Export Mendeley
＜departmental bulletin paper＞
The Formation of Revisionism of the Decentralized Higher Education System: A Case Study of the State of California in 1990's
| Creator | |
|---|---|
| Language | |
| Publisher | |
| Date | |
| Source Title | |
| Vol | |
| First Page | |
| Last Page | |
| Publication Type | |
| Access Rights | |
| JaLC DOI | |
| Abstract | This article describes why California’s internationally praised higher education system lost its support by reviewing the debates on higher education reforms in the State of California in 1990’s. The ...higher education system in California has a unique decentralized structure. Each of the three public sectors, the University of California, the California State University, and California Community Colleges, has its own governing board, and there is no central governing board for all colleges and universities. The California Postsecondary Education Commission was not a statewide governing board but a coordinating agency with the function of data repository. Some previous researches focusing on in-state politics described CPEC as an ineffective agency with limited authority. However, it was said that most of the persons concerned, including both of the leaderships of the higher education sector and the state legislature, preferred CPEC’s weak coordination to a stricter one, because there remained a space for them to exert their own influence. Meanwhile, recent national trend in higher education reform is described as lack of leadership in coordination, and California, which had abandoned CPEC in 2011 and has not yet created any new agency, turned out to be one of the most chaotic states. Reviewing four major reports for higher education reform in 1990’s, this research shows how Californian’s evaluation to CPEC and the segmental structure had changed. Foreseeing severe financial conditions and rapid increase of student enrollment, some reform advocates started to expect CPEC to have stronger authority for effective coordination. The expectation to CPEC was assimilated into another discussion which criticized the segmental and decentralized nature of Californian higher education system and insisted greater responsibility of higher education to K-12 education. By 1999, the reform trend to expel the representatives of higher education sector from CPEC had eventually formed. CPEC was no longer seen as the buffer between the higher education sector and the state government, but it was expected to be a lay board to control the colleges and universities from the outside of the higher education sector. Finally, the legislative review of the Master Plan in 2002 recommended the closure of CPEC, similarly insisting that independency from the higher education sector is essential for the state education throughout K-12 to postsecondary education.show more |
| Table of Contents | １ 問題の所在：高等教育の州調整機関の改革 ２ 先行研究：高等教育を取り巻く環境の変化と調整機関の改革 ３ 本稿の課題：改革ロジック形成のメカニズム ４ 1990年代の主要な改革提言 ５ まとめ：改革論争の中で形成された高等教育の分権性・独自性の否定 |
Hide fulltext details.
| File | FileType | Size | Views | Description |
|---|---|---|---|---|
p069
|
1.19 MB | 361 |
Details
| NCID | |
|---|---|
| Record ID | |
| Peer-Reviewed | |
| Subject Terms | |
| Created Date | 2019.04.02 |
| Modified Date | 2021.03.12 |