Reconstruction Of China University Accountability System

Higher education evaluation is considered to be one of the important measurements to ensure and improve the quality of higher education. In terms of the organization of the main body, China higher education evaluation is basically divided into two categories, one is led by the Government's evaluation, the other is that evaluations which is led by the civil society organizations. Undergraduate teaching evaluation is a typical representative of higher education evaluation, which is regarded as the most extensive and deep involves, and most affected by concerns of the community. There are some similarities and differences between evaluation and accountability. To a certain basis, we can analyze evaluation from the perspective of accountability. Is the Undergraduate teaching evaluation system an accountability system? If the answer is yes, what type of accountability system should it be? How are the effects? What kind of resistance will be show on, if there is a change? Though the analysis of the above issues and undergraduate teaching evaluation system, how will be the system reformed? All these questions are not answered yet. Thus, this dissertation tries to give some suggestion to improve the universities accountability system, learn something from experience and research results both home and abroad, as well as theoretical and empirical research.It is a very relevancy to address the China universities accountability problem from system-analysis perspective. If broaden of the three main streams of neo-institutionalism's hypothesizes, blending in structure and rationality, and making structure, system and rationality interactive, we can analyze the effects of the China university accountability system, historical development and change trends. System's impact on behaviors, the deep structure that impact the systems, system's path dependency of itself, and the dynamisms of the system change should be the breaches. First of all, we assume that rules are outside, the system is set, that is to say, regard university accountability as a independent variable. This dissertation tries to explain the universities behavior in this situation, not explain how the rule is set. Then, consider university accountability as a dependent variable. The study will be launched in three aspects:the structural system of the impact, the historical path dependence and increasing returns, and institutional continuity and change of key nodes. Then, use them to explain the formation and evolution of specific systems in a specific structure. The dissertation just analyzed the when, because of what reason and what type of changes occurs, in order to predict and build a more reasonable, in line with Chinese national conditions'university accountability system.Theoretically, the higher education accountability from the management system perspective is the traditional "paradigm of the responsibility to answer." Managers are the accountable subjects and the contraries are those who is accountability for. They are separated. The stakeholders don't participate broadly. The higher education accountability system in the governance system perspective emphasize on the accountable subjects take the responsibility of stakeholders, change stress to dynamics, and from passive to active. The whole accountability's purpose is to improve not only prove. It is a helpful way to let university make judgments considering the stakeholders'needs and at the same time offer some information about performance. Social accountability to the university system refers to a system, in which all stakeholders, in and out the university, constitute the main body of the accountable subjects, that is guided by the government, coordination, certification, evaluation by the government and other social institutions categories organizations, university stakeholders to participate effectively in the whole process of the integrated system of accountability arrangements for university. It is a social accountability system in the governance perspective and will be the reform trend in the future. From the accountability perspective, the first round of the undergraduate teaching evaluation implemented by government is essentially a system of government accountability arrangements for colleges and universities, and it is belongs to the management systems.So, it is necessary to build a university accountability system based on government, that is to say, to build China university social accountability system.The empirical results show that:Using fuzzy comprehensive evaluation principle to conduct a multi-level analysis, the results shows that the effectiveness of undergraduate teaching evaluation system that is a typical China university accountability system is considered as "general", accounting for 40%, the combined ratio of "good" and "very good",accounting for 24%, so the ratio above "general" is 64%, indicating that the system has been approved on the whole. But the combined ratio of "lower" and "very low" is also high, accounting for 36%, showing that the reform must be strengthened in order to make the system more perfect and more efficient. If we take the undergraduate teaching evaluation system that is a China university accountability system as the independent variables, the context of accountability in government, university strategic behavior, rational choice is limited. On the one hand, university attaches great importance to assess, take positive action in short time, and achieve a certain effect; on the other hand, the strategic action of the university lack of power, no continuous improvement of the self-effectiveness, and the external pressure did not translate into the internal power. As for limited rational choice, even some unexpected "alienation" behaviors bring some side-effect to students and society.Second, if we take the undergraduate teaching evaluation system that is a China university accountability system as the dependent variable to conduct an analysis, the change of the China university accountability system can be divided into three stages in the past 60th-year:the inner check-style stage, gradually standardize government accountability stage, and government as the main, social take part in accountability step by step stage. China university accountability system subject to the micro "the deep structure of system", which include the planned economic system psychological inertia, centralized management operation mode, the official standard culture and concept, and so on. By the action of the impacts of the following elements:high building costs, learning effects, cooperating effects, adaptive expectations, incomplete market, interest and belief, the China university accountability system evolves on the administrative mode track, thus shows a strong phenomenon of path dependence. Since the founding of the new china in the past 60 years, the China university accountability system has experienced four types of institutional change:institutional fine-tuning, system conversion, system distortion, and the system rupture. At present, the shortcomings of the existing accountability system call for institutional innovation. It is the natural choice of the history that from path dependence to path shaping. The impact of the deep structure and path dependence not only offer the realistic basis for institutional innovation, but also the resistance to change. Therefore, we must explore a feasible accountability system for university in China in Chinese national conditions.The core content of China university social accountability system which is consistent with Chinese national conditions should include the following factors:First, build the partnership between universities and its stakeholders, creating synergies. Start accountability regularly or randomly according to needs. Second, the government promulgates accountability rules and laws, develops accountability rules, establishes various related organizations, and urges universities to publish information. Based on investigations, the government should set a series evaluation programs according to the stakeholders'different needs. Under the guidance, supervision and certification of the Evaluation Centre of the Ministry of Education, the evaluation centre and other social evaluation agencies organize and implement accountability process by classification, the stakeholders'wide participation, and the result published. Third, university establish a accountability-respond organization, which in accordance with the policies and regulations required provides basic teaching state data, and teaching and research achievement data and so on. Interact positively with the stakeholders and using feedback information to improve the performance of university. Fourth, stakeholders involved in the whole process of accountability and interact with university, via participatory mechanisms that set by policies and regulations. The behavior of government and universities are monitored. They can use the result according to their needs. In this situation, by meet their different interests, at the same time, the different demands formats different positive pressure for universities, which ensure continuous improvement of university. We must establish and perfect university social accountability system by the following measures:raising awareness of university stakeholders'participation, improving accountability system in university, and developing relevant policies and regulations.