共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 46 毫秒
1.
我国大学学术自由实现的制度分析 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
朱家德 《赣南师范学院学报》2008,29(2):102-105
基于学术失范泛滥的学术自由限制的讨论基础是不成立的,学术失范泛滥恰恰是学术自由缺失的表现。现阶段,实现我国大学教师在教学和科研方面的学术自由,在制度的框架下,要通过构建以落实教师职务聘任制改革为核心的外在制度来保障权利层面的自由,同时重构以培育学术自由精神核心的学术独立意识、学术良知和学术规范的内在制度来保障精神层面的自由。 相似文献
2.
学术自由的内涵与边界 总被引：7，自引：0，他引：7
现代大学办学中的学术自由,指称的是学术活动主体个人治学中免于外部干涉这一意义上的学术自由。学术自由的思想之所以获得广泛的传播,不只是在于它具有促进知识进步和发展的工具价值,更重要的是它反映了学术活动中主体个人正义、适切的权利诉求,这是学术自由的基本价值之所在。在当代民主社会,学术自由所受到的侵害有时并非来自学术组织外部的强制,倒往往来自学术组织内部的强制。今天学术自由面临的最严重威胁,便是大学学术道德规范正在受到严重的侵蚀和损坏,而其直接的诱因在相当大的程度上源于大学内部管理权力的某些不当强制。这就需要在学术效率与学术自由的价值选择上进行新的权衡,多一些对学术人员自由权利的尊重,才能有真正的知识生产效率。 相似文献
3.
美国宪法及法律并无学术自由的明确规定,但法院根据宪法法案对一系列案件的解释和判决,赋予学术自由以宪法地位,使学术自由概念本身成为融合了宪法原则和学术观念的司法概念.但法院同时又为学术自由设定边界,通过教师权利与学校利益、社会利益的平衡,保证高等教育公共性的实现. 相似文献
4.
美国大学教师的学术自由权利:历史的视角 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
美国大学教师的学术自由权利经历了"学院时代"与"大学时代"两大历史时期的发展。美国大学教师学术自由权利的争取过程,同时也是赋予学术自由权利以认识论和政治论意义的过程。历史证明,学术自由权利是保障大学教师从事知识创新与探索活动的基本权利,是保护教学与研究工作免受各种不合理干扰和限制的必要权利,是赋予大学教师适当社会地位和必要经济保障的重要权利,也是一项与学术责任相伴生的有限权利。 相似文献
5.
Bruce Macfarlane 《Higher Education》2012,63(6):719-732
The scholarly debate about academic freedom focuses almost exclusively on the rights of academic faculty. Student academic
freedom is rarely discussed and is normally confined to debates connected with the politicisation of the curriculum. Concerns
about (student) freedom of speech reflect the dominant role of negative rights in the analysis of academic freedom representing
‘threats’ to academic freedom in terms of rights which may be taken away from a person rather than conferred on them. This
paper draws on the distinction between negative and positive rights and the work of Sen (1999) to re-frame student academic freedom as capability. It is argued that capability deprivation has a negative impact on the
extent to which students can exercise academic freedom in practice and that student capability can be enhanced through a liberal
education that empowers rather than domesticates students. 相似文献
6.
Bernice Schrank 《Interchange》1997,28(4):351-362
W. Richard Bond's “Zero Tolerance: A New Enemy of Academic Freedom?,” Michael Kubara's “Academic Freedom,” and Fred Wilson's “In Defence of Speech Codes” included in the Symposium published in Interchange, Volume 27, #2, 1996, deal with the role and importance of academic freedom in Canadian universities and the pressures both within and without the academy for its attenuation. Although the Bond paper begins with the recent controversy in Ontario universities over the attempted introduction of a policy of zero tolerance of harassment and discrimination, it quickly moves to a summary of the traditional position regarding academic freedom in which that right is balanced by a corresponding responsibility. As insistent as Bond on the importance of academic freedom, Kubara and Wilson both approach the topic in a more argumentative fashion. Kubara and Wilson differ, however, in the kinds of arguments they propound. Kubara defends the traditional liberal conception of the university and attacks what he regards as the trendy feminist attack on academic freedom. Wilson recognizes that along with the rights bestowed by the acceptance of the principle of academic freedom is an obligation to engage in rational debate. The mechanism in Wilson's view for ensuring such debate is a well-crafted speech code in which professionally unacceptable speech acts are unambiguously defined. The fundamental difference between these two positions is that, whereas Kubara advocates an academic discourse that is as unfettered as is permissible within the law, Wilson proposes stricter limitations. I will discuss the Bond, Kubara, and Wilson papers in turn, commenting briefly on their positions. I will then present my own position on academic freedom and speech codes. 相似文献
7.
