高等教育质量的院校类型及区域差异分析——兼论我国高等教育资源配置格局与质量格局

发布时间：2018-05-25 18:28

本文选题：高等教育质量 + 区域差异　；参考：《清华大学教育研究》2012年05期

【摘要】：本文使用清华大学教育研究院"中国大学生学习性投入调查2011"数据,将大学生学习性投入(五大可比指标)作为高等教育质量的过程性指标,将学生自我报告的教育收获(知识、能力、价值观收获)和在校满意度作为高等教育质量的结果性指标,综合而实证地考察在区域与院校类型的交互作用下我国本科教育的质量现状,并围绕教育过程性指标和学生先赋因素对教育结果质量的影响因素进行深入分析。研究发现,虽然我国存在高等教育资源区域和院校类型上分布不均衡的问题,但高等教育资源配置格局与人才培养质量格局之间具有复杂的关系,资源条件优势并不等同于学生的高学习性投入和高教育收获,不同区域和类型高校在人才培养上各具优势。研究还发现,在不同区域、不同类型的院校中,影响学生教育收获和在校满意度的因素不尽相同,但就总的预测率而言,教育过程性因素对学生教育收获和在校满意度的影响远大于学生的先赋因素。
[Abstract]:This paper uses the data of "Chinese college students' learning input survey 2011" from the Institute of Education of Tsinghua University, and regards the study input (five comparable indexes) as the process index of higher education quality. Using self-reported educational gains (knowledge, abilities, values) and school satisfaction as an indicator of the quality of higher education, The present situation of undergraduate education quality in China under the interaction of regional and college types is comprehensively and empirically investigated, and the influence factors on the quality of education result are deeply analyzed around the educational process index and the factors of students' first assignment. It is found that although the distribution of higher education resources in China is uneven in the region and the types of colleges and universities, there is a complex relationship between the pattern of allocation of higher education resources and the pattern of talent training quality. The advantage of resource condition is not the same as the high learning input and high education harvest of students. Different regions and types of colleges and universities have their own advantages in talent training. The study also found that, in different regions and different types of colleges, the factors affecting students' educational gain and satisfaction were different, but in terms of the overall forecast rate, The influence of educational process factors on students' educational gain and satisfaction is much greater than that on students' preemptive factors.
【作者单位】：清华大学教育研究院;
【分类号】：G649.21

【参考文献】