作者：徐世红
出版社：四川大学出版社
格式: AZW3, DOCX, EPUB, MOBI, PDF, TXT
经济变化影响中国英语高等教育的历时研究试读：
Acknowledgements
Many people have assisted me in the preparation and completion of this book. I would like to give special thanks to my supervisors, Prof. Michael Bottery, Senior Lecturer Nigel Wright, and Prof. Zhang Wenpeng. I benefit much from their sincerity in carrying out their commission of helping me in study and research.
I am also grateful to all the colleagues in University of Durham, University of Hull, UESTC, and Yancheng Teachers College. They help me a lot both in their cooperations as fellow workers, interviewees, and data collectors, and in their participation in the studies and their advice in the development of EFL teaching.
In addition, I' d like to express my sincere gratitude to my friends for their valuable advice that has brought me a great deal of inspiration and facilitation for my research and book writing. Some of their names are listed as Prof. M. S. Byram, Doctor Feng Anwei, Doctor Guo Yannan, Prof. Huang Binlan, Prof. Chang Junyue, Associate Prof. Yin Weihong, Senior Lecturer Wang Daqing, Senior Lecturer Bai Ziming, Lecturer Wu Fei, and Master Mai Chunyan, etc.
I' m also much indebted to the editors and publishers who helped to provide support for the completion of the book.
My heartful thanks, last but not the least, goes to my family members, for their many ways of contributions to my study and research. Particularly, I want to thank my husband and my beloved daughter for their deep love, great sacrifice, and firm support in the years of research.
Preface
thFor many reasons, the 20 century has witnessed drastic changes happening in various aspects of human society. Changes were initiated by the need for capital accumulation and resulted in a large-scale reconstruction of the