【作者】 张炜；

【导师】 冯向东； 柯佑祥；

【作者基本信息】 华中科技大学 ， 教育经济与管理， 2010， 博士

【摘要】 从“精英教育”向“大众教育”转型过程中,中国高等教育的发展重心逐渐由“规模外延”转移到“质量内涵”上来：“211工程”、“985工程”以及“高等教育强国”战略的实施,标志着中国高校人才培养的“质量意识”已提升到国家层面。然而,质量也意味着代价：伴随着“高等教育质量工程”逐渐深入,坊间对于中国高校的高额学杂费、负债运营、效率低下等“成本病”的指责不绝于耳——关键的,中国高校为保障其人才培养质量的成本投入还是一个未解之“谜”。中国高校用于保障其人才培养质量的成本投入现状如何?应该如何?如何改进?对于这些问题的探究构成了高校人才培养的质量成本研究。“质量成本”是管理经济学中的经典理论和话语系统；将其系统引入中国高等教育研究和管理中,不仅是必要的,而且是充分的：一方面,人才培养的质量成本是高校组织的内生价值目标,它的引入能够深化管理者对高等教育质量与成本的系统认识,并为中国高等教育绩效管理开辟新途径；另一方面,高校人才培养的质量与成本是有着显著关联性的。“985高校”相关数据的曲线拟合、成本生产函数以及Perason相关等分析结果显示：高校人才培养质量与成本之间呈现“半倒U型”正向关联。值得注意的是,用“不良质量成本”构建“高校人才培养质量成本”话语体系是不合适的；回溯概念本源,“质量发生成本”才是构建这一核心概念的内涵基础。基于此,研究运用“标杆管理”的分析框架,按照“合格质量”、“良好质量”、“一流质量”的质量标杆对中、美两国高校人才培养的质量成本进行了总量、比重和内部结构的分层比较。研究发现：随着“质量标杆”的提升,美国高校人才培养质量成本及其占总成本的比重逐级上升；内部结构维度上则呈现出“教学成本”比重逐层下降而“学生服务”比重逐层上升的特征,体现出美国高校人才培养过程中“以人为本、循序渐进”的发展关系。与美国高校不同,中国高校人才培养质量成本及其占总成本比重没有随着“质量标杆”逐层提升；历史数据分析也表明：中国发达地区、高层次大学在发展过程中,其经费投入的策略更趋向于“物”而非“人”。以美国“4年制私立高校”和“4年制公立高校”的整体水平为标杆,从公平和效率两大价值视角对中国高校进行分类区分,有利于其人才培养质量成本比重和结构合理目标区间的确定。基于公平性的研究发现：1999年-2007年间,中国高校省际间人才培养质量成本的变异系数、基尼系数上升明显,泰尔指数则保持稳定。这表明：造成人才培养质量成本支出省际差距扩大的主要原因在于经费支出排名中后位次的省区高校增长的相对落后。基于产出效率的研究则显示：中国高校人才培养的质量成本产出效率还有较大的提升空间——DEA计量结果显示,“985高校”人才培养质量成本产出的有效率低于50%；而中国教育部属高校人才培养质量成本产出的SFA效率为0.59,并显著受到政府定位、学科类型、所在地域等因素的影响。根据公平性和有效性将中国高校分为三个层次,各层次高校可以参照美国对应层次高校整体平均水平来合理制定其人才培养质量成本的外在标准和内在结构。高校人才培养质量成本是如何转化为人才培养质量的?这是中国高校改进其人才培养质量成本及其结构必须面对的一个重要的现实问题。研究在“个体资本转化”的理论视角下,通过对12所“985高校”的40名研究生和800名大学生的访谈问卷,构建出高校人才培养“质量成本——质量”转化机理的结构方程模型。分析得知：高校人才培养质量成本转化为质量的源动力在于高校提供的“文化资本”；其现实的主导路径为“文化资本→服务学生→教学科研→个体人力资本→个体社会资本”。访谈比较和路径分析还显示：与美国一流高校相比,中国“985高校”迫切需要在“文化资本”、“学生活动”、“教学科研”等方面增加投入和管理力度以提高其服务质量。更多还原

