欢迎来到51Due,请先 | 注册
关注我们: 51due论文代写二维码 51due论文代写平台微博
英国论文代写,英国essay代写知名品牌微信

Essay代写范文

为您解决留学中生活、学习、工作的困难、疑惑
释放自我

essay代写-Public choice bias in UK higher education policy

2019-05-18 | 来源:51due教员组 | 类别:Essay代写范文

本篇essay代写- Public choice bias in UK higher education policy讨论了英国高等教育政策的公共选择倾向。英国的高等教育一向有尊重学术自由的传统,大学以外的力量对大学事务一向干涉甚少。所以,在英国高等教育现实政策过程中,减少特权的公共选择倾向首先表现为减少大学特权。具体表现为政府干预力度加大和将原属大学的某些特权转给市场,以达到分化大学特权的目的。本篇essay代写51due代写平台整理,供大家参考阅读。

higher education policy,英国高等教育政策,essay代写,代写,paper代写

The theory of public choice is a kind of political economics. The basic assumption of the study of non-market collective choice by using economic methods is the economic man hypothesis in western economics, which holds that in the collective choice of non-market, people are also rational and self-interested. It has produced the huge and profound influence to the western government management idea and the policy behavior.

The theory of public choice is based on the liberalism of classical economics and the realistic criticism and sublation of Keynesian state interventionism. Although its focus is mainly on the transaction process of the political market to explain the reasons for the failure of the government, in the practical research, the theory of public choice is not only used to study the failure of the government. Its original intention is to examine government and other public economy with the method that checks market economy blemish and inadequacy, with this explain government also has blemish. The real implication is not against appropriate government intervention, only that it should be considered only when the market solution does cost less than the performance of government intervention. The implication is that the choice between the market and the government is based on performance. In this sense, the theory of public choice belongs to the category of "neoliberalism" which is both "liberalism" and "conservatism". One of its concrete influences on the practice of public sector reform is to reorganize the public sector by means of marketization so as to realize effective public management with the power of market competition.

The analysis of policy problems by public choice theory also implies another basic premise, that is, the policy process involves multiple policy subjects. Higher education products are quasi-public goods. On the one hand, they have the attribute of public goods; on the other hand, they have the attribute of private goods. Especially after the modern university evolved the function of serving the society, the externality of the university was strengthened unprecedentedly and became a symbiosis of many stakeholders. In the context of globalization, however, the fact that many aspects of higher education in the UK are still left entirely to the universities is beginning to seem highly unrealistic. This is the power outside the university. In particular, the intervention of the market and the government in higher education has provided reasons, and has become the realistic basis for the public choice in the process of higher education policy in the UK.

The two issues emphasized by the public choice theory have become the intervention of non-university forces in British higher education and provided the theoretical basis for the public choice tendency of its higher education policies. The theory of public choice holds that the government, as the guarantor of public interests, can make up for the deficiency of market economy and make the social benefits of decisions made by economic people in the market higher than before government intervention. While the hypothesis of economic man emphasized by the public choice theory is mainly directed at the government, its logic can be extended to the field of higher education. Since the government, which is always famous for publicity and public welfare, cannot escape the self-interest of economic man, so can the field of quasi-publicity higher education. In fact, it is obvious that universities have their own interests, such as the university of Warwick, which has successfully transformed itself into an entrepreneurial university. Within universities, the clear evidence of the economic personality of professors is the behaviour of academic capitalism. Another point that public choice theory has repeatedly emphasized is that the power to increase social welfare and ensure equality for all should not be randomly assigned to a privileged institution or class, and then reverently wait for the favor of the privileged institution or class. Extending to the field of higher education as a quasi-public sector, even the affairs of higher education cannot be entirely decided by the universities themselves. Therefore, the external forces including the government and the market, together with universities, influence the higher education cause, which is an important manifestation of the public choice tendency of the higher education policy. In Britain, where higher education is seen as a public service, it is not surprising that its policies have a public choice bias.

On the whole, the essence of the public choice theory is that the market is defective, so is the government. When the market is inefficient in providing a certain type of products and services, and the government is able to provide such products and services with a relatively high efficiency, the government should play a role. Ultimately, public choice is about performance, privilege reduction, and fairness.

