work performance of faculty affect the organization performance.
In order to provide scientific basis of decision making with respect to the reform of non-administration of universities and eventually improve the managing work performance of the whole universities, the questionnaires are made and issued. At the same time, taking the difficulty of the external administration research in colleges into account and basing on the principle of feasibility and convenience, this essay only study internal administration in universities and the relation between internal administration and the work performance of faculty.
Through the review of previous research, this essay founding that, at present the academic empirical research of internal administration in universities is still scarce. Based on this situation, in order to improve the scientific of this research, this research uses self-making internal administration of universities scale and mature Job performance scale to study internal administration in universities scale and the relation between internal administration and the work performance of faculty.
Based on the review of previous research, this essay indicates the research supposal and randomly issue questionnaires to150teachers and staff. Using statistical software, by using descriptive statistics, EFA, Variance analysis method, the correlation analysis and regression analysis to analyze data and test hypotheses, we draw the following conclusion:the internal administration of universities scale has good reliability and validity; different personal factors of teachers and staff such as record of formal schooling, age, post, grade and belonging department attribute internal administration of universities different, while, gender and the length of service have on different in internal administration of universities different; three dimensions of internal administration of universities have significant correlation with teachers'and staffs'work performance; internal administration in universities can well predict the work performance of faculty.
In the last, according to the research, based on the status of internal administration of universities, this paper proposes some suggestions and points out the shortcomings of this research, then put forward the research prospects..
引文
[1].别敦荣.学术管理、学术权力等概念释义[J].清华大学教育研究,2000(2).
[2].伯顿·克拉克.高等教育系统一学术组织的跨国研究[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,1994.
[3].蔡洁,山西省普通高校教师工作绩效现状研究[D].山西财经大学硕士学位论文,2012.
[4].陈昌贵,季飞.制度变迁视角下的大学“去行政化”[J].教育纵横,2010(09)：67-69.
[5].邓倩.知识员工绩效考核研究[D].天津大学硕士学位论文,2006.
[6].郭文琦.高林行政管理人员绩效管理体系构建[D].兰州大学MPA学位论文,2009.
[7].韩翼.雇员工作绩效结构模型的构建与实证研究[D].华中科技大学博士学位论文,2006.
[8].何霖俐,研究型大学新的人事分配制度对教师工作绩效的影响研究[D].四川大学硕士学位论文,2007.
[9].胡迪.知识型员工工作压力、自我效能与工作绩效的关系研究[D].杭州电子科技大学硕士论文,2009.
[10].季飞.大学为什么要去行政化[J].现在教育管理,2010(09)：19-22.
[11].李成.对高校“去行政化”问题的思考—基于“契约不完全”代理的视角[J].教育发展研究,2011(05)：18-22.
[12].李立国.赵义华.黄海军.论高校的“行政化”和“去行政化”[J].中国高教研究,2010(5)：2-4.
[13].林善栋.去行政化与现代大学制度的建立[J].教育评论，2008(6)：8-10.
[14].刘家明,张小琏,论我国高校非行政化改革的动力[J].嘉应学院学报(哲学社会科学),2009(04)：91-95.
[15].林泽炎.量化工作绩效的关键：考核工具的设计及举例[J].企业人力资源管理,1999(12)：28-30.
[16].刘精晶,高校教师时间监控观与工作绩效关系研究[D].大连理工大学硕士学位论文,2009.
[17].刘智发.重庆公立普通高等学校行政化的现状与对策研究—基于重庆市4所高校教师的调查[D].重庆师范大学硕士学位论文,2012.
[18].马成.权力视野下中国公立大学的行政改革[D].西南大学硕士论文.2012.
[19].[美]伯顿·克拉克.高等教育新论[M].王承绪译.杭州；浙江教育出版社,2001：45.
[20].[美]罗伯特·波恩鲍姆.学术领导力[M].北京；北京师范大学出版社,2008.5.
[21].[美]曼瑟尔·奥尔森.集体行动的逻辑[M].陈郁,等译.上海：格致出版社·上海三联书店·上海人民出版社,1995：191-192.
[22].潘午丽.论高校行政权力与学术权力博弈中教师的价值取向困境[J].当代教育论坛,2011(5)：13—15.
[23].孙培亮.我国大学去行政化问题研究[D].河南大学硕士学位论文,2011.
[24].沈宇.高校行政人员责任心与工作绩效的相关性研究[D].电子科技大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[25].史万兵.高等教育行政管理体制深化改革研究[M].教育科学出版社.2008年9月.
[26].石若坤.和谐校园呼唤高校“去行政化”—基于教帅心理契约的思考[J].湖北社会科学,2011(5)：164-169.
[27].谭志合.当代中国高等学校学术权力与行政权力的关系[J].师工高教研究,2002(8)
[28].王辉,李晓轩,罗胜.任务绩效与情境绩效二因素绩效模型的验证[J].中国管理科学,2003,11(4)：79—84.
[29].吴湘萍,徐福缘,周勇.高校教师工作绩效的影响因素分析[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2006(：3)：30-37.
[30].王瑞环.博弈论视角下高校行政权力和学术权力关系研究[D].青岛大学硕士学位论文,2012.
