登录 EN

添加临时用户

以数据为核心:英国高等教育数据治理体系研究

Implementing a Data-Centric Approach: A Study of Data Governance Systems in UK Higher Education

作者:彭浥尘
  • 学号
    2019******
  • 学位
    博士
  • 电子邮箱
    pen******.cn
  • 答辩日期
    2022.07.20
  • 导师
    叶富贵
  • 学科名
    教育学
  • 页码
    215
  • 保密级别
    公开
  • 培养单位
    103 教研院
  • 中文关键词
    高等教育,数据治理,政策网络,英国
  • 英文关键词
    higher education, data governance, policy networking, UK

摘要

在高等教育领域从“管理”向“治理”的转向中,网络治理是其中的一种重要治理形式。它可以跨越政府和社会、时间和空间等有形或无形的边界,使多元主体聚集在同一治理空间内。由于数据轻便性、灵活性、迅捷性等特征,以及数据处理、分析、应用等技术的提升,以数据为依托的网络治理方兴未艾。当前,数据治理已经成为部分国家高等教育部门的主流治理方式。英国的高等教育数据治理始终走在前列,20世纪50年代起,就开始设立专门的高等教育统计机构,对教育数据进行有意识地收集和应用。经过文献梳理、案例分析、比较研究等发现,英国已经形成了多方主体共同参与高等教育数据治理的局面。有限的英国政府、自治的高等教育机构、创新的企业、灵活的第三部门等都是其中的重要参与者。同时,在由国家支持的自下而上的大规模社会创新中,公共服务的用户被定位为共同生产者、积极参与者和自我管理者,“自我组织”并提出解决方案。就运行模式和治理特征而言,多元主体的共同参与形成了一个新的治理网络,在这个网络中产生关于高等教育未来的新理念和新规划。通过数据的传输和应用,高等教育部门被重新想象成一个新的流动性空间,一个由分散在政策网络中的公共、私人和跨部门行为者共同参与软治理的空间。相较于其它国家而言,英国的高等教育数据治理并不局限于相对粗糙的数据统计,更注重对已有数据的存储分析、挖掘和利用,强调精细化捕捉各个层面数据的变化,及由数据展现的复杂相关与因果关系。最重要的是数据意味着一种理念和思维方式的更新。面对海量数据,教育部门的决策理念开始发生改变,决策过程从事后分析向事前预测转变。各治理主体通过不断更新的技术对海量数据进行数学运算和逻辑分析,以此来预测来事件发生的可能性,推动决策思维从“为什么”、“是什么”向“如何发展”转变。但英国的高等教育数据治理体系也存在不足,平台资本主义的不断发展带来的平台监视、学术自由和自主权受损、扩大教育不公等。学术自由能否最大程度地得到保护,商业教育技术的扩张是否会决定学生的需求,学习者和机构的隐私如何得到保障,都是应该警惕和思考的重要议题。

In the transformation from "management" to "governance" in the field of higher education, network governance is an important form. It can cross tangible and intangible boundaries of government and society, time and space, bringing together various actors in the same governance space. "Data" is playing an important role as a bridge due to its characteristics of portability, flexibility, and swiftness, network governance relying on data is in the ascendant. At present, data governance has become the mainstream governance mode of higher education departments in some countries. The UK's higher education data governance has always been at the forefront. Since the 1950s, special higher education statistical institutions have been set up to consciously collect, analyze and apply education data. Through literature review, case analysis, and comparative research, it is found that the United Kingdom has formed a situation in which multiple parties participate in higher education data governance. The limited UK government, autonomous higher education institutions, innovative enterprises and flexible third sector are all important participants. At the same time, in bottom-up large-scale social innovation supported by the state, users of public services are positioned as co-producers, active participants and self-managers, “self-organizing” and proposing solutions.In terms of operation mode and governance characteristics, the joint participation of multiple subjects forms a new governance network, in which new ideas and new plans for the future of higher education are generated. Through the transmission and application of data, the higher education sector is reimagined as a new mobility space, a space of soft governance involving public, private and cross-sector actors.Compared with other countries, the higher education data governance in the UK is not limited to relatively rough data statistics, but pays more attention to the storage, analysis, mining and utilization of existing data, and emphasizes the fine capture of data changes at all levels, as well as the complex correlation and causal relationship shown by data. The most important thing is that data means a new idea and way of thinking. Faced with massive data, the decision-making concept of the education department has begun to change, and the decision-making process has shifted from post-analysis to pre-prediction. Each governer carries out mathematical operation and logical analysis on massive data through constantly updated technology, so as to predict the possibility of occurrence of events and promote the transformation of decision-making thinking from "why" and "what" to "how to develop".However, the UK's higher education data governance system also has shortcomings. The continuous development of platform capitalism has brought about platform surveillance, damage to academic freedom and autonomy, and expansion of educational injustice. Whether academic freedom can be protected to the greatest extent, whether the expansion of commercial education technology will determine the needs of students, and how the privacy of learners and institutions can be guaranteed are all important issues that should be vigilant and considered.