Higher education in Britain has a tradition of respecting academic freedom, and outside forces have always had little interference in university affairs. Therefore, in the realistic policy process of higher education in the UK, the tendency of public choice to reduce privileges is firstly manifested as the reduction of university privileges. In order to achieve the purpose of dividing the privilege of university, the government intervenes intensively and transfers the privilege of university to the market. The increase in government intervention is evident in a number of documents, from the 1997 del ying report to the 2003 white paper the future of higher education. Recent policies to maintain quality and to emphasize the role of universities in regional economic development also indicate this. Secondly, the tendency of public choice in the process of British higher education policy is also reflected in the intervention of external forces such as government and market to improve university performance. Many of the policies of higher education reform in Britain, from the thatcherite era to the so-called third way to the reforms under brown, have an implicit public choice bias.

The tendency of public choice in British higher education policy is firstly reflected in the emphasis on the performance of higher education. During the thatcher administration, improving the performance of higher education became the basic principle of the reform of higher education. Its main realization way is the higher education marketization reform. It is divided into two parts: one is to cut costs and reduce public expenditure on higher education; the other is to guarantee and improve the quality of higher education.

The reduction of university privileges is achieved through a variety of themes and approaches by the market, society and government. Although the thatcherism of the thatcher government is generally regarded as tantamount to market reforms, the fact that universities themselves are less powerful is also part of thatcher's market policies in higher education. Higher education policy, as part of thatcherism, is subordinate to the entire reform policy framework, making "the fact that different fields clearly serve the common policy weakens the autonomy of education decision-making... Government intervention to reduce the autonomy of universities is not mainly through direct administrative intervention, but by reducing the amount of public financial support for education, how to support and introducing other forces outside universities. For example, the university grants committee would be abolished, and the university funding committee, which is more controlled by the government, and the grants committee for the multi-disciplinary technical colleges and the extended education colleges would be set up. "If universities do not take concrete action to ensure and improve efficiency and quality, then the university funding committee will take on this responsibility," the UFC declared.

The public choice tendency of British higher education policy in thatcher's era was also reflected in improving the quality and fairness of higher education. In 1985, the thatcher government published the higher education document "the development of higher education in Britain in the 1990s". The green paper required higher education to relax admission requirements and stipulate "who can benefit from higher education". In 1987, the white paper higher education -- meeting new challenges was published, calling for continued increase in the number of students, especially for young women and adult students. In addition, the white paper also discusses the efficiency of higher education. In the same year, Lin duopu's report delegated the power of quality control of higher education to colleges and universities themselves to a certain extent, reflecting the implication of public choice. The government is positioned to establish an appropriate system to urge colleges and universities to shoulder the responsibility of improving the quality of higher education. The education reform act of 1988 also declared a policy of funding based on the quality of education.

Under major, the higher education policy continued the existing ideas of the conservative party, and most of them were the continuation, consolidation and expansion of the reform achievements in thatcher's era. The public option in its higher education policy is much the same as that of the thatcher government, but with more emphasis on introducing social forces to counterbalance the privileges of the "old universities". The biggest reform policy for higher education was the white paper higher education: a new framework issued by the parliament and the house of Commons in 1991. The white paper can be said to be a programmatic document guiding the government to formulate higher education reform policies. In the introduction to the white paper, major said: "in higher education, our reforms will largely end the artificial distinctions that have been growing between universities and polytechnics and other institutions." Since then, British higher education quickly ended the era of "dual system" and entered a new era of "unitary system". Subsequently, the continuing and higher education act of 1992 and the Scottish continuing and higher education act of 1992 were enacted to increase the number of students, provide subsidies and loans to students and encourage open universities. And merged UFC and PCFC into the higher education funding committee. Its members are no longer all university, but many business people. These policies actually reduce the privileges of "old universities" by introducing "new university" forces and social forces.

In addition, major's government has promoted a popular policy of expanding the scale of higher education to increase fair opportunities. The mass movement for higher education launched by the major government has increased the UK's higher education enrolment rate by more than 30 percentage points in just 10 years.