[31].王沛,孙连荣.工作绩效评估研究综述[J].人类工效学,2004,6：28-29.
[32.]巫春华.高等学校非行政化-国际经验与对策[J].高等教育研究,2005(8).23-27.
[33].武立勋,李汉邦,徐枞巍.对大学组织特性及行政与学术权力关系的思考[J].山西大学学报(社科版),2004(5)
[34].徐红.高校行政管理人员绩效评估工作研究[D].湘潭大学硕士学位论文,2008.
[35].尹雪林,高校教师工作绩效影响因素研究—基于苏州大学的调查[D].兰州大学硕士学位论文,2012.
[36].[加]约翰.H.范德格拉夫.学术权力—七国高等教育管理体制比较[M].王承绪等译.浙江：浙江教育出版社,2001.
[37].张家.大学去行政化的困难何在[J].大学教育科学,2009(2)：.110-112.
[38].张发旺.关于高校“去行政化”的几个问题[J].2010(05)：96-101.
[39].钟秉林.关于大学“去行政化”几个重要问题的探析[J].中国高等教育2010(9)：4-7.
[40].章晓莉.高等学校行政权力与学术权力的内涵界定与关系辨析[J].中国科技信息,2005(12).
[41]. Abraham Flexner. Universities:Ameriean English Geman[M].Network, Oxford University Press, 19303.Peter,Seott.The Crisisofthe University[N].Croo. HelmLtd, Provident House.1984:54.
[42]. A. C. Kors, and H. A. Silvweglate, The Shaow University:The Betrayal of Liberty on America's Campuses[M]. New York:Free Press.
[43]. Bergquist, Willian H. The Four Culture in the Academy:Insights and Strategies for Improving Leadership In Collegiate Organization[M]. Published by Jossy-Bass,1992.
[44]. Borman,W.C., Motowidlo,S.J. Expanding the Criterion Domain to Include Elements of Contextual Performance[J]. Personnel Selection in Organizations,San Francisco. Jossey-Bass,1993.
[45]. B.Salter, T.Tapper. The Politics of Governance in Higher Education[J].The Case of Quality Assurance, Political Studies,2000.
[46]. Campbell,McCloy, Opper& Sager. A theory of Performance In N. Schmitt, W.C. Borman and Associates [J]. Personnel Selection in Organizations, San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass,1993.
[47].Kyvik D A. Seven Recent Changes in the Governance of Higher Education Institutions in Norway[J].Higher Education Policy,1998, 11(2-3):217-228.
[48]. Lawrence R. Veysey, The Emergence of the American University[J]. University of Chicago Press, 1965.
[49]. Michael K. McLendon. The Politics of State Higher Education Governance Reform [J].Peabody Journal of Education,2003.
[50]. Motowidlo,S.J.,&Van Scotter,J.R. Evidence that Task Performance should Distinguishde from Contextual Performance[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,79,475-480,1994.
[51]. Murphy. Job performance and productivity[J].Psychology in organization, Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum,1990.
[52].Ryans D G. Characteristics of teachers[M]. American Council on Education,1960.
[53]. S.Slaughter, and L. I.Leslie. Academic Capitalism:Politicis, and the Enterpreneurial University [M].Johns Hopkins University Press.1997.
[2].伯顿·克拉克.高等教育系统一学术组织的跨国研究[M].杭州：浙江教育出版社,1994.
[3].蔡洁,山西省普通高校教师工作绩效现状研究[D].山西财经大学硕士学位论文,2012.
[4].陈昌贵,季飞.制度变迁视角下的大学“去行政化”[J].教育纵横,2010(09)：67-69.
[5].邓倩.知识员工绩效考核研究[D].天津大学硕士学位论文,2006.
[6].郭文琦.高林行政管理人员绩效管理体系构建[D].兰州大学MPA学位论文,2009.
[7].韩翼.雇员工作绩效结构模型的构建与实证研究[D].华中科技大学博士学位论文,2006.
[8].何霖俐,研究型大学新的人事分配制度对教师工作绩效的影响研究[D].四川大学硕士学位论文,2007.
[9].胡迪.知识型员工工作压力、自我效能与工作绩效的关系研究[D].杭州电子科技大学硕士论文,2009.
[10].季飞.大学为什么要去行政化[J].现在教育管理,2010(09)：19-22.
[11].李成.对高校“去行政化”问题的思考—基于“契约不完全”代理的视角[J].教育发展研究,2011(05)：18-22.
[12].李立国.赵义华.黄海军.论高校的“行政化”和“去行政化”[J].中国高教研究,2010(5)：2-4.
[13].林善栋.去行政化与现代大学制度的建立[J].教育评论，2008(6)：8-10.
[14].刘家明,张小琏,论我国高校非行政化改革的动力[J].嘉应学院学报(哲学社会科学),2009(04)：91-95.
[15].林泽炎.量化工作绩效的关键：考核工具的设计及举例[J].企业人力资源管理,1999(12)：28-30.
[16].刘精晶,高校教师时间监控观与工作绩效关系研究[D].大连理工大学硕士学位论文,2009.
[17].刘智发.重庆公立普通高等学校行政化的现状与对策研究—基于重庆市4所高校教师的调查[D].重庆师范大学硕士学位论文,2012.
[18].马成.权力视野下中国公立大学的行政改革[D].西南大学硕士论文.2012.
[19].[美]伯顿·克拉克.高等教育新论[M].王承绪译.杭州；浙江教育出版社,2001：45.
[20].[美]罗伯特·波恩鲍姆.学术领导力[M].北京；北京师范大学出版社,2008.5.
[21].[美]曼瑟尔·奥尔森.集体行动的逻辑[M].陈郁,等译.上海：格致出版社·上海三联书店·上海人民出版社,1995：191-192.
[22].潘午丽.论高校行政权力与学术权力博弈中教师的价值取向困境[J].当代教育论坛,2011(5)：13—15.
[23].孙培亮.我国大学去行政化问题研究[D].河南大学硕士学位论文,2011.
[24].沈宇.高校行政人员责任心与工作绩效的相关性研究[D].电子科技大学硕士学位论文,2005.
[25].史万兵.高等教育行政管理体制深化改革研究[M].教育科学出版社.2008年9月.
[26].石若坤.和谐校园呼唤高校“去行政化”—基于教帅心理契约的思考[J].湖北社会科学,2011(5)：164-169.
[27].谭志合.当代中国高等学校学术权力与行政权力的关系[J].师工高教研究,2002(8)
[28].王辉,李晓轩,罗胜.任务绩效与情境绩效二因素绩效模型的验证[J].中国管理科学,2003,11(4)：79—84.
[29].吴湘萍,徐福缘,周勇.高校教师工作绩效的影响因素分析[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2006(：3)：30-37.
[30].王瑞环.博弈论视角下高校行政权力和学术权力关系研究[D].青岛大学硕士学位论文,2012.
[31].王沛,孙连荣.工作绩效评估研究综述[J].人类工效学,2004,6：28-29.
[32.]巫春华.高等学校非行政化-国际经验与对策[J].高等教育研究,2005(8).23-27.
[33].武立勋,李汉邦,徐枞巍.对大学组织特性及行政与学术权力关系的思考[J].山西大学学报(社科版),2004(5)
[34].徐红.高校行政管理人员绩效评估工作研究[D].湘潭大学硕士学位论文,2008.
[35].尹雪林,高校教师工作绩效影响因素研究—基于苏州大学的调查[D].兰州大学硕士学位论文,2012.
[36].[加]约翰.H.范德格拉夫.学术权力—七国高等教育管理体制比较[M].王承绪等译.浙江：浙江教育出版社,2001.
[37].张家.大学去行政化的困难何在[J].大学教育科学,2009(2)：.110-112.
[38].张发旺.关于高校“去行政化”的几个问题[J].2010(05)：96-101.
[39].钟秉林.关于大学“去行政化”几个重要问题的探析[J].中国高等教育2010(9)：4-7.
[40].章晓莉.高等学校行政权力与学术权力的内涵界定与关系辨析[J].中国科技信息,2005(12).
[41]. Abraham Flexner. Universities:Ameriean English Geman[M].Network, Oxford University Press, 19303.Peter,Seott.The Crisisofthe University[N].Croo. HelmLtd, Provident House.1984:54.
[42]. A. C. Kors, and H. A. Silvweglate, The Shaow University:The Betrayal of Liberty on America's Campuses[M]. New York:Free Press.
[43]. Bergquist, Willian H. The Four Culture in the Academy:Insights and Strategies for Improving Leadership In Collegiate Organization[M]. Published by Jossy-Bass,1992.
[44]. Borman,W.C., Motowidlo,S.J. Expanding the Criterion Domain to Include Elements of Contextual Performance[J]. Personnel Selection in Organizations,San Francisco. Jossey-Bass,1993.
[45]. B.Salter, T.Tapper. The Politics of Governance in Higher Education[J].The Case of Quality Assurance, Political Studies,2000.
[46]. Campbell,McCloy, Opper& Sager. A theory of Performance In N. Schmitt, W.C. Borman and Associates [J]. Personnel Selection in Organizations, San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass,1993.
[47].Kyvik D A. Seven Recent Changes in the Governance of Higher Education Institutions in Norway[J].Higher Education Policy,1998, 11(2-3):217-228.
[48]. Lawrence R. Veysey, The Emergence of the American University[J]. University of Chicago Press, 1965.
[49]. Michael K. McLendon. The Politics of State Higher Education Governance Reform [J].Peabody Journal of Education,2003.
[50]. Motowidlo,S.J.,&Van Scotter,J.R. Evidence that Task Performance should Distinguishde from Contextual Performance[J]. Journal of Applied Psychology,79,475-480,1994.
[51]. Murphy. Job performance and productivity[J].Psychology in organization, Hillsdale, NJ:Erlbaum,1990.
[52].Ryans D G. Characteristics of teachers[M]. American Council on Education,1960.
[53]. S.Slaughter, and L. I.Leslie. Academic Capitalism:Politicis, and the Enterpreneurial University [M].Johns Hopkins University Press.1997.