在美国,学术自由具有一定的法律意义,学术自由保护原则的确立主要来自于法院对学术自由案件判决的逻辑关系。美国大学教师的学术自由权利主要涉及到以下几个方面：学术行为的保护性——维护大学教师公民身份的自由;学术评价的公正性——捍卫大学教师平等对待的权利;学术成果的保密性——保护大学教师科学研究的自由。学术自由保护原则最终通过权衡控诉双方的利益得以实现。 相似文献
8.
William E. Thro 《Educational Assessment, Evaluation and Accountability》2007,19(3-4):135-145
Academic Freedom is a sacrosanct value on American university campuses. Virtually all research institutions, public and private, have explicitly adopted some form of the American Association of University Professors’ 1940 Statement of Principles on Academic Freedom and Tenure or the organization’s the 1915 Declaration of Principles on Academic Freedom & Tenure. Because of the near universal acceptance of the principle of academic freedom, there is a common belief that the United States Constitution recognizes academic freedom and, more importantly, confers “special rights” on the persons and institutions of academia. Yet, despite its almost universal acceptance by faculty and administrators and despite its constant use as a constitutional theory whenever faculty and/or administrators dislike a government program, academic freedom is a constitutional myth. The rights of individual academics or of academic institutions are no greater than the rights of individual non-academics or of non-academic agencies or institutions. Put another way, from a constitutional standpoint, there is nothing special about the academic setting. Academic Freedom is no greater, and no lesser, than the constitutional rights of non-academics or ordinary state agencies. Nevertheless, academic freedom must be respected as a practical reality. There are important public policy reasons why university professors should have wide latitude in their research, writing, and teaching efforts. At the same time, institutions should be given a large amount of discretion in determining the scope of their missions. In other words, while academic freedom is not a federal constitutional value, it should be an important public policy consideration and, perhaps, even a state constitutional value. The purpose of this Article is twofold. First, it seeks to demonstrate that academic freedom is a constitutional myth. Institutional academic freedom, the idea that institutions of higher education have a federal constitutional right to be free from outside control, is simply incompatible with constitutional realities. Moreover, professors do not have an individual constitutional right to academic freedom. In short, the rights of professors and the institutions that employ them are no greater than the rights of non-academic employees and non-academic organizations. Second, it attempts to explain why respect for academic freedom is a practical reality. 相似文献
9.
论"学术自由"理念的现代意义 总被引：3，自引：0，他引：3
高秀琴 《扬州大学学报(高教研究版)》2004,8(5):12-14
学术自由产生于思想自由，其精神实质是一种人性的体现。现代高等教育在学术自由理念支配下取得了辉煌的成绩。学术自由与学术责任是一对辩证的范畴，学术自由必须承担学术责任。学术自由弘扬批判精神和张扬个性，为创造性提供精神氛围。学术自由体现以人为本，最终是实现人的全面发展。 相似文献
10.
Performance management systems have been an inevitable consequence of the development of government research evaluations (GREs) of university research, and have also inevitably affected the working life of academics. The aim of this paper is to track the development of GREs over the past 25 years, by critically evaluating their adoption in the UK and Australian higher education sector and their contribution to the commodification of academic labour, and to highlight the resultant tensions between GREs and academic freedom. The paper employs a literature-based analysis, relying on publicly available policy documents and academic studies over the period 1985–2010. GREs are a global phenomenon emanating from new public management reforms and while assessments of university research have been welcomed, they have attracted critique based on their design, the manner in which they have been applied, and the unintended consequences of their implementation on academic freedom in particular. Consistent with international research on the impact of GREs, Australian research assessments appear to be undoing the academic freedom that is central to successful research. Further empirical research on the impact of GREs on academics is urgently needed. 相似文献
11.
学习自由是学术自由的一个重要组成部分,从强调单一的学术自治发展到重视学生的学习自由,学术自由经历了漫长的过程。作为一种自由,学习自由既有哲学层面的涵义,又有可操作层面的涵义。学习自由是高校学生应有的一种权利,其必要性是由高校和学生本身的特点,以及培养创新性人才的时代要求决定的。学习自由不是绝对的自由,需要有一定的限制。这种限制在认识和具体执行中分为两种,积极的限制实际上是一种必需的引导,消极的限制是认识上的误导,需要纠正。 相似文献
12.
美国大学集体谈判制度的形成与发展 总被引：4，自引：0，他引：4
集体谈判是大学管理当局与教师代表通过协商谈判,雇佣双方达成关于各自应该履行的责任和权利、义务关系等方面的协议.美国大学集体谈判制度产生的主要原因是保障高校教师的经济、职业安全,争取学术自由与终身聘任制等方面的合法权益.美国教师联合会和全国教育协会的积极推动促成了集体谈判制度的建立,美国大学教授协会的认可则是集体谈判制度得以推行的重要影响因素.集体谈判制度在保护高校教师的学术自由与终身聘任制权利方面发挥了十分重要的作用,成为美国高校教师管理中较有特色的一种制度. 相似文献
13.
