Dilemma and path selection of faculty involvement in the shared governance of medical colleges

  • Zhu Liyan ,
  • Zhang Shue ,
  • Zhao Xin ,
  • Wang Hongni ,
  • Yang Libin ,
  • Cao Depin
Expand
  • 1Department of Medical Education Management, School of Health Management, Harbin Medical University, Harbin 150081, China;
    2Department of Health Management and Policy, School of Public Health, Hangzhou Normal University, Hangzhou 311121, China;
    3Center for Higher Education Research and Teaching Quality Evaluation, Harbin Medical University, Harbin 150081, China

Received date: 2020-10-29

  Online published: 2021-06-29

Abstract

Shared governance is defined by co-operation in policy making by institution authority and faculty that encourage all steak-holders to work together for optimizing the operation of their colleges. Faculty involvement in medical college governance has a significance value for self-dependent innovation, improvement, cross-disciplines and coordinated management in medical education. This study explores the multiple influencing factors on medical college faculty involvement in medical college governance like awareness of medical teachers, collaboration culture and challenges from bureaucratic system. In order to promote faulty involvement in shared governance, medical colleges should focus on constructing a shared governance culture, refining the system of faculty involvement in governance, enhancing the consciousness and capacity of faculty staff.

Cite this article

Zhu Liyan , Zhang Shue , Zhao Xin , Wang Hongni , Yang Libin , Cao Depin . Dilemma and path selection of faculty involvement in the shared governance of medical colleges[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Education, 2021 , 41(7) : 577 -581 . DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20201029-01529

References

[1] 孙宝志. 医学教育质量文化建设中存在的问题分析与对策[J]. 中华医学教育杂志, 2020, 40(6): 405-408. DOI: 10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20191101-00938.
[2] 眭依凡. 引领高等教育内涵式发展:高等教育研究适逢其时的责任[J]. 中国高教研究, 2018(8): 6-10,22. DOI: 10.16298/j.cnki.1004-3667.2018.08.02.
[3] 教育部临床医学专业认证工作委员会.中国本科医学教育标准—临床医学专业(2016版)[M]. 北京: 北京大学医学出版社, 2017:31-35,47-51.
[4] 本刊编辑部. 透视国外大学治理经验发展中国特色大学治理体系——访中国人民大学教育学院副院长李立国[J]. 世界教育信息, 2019, 32(3): 42-47,63.
[5] 李福华. 大学治理的理论基础与组织架构[M]. 北京: 教育科学出版社, 2008:91.
[6] 俞可平. 治理与善治[M]. 北京: 社会科学文献出版社, 2000:10.
[7] Olson GA. Exactly what is “shared governance”? [EB/OL]. (2009-07-23)[2020-10-29]. https://www.chronicle.com/article/Exactly-What-Is-Shared/47065.
[8] 王名, 蔡志鸿, 王春婷. 社会共治:多元主体共同治理的实践探索与制度创新[J]. 中国行政管理, 2014(12): 16-19. DOI:10.3782/j.issn.1006-0863.2014.12.02.
[9] 刘莹, 喻荣彬, 陈峰, 等. 健康中国战略下新医科的建设任务与发展路径思考[J]. 中华医学教育杂志, 2020, 40(9): 657-661. DOI:10.3760/cma.j.cn115259-20200309-00290.
[10] 柯杨. 21世纪中国医学教育改革再定位[M]. 北京: 北京大学医学出版社, 2014:90-91.
[11] 魏叶美. 教师参与学校治理研究[D].上海: 华东师范大学, 2018.
[12] 郭娇, 徐祯. 高校教师参与治理的意愿及行为分析[J]. 中国高教研究, 2018(6): 62-68,76. DOI:10.16298/j.cnki.1004-3667.2018.06.10.
[13] 张端鸿, 王倩, 蔡三发. 学术委员会在高校内部治理中为什么会被边缘化——以A大学为例[J]. 江苏高教, 2020(10): 29-36. DOI:10.13236/j.cnki.jshe.2020.10.005.
[14] 陆韵. 高校教师群体社会分层对参与学校决策的影响及应对[J]. 江苏高教, 2018(6): 50-54. DOI:10.13236/j.cnki.jshe.2018.06.011.
[15] 胡娟. 熟人社会、科层制与大学治理[J]. 高等教育研究, 2019, 40(2): 10-17.
[16] 张乾友. 行动主义:合作治理的神髓——兼评张康之教授的《公共行政的行动主义》 [J]. 河北学刊, 2017, 37(3): 189-194.
[17] 骆聘三. 大学治理共同体的时代价值及建构理路 [J]. 黑龙江高教研究, 2020, 38(5): 30-34. DOI:10.19903/j.cnki.cn23-1074/g.2020.05.007.
[18] 严玉萍. 大学共同治理的新局面:基于组织文化和制度领导的视角——以北欧五所大学为例 [J]. 大学教育科学, 2018(4): 78-83,90.
[19] 李玲玲, 蔡三发. 基于章程文本分析的高校治理问题研究——以“一流大学”建设高校为例 [J]. 高教探索, 2018(8): 14-19.
[20] Zhang S, Zhou J. Social justice and public cooperation intention: mediating role of political trust and moderating effect of outcome dependence[J]. Front Psychol, 2018,9:1381. DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01381.
[21] 汪玮, 周育海. 多重逻辑下的制度变迁:一个案例的探析 [J]. 浙江社会科学, 2013(9): 97-104,158. DOI:10.14167/j.zjss.2013.09.009.
Outlines

/