Mr Blair is best known for his "third way" of emphasising social justice, accountability, responsibility, co-ordination and community. The public choice tendency of higher education policy is also contained in it. In the ten years, greatly increase public spending in the field of higher education, continue to keep the marketization of higher education policy, introduced many reform measures based on market, and try to create an inclusive, diversity of society, create some point to the performance of education equality and education policies, such as gender equality and "will be a failure of the school as object", etc. Within the framework of the "third way" reform, Blair issued a white paper on education "the pursuit of excellence in schools" as the education policy platform of his administration. The following year, in the white paper "our competitive future: building a knowledge economy", the Blair government put higher education in a rather important position, clearly put forward the task and goal of building a knowledge economy, and entrusted heavy responsibilities to higher education. The white paper calls for universities to play an irreplaceable role in further commercializing and marketing science, and encourages universities to interact with industry. Special funds have been set up for this purpose and their support has been increased year by year.

It is also the embodiment of the public choice tendency of the higher education policy of Blair government to promote fairness by differential fees. Although fees for higher education were introduced under Margaret thatcher, differential fees, which promote fairness, have been in place since the Blair years. In the white paper "the future of higher education" published in 2003, it was deemed necessary to make higher education adopt flexible tuition policies, and put forward the proposition of uniform price, heterogeneous price and flexible charge considering purchasing power. The government has also introduced the graduate education sharing scheme, which will see universities charge up to 3,000 a year for tuition and end the "pay first, pay later" system in favour of a "pay first, pay later" system. Students receive higher education without paying any fees. The government pays tuition fees to the school. When the graduate earns more than 15,000 pounds after graduation, the student repays the loan through the tax system.

The Blair government has also continued its policy of democratising higher education with a fair intention. In 2002 alone, the number of students enrolled in British institutions of higher learning increased by 54,400 over the previous year to 89,6621. The 2003 white paper went further, arguing for making higher education more inclusive, making it more market-friendly and raising the enrolment rate of the school-age population to 50 per cent.

In terms of financial support policies for higher education, the Blair government, on the one hand, encouraged the society and individuals to pay attention to higher education by means of media and various professional institutions. On the other hand, it also carries out more specific and detailed coordination among institutions of higher education, fund committees and industrial and commercial enterprises, so as to promote the development of higher education and generate greater economic benefits. To strengthen the government's influence over universities.

University performance and other stakeholders' attitudes are important manifestations of the public choice tendency of higher education policy of brown government. The brown government reorganized and split the education and skills department into the children's, schools and families department and the innovation, universities and skills department. The ministry of innovation, universities and skills, which focuses on higher education, has assumed some functions of the ministry of education and skills and played an important role in scientific innovation, higher education and continuing education. The department of innovation, universities and skills attaches great importance to market and efficiency. During the brown administration, the government also began to participate in the performance evaluation policy of British higher education. Since 1999, the UK has started to conduct performance evaluation for all universities nationwide. The process of performance evaluation and the release of performance report are completed by the performance indicator guidance group, whose members come from various government departments, higher education fund committee of England, Scotland and wales, higher education statistics bureau, universities and colleges, etc. Since 2003, the brown government has introduced performance-oriented education accountability policies to strengthen the intervention in higher education and ensure the performance of universities. In England, for example, universities are required to sign a memorandum of understanding with the higher education fund of England to ensure the direction and efficiency of funding. In 2004 HEFCE mandated that universities set up audit committees and conduct an external audit once a year. In 2006, South Africa established a leading group of other public investors and stakeholders to pilot the accountability system. A new accountability policy between HEFCED and the university was formally established in 2008. The brown administration's higher education policy also focuses on student attitudes as important "investors" in higher education. In 2005, the first national survey of college students' satisfaction was carried out, which was organized by the higher education fund committee of England, and a large-scale survey of college students' satisfaction was carried out every year.

要想成绩好,英国论文得写好,51due代写平台为你提供英国留学资讯,专业辅导,还为你提供专业英国essay代写,paper代写report代写,需要找论文代写的话快来联系我们51due工作客服QQ800020041或者wechatAbby0900吧。

我们的优势

  • 05年成立,已帮助上万人
  • 24小时专业客服
  • 团队成员都毕业于全球著名高校
  • 保证原创,支持检测

英国站