حلقة تعريفية لقناة قضايا العرب ..الدوحة قطر ماليزيا مصر بريطانيا فرنسا المغرب Hoa Kỳ

Neoliberal political ideology underpins much of the recent change to state steering of higher education. For example, the neoliberal political philosophy, with its emphasis on the market and light state surveillance, is clearly evident in both the supermarket and evaluative state models. The supermarket and evaluative state models emphasize the state's supervisory function without tight, detailed control of institutions, as well as the self-regulatory nature of higher education institutions based on strong executive leadership and the efficiency of resource utilization and management. These models and approaches are to a significant degree illustrative of current higher education trends in Australia, Western Europe, and Japan. The state's roles in the evaluative state model, in theory, encapsulate the idea of the separation of funder and provider, and policy and delivery. The evaluative state thesis identifies evaluation – in particular, output rather than input and process quality control – as the government's main policy instrument in the postroutine evaluation regime and in the context of scarce public resources. A posteriori evaluation as well as financial incentives are common policy instruments currently in use in Western European countries and Japan. In this respect, it can be argued that the higher education systems in these countries are converging on the evaluative state model. The higher education system can be understood as a subsystem of the nation-state system. It can also be understood as a part of a state education system – which is “a nationwide and differentiated collection of institutions devoted to formal education, whose overall control and supervision is at least partly governmental, and whose component parts and processes are related to one another” (Archer, 1984: 19) – regardless of whether individual institutions are public or private. However, challenge to traditional state steering models and approaches in higher education have also arisen from new global and regional trends, such as the Bologna process. Meek (2002) identifies the global dimension – including international higher education consortia such as Universities 21 (a network of 18 leading research universities in ten countries) and supranational coordination authorities such as the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the World Bank, and the European Union – and attempts to incorporate it into the concept of higher education coordination. These supra-national actors and agreements affect the choices which government can make, which in turn changes the mode of higher education coordination. Neoliberal political ideology underpins much of the recent change to state steering of higher education. For example, the neoliberal political philosophy, with its emphasis on the market and light state surveillance, is clearly evident in both the supermarket and evaluative state models. The supermarket and evaluative state models emphasize the state's supervisory function without tight, detailed control of institutions, as well as the self-regulatory nature of higher education institutions based on strong executive leadership and the efficiency of resource utilization and management. These models and approaches are to a significant degree illustrative of current higher education trends in Australia, Western Europe, and Japan. The state's roles in the evaluative state model, in theory, encapsulate the idea of the separation of funder and provider, and policy and delivery. The evaluative state thesis identifies evaluation – in particular, output rather than input and process quality control – as the government's main policy instrument in the postroutine evaluation regime and in the context of scarce public resources. A posteriori evaluation as well as financial incentives are common policy instruments currently in use in Western European countries and Japan. In this respect, it can be argued that the higher education systems in these countries are converging on the evaluative state model. The higher education system can be understood as a subsystem of the nation-state system. It can also be understood as a part of a state education system – which is “a nationwide and differentiated collection of institutions devoted to formal education, whose overall control and supervision is at least partly governmental, and whose component parts and processes are related to one another” (Archer, 1984: 19) – regardless of whether individual institutions are public or private. However, challenge to traditional state steering models and approaches in higher education have also arisen from new global and regional trends, such as the Bologna process. Meek (2002) identifies the global dimension – including international higher education consortia such as Universities 21 (a network of 18 leading research universities in ten countries) and supranational coordination authorities such as the United nations .. Qatar...

Category