Romulo F. Magsino 《Interchange》1982,13(3):1-17
Summary The two main approaches available for conflict resolution — in education as elsewhere — suffer from serious defects. The fundamental rights approach, popular with groups advocating certain real or fancied rights, presupposes that each individual or class of individuals has basic, over-riding entitlements. In the absence of an arbitrary or compelling consideration, however, this approach is torn and immobilized by inflexible, absolutistic claims. Our analysis in this paper shows no justification in the rhetoric of children/student rights' advocates, parent power movements, or beleaguered educators that their respective rights should be regarded as pre-eminent in educational conflicts. The second approach, intended to balance competing interests, either capriciously gives undue weight to one competing claim or leads to uncritical decisions based on unarticulated value presuppositions. Hopefully, a third approach could remedy these difficulties. The reconstructed Millian-Utilitarian approach suggested in this paper combines the use of balancing and of substantive principles based on defensible utilitarian values and pre-suppositions. In making this suggestion, the paper hopes to highlight the necessity for justices and decision-makers to deliberate more consciously, adequately, and rigorously on the values that undergird educational and social policies. 相似文献
14.
美国大学教师终身教职与学术自由的关系 总被引：5，自引：0，他引：5
王保星 《北京大学教育评论》2005,3(1):81-86
美国大学教授协会所确立的学术自由与终身教职之间的内在联系 ,使得终身教职成为保证美国大学教师学术自由的制度性工具。关于终身教职与学术自由之间关系的理论探讨 ,均须充分考虑到终身教职的学术自由价值。 相似文献
15.
教师的教授自由是教学自由的一个重要构成部分。教授自由是必然、权利与责任的统一。教师的教授自由意味着教师必须按教学的规律办事,一方面教师拥有教学的自主权利,另一方面,教师在拥有教学权利的同时肩负着社会责任。因此,教师的教授自由并非无边界、无限度,它的实现需要具备多方面的条件。 相似文献
16.
胡甲刚 《清华大学教育研究》2011,32(2)
作为一种法定基本权利的学术自由兼具多种属性。从独立与否的标准来看,它是一项相对独立的法律权利;从国家作用方式来看,它既是一项消极权利,也是一项积极权利;从享有主体来看,既是一项个人性权利,也是一项制度性权利;从权利的边界来看,它不是一项绝对的自由权利,而是一项相对的自由权利。 相似文献
17.
韦伯认为学术自由受侵犯的主要原因来自于大学内外的官僚体制。因此,对外,他主张大学自治;对内,他主张教师职业自由、价值中立,并将学者对其学术责任的承担当作完善内心“积极自由”的一种方式。他的学术自由思想引发我们对诸如大学管理机构权限与大学自治限度、大学利益之保障与教师职业自由之限制、学术官僚化与学者权利之保障、价值中立与教师教学自由的道德限度等问题以深刻思考。 相似文献
18.
The current debate about academic freedom has been marked by a lack of clarity and consistency as to what academic freedom actually means. Sometimes it is described solely in terms of individual freedoms; at others in terms of an interplay between individual, collegial and institutional freedoms. Sometimes it is presented as a set of rights; at others, as a pairing of rights and responsibilities. This paper presents an empirical investigation of the range of understandings of academic freedom experienced amongst social scientists in Australian universities. The investigation was undertaken from a phenomenographic perspective and five different ways of understanding academic freedom were constituted, based on two primary dimensions of variation in views: the types of constraints regarded as an appropriate part of academic freedom; and the role of self and other (i.e., peers, institution, society) in creating academic freedom. The structural relationships found between different ways of viewing academic freedom in this study provides a broader framework within which to interpret the range of views found in the literature and public debate. 相似文献
19.
学术自由不仅是进行学术研究的根本保证,也是大学作为社会组织机构享有的一种独特权利。但自由和限制是一对不能分割的矛盾范畴,自由也意味着限制。本文在对学术自由的概念及其合理性简要分析的基础上,论述了学术自由的内外部限制问题,以全面和深刻地认识学术自由。 相似文献
20.
我国高等学校教授治校的现状及发展趋势 总被引：2，自引：0，他引：2
李方 《扬州大学学报(高教研究版)》2005,9(1):42-45
在高校内部管理体制改革过程中,教授治校作为一种民主管理思想和管理模式受到关注。教授治校在我国有着特定的涵义,治校的内容和范围都有一定的限定性。教授治校的重要性体现在与学术自治、学术自由以及民主管理的关系;必要性在于其对行政权力和学术权力的平衡。教授应享有对学术事务的管理权和决策权;教授治校受领导者个人因素的影响较大,其实现程度存在学校差异性。 相似文献