Comparative Analysis Of Higher Education Administration Structure In Mongolia And China

This dissertation presents a comparative analysis of significant changes in the management of higher education driven by government reform policies in China and Mongolia. It focuses on two of the most significant and characteristic features of the reform in management-changes in higher education governance and administration in Mongolia and China.The principle aim of the research is to describe and compare the impact of changes in higher education management policy on social, political and economic environments in these two countries.Significance of research is a providing comparative analysis of governance structures and practice in Higher education with defined data and capitalized knowledge on Higher education management. Developed in the research ideas are useful for a senior managers working in higher education to improve management operations.In the research in Part 1 provides an analysis of trends and tendencies of Higher education development in knowledge based society, interrelations between Higher education and labour market in market-driven economy.This part of dissertation presents a basic concepts and models of management applied to Higher education sector and institutions.Comparative analysis has been developed in taking into account contemporary governance structures and models of Higher education at the system and institutional levels in the both of countries in all dimensions of the state-institution relationships.The research describes the experience accumulated in higher education management at institutional level.The focus has been given on a similarities and differences of governance and administration structures in Higher education in the socio-economic and political contexts of two countries.Results of research summarized in Conclusions.Key changes in Higher education management in Mongolia and China and a comparative perspectives:The changes in the higher education system in Mongolia and China are:Decentralization of higher education institutions through nationwide flexible governance structure.Market driven strategic planning and development Greater accountability to public and customers - Diversification of funding sources.The changes in the higher education systems in both of Mongolia and China were largely driven by changes in economic environments and government proposals in the two nations. Although the two countries are different in so many ways, such as in their political systems, social cultures, historical traditions and levels of economic development, the governments of both nations regard higher education as making an important contribution to economic growth.The significant changes in the higher education sector in Mongolia and Chinaand were designed by the governments principally to address economic issues. But they took different paths. In Mongolia administrative decentralization was the general trend, in the form of corporate management which tented to replace coUegiality, more involvement of in university affairs through the unified national system, greater accountability, the use of international experience. The intention of the Mongolian Government, was to strengthen the ability of the institutions to respond quickly to national and local priorities in the economy and to government policies.In China, devolution was the path taken by the central government to solve the problems raised by the relationships between the central government and the local governments, and between the governments and the institutions. The devolution was intended to stimulate institutions to produce more highly-skilled graduates to meet the needs of China's economic growth because the traditional state-planned system discouraged the initiative of the institutions of the institutions at various levels and led to inefficiency and ineffectiveness in the higher education system.Governments in both countries considered that management in higher education was the vital area to be reformed, and this in turn led to the reform in other areas of higher education.Consequences of reform in higher education administration in Mongolia and China:As a consequence, legislation in two countries is being changed, allowing for new management forms.Concerning autonomy, the law delegates necessary decision power to the institution - for changes in curricula and teaching methods, for internal self-governance, for interaction with other organizations nationally and internationally and for economic transactions.- Accountability follows autonomy. In all fields where the institution has been given the responsibility to make its own decisions, the decision process should be transparent and result should be made public.- The students are full members of the higher education community. They participate in the organization and content of education. Student participation in institutional governance is prescribed by law.Quality assurance system is important cornerstones in each national system of higher education. The quality assurance system is independent of political and institutional interaction and it a basis in the legislation.The significant changes in higher education governance, caused by the reform have resulted in a number of achievements . There are two of the major consequences of the reform in governance of higher education: institutional autonomy and diversification of funding system.Institutional autonomy is an absolute precondition for effective strategic management to help Higher education institutions to face global competition.The Higher education institutions have institutional autonomy and learn to innovate, modernize and become entrepreneurial which is common in two countries.In the present turbulent times and diversified funding structures, Higher education institutions have sufficient flexibility to organize their financialmanagement in a way that these serve needs of public in the best possible way which differ from country to country.In Higher education institutions are in place an appropriate mechanisms to make universities accountable for their efficient use of public funding, transparent fund allocation systems as well as evaluation mechanisms depending on legislative and economic environment of the country.As a result of changes in management system, Higher education institutions are becoming able to manage their autonomy by having a clear mission, backed up with strategic plans, acting responsibly and responsively to their external environment, managing their financial and human resources efficiently, managing changes and innovation . This is most common picture of higher education institutions in the both of countries.