【Abstract】 From Elite to Mass Higher Education, the strategy of development which focuses on Chinese universities & colleges’ personnel training turned from the pursuit of "Scale Effect" to " Improving the Quality " just as the implementation of the "211 Project", the " 985 Project" and the strategy of " Building A Strong Higher Education Country "; However, quality also means a price:With the deepening of "Quality Project for Higher Education", Today’s higher educational institutions have faced the lingering criticism of their "Cost Disease" in high tuition fees, high debt operation, extravagancy and inefficiency, leaving an unsolved mystery of cost inputs to ensure the quality of personnel training. So what is the current state of quality cost in this regard? What is the reasonable proportion? How to be improved if necessary? Therefore, this paper will regard the probing of the above questions as a main part of the research."Cost of Quality" (COQ) was a classical concept and the discourse system in Management, Economics and Engineering; It is not only necessary but a development strategy to introduce such system into the higher education research for Chinese universities & colleges’ management:On the one hand, as the third sector and a non-profit organization, colleges also required the operation based on obtaining the fundamental value such as equality and efficiency in their organization goals; The COQ of universities & colleges’personnel training can become the reality reference system for these value of their idea of quality & cost and the performance management practice. On the other hand, the quality and the cost of Chinese colleges’personnel training have a significant relevance. Through the analysis of the fitting curve, quadratic-function of cost production and Perason correlation from " 985 Project Universities " in recent years, it has shown that an "half inverted U-tupe " positive association between the quality and the cost of colleges’ personnel training can be seen. It should be noted that although the universities & colleges’personnel training is a similar but more specific activation as an enterprise organizational behavior, so it is not appropriate to build its discourse by using the "Cost of Poor Quality" as the core concept. Instead, we should return to the original idea of " quality of just cost" to build the Performance Management rightly.Based on these reviews, we take the benchmarking tool and had a hierarchical comparison between Chinese and American universities in terms of the COQ、COQ per college student、COQ percents to total cost and internal structure of COQ for colleges’ personnel training in accordance with " Acceptable Quality ", " Good Quality ", " Top Quality", the results told us that:With the upgrading of "Quality benchmarking", the quality of American universities, the cost of personnel training and the proportion of the total cost increased step by step; internal structure featured the declining of the proportion of " Instruction " and the increasing of the proportion of " Department research " based on the upgrading of "Quality benchmarking" and the "Human-Oriented" development strategy, which is reflected in the relationship between the quality and the COQ in American universities. However, in China’s universities, "Good Quality" doesn’t mean that the COQ has the higher proportion in the total cost than "Acceptable Quality". In addition, historical data also shows that funds are prioritized to "Non-human" rather than " Human " during the process of the development of high-level universities.From the perspective of fairness and efficiency, China’s universities can refer to American universities which can help them identify the "reasonable range " of personnel training goals. On the one hand, the study of equality found that there was an unequal tendency reflected on the coefficient of variation, Gini index in China’s universities in 1999-2007 among the 31 provinces, and the Theil index remained stable. It told us that the inequality was caused by the provinces at the end of the ranking list of COQ, who has lower COQ investigation. On the other hand, the study based on the efficiency analysis showed that more than 50% of " 985 project universities " were inefficient through DEA measurement in 1999-2007. The result measured through SFA further showed that the input-output efficiency rate of the COQ for "Ministry of Education Universities "was 0.59 and it was significantly affected by the Government location, subject type, geographic location and other factors. According to equality and efficiency ranking of the above-mentioned Chinese universities, with reference to American universities reasonably, there were three quality-goal levels for the COQ to develop its external and internal dimensions.How was the COQ converted to the quality of personnel training? This is the key and practical question Chinese universities & colleges faced in improving their COQ and structure. Based on the perspective of the "Individual Capital Transformation", the paper constructed a SEM named "The COQ converted to Quality of universities & colleges’personnel training" by interviewing and distributing questionnaires to 40 graduate students with overseas background and 600 college students from Chinese "985 project universities". The result indicated that the source of power for "The COQ converted to Quality" was the "Cultural Capital" from the college to the college students; the dominant path for the "COQ to Quality" of Chinese colleges’personnel training is " Cultural Capital→Teaching & Research→Serving Students→Individual Human Capital→Individual Social Capital". As the benchmarking of US "Ivy League", Chinese "985 Project Universities" urgently need to increase their inputs and strengthen management in "Cultural Capital", "Student Services" and "Instruction & Research" so as to improve the quality of service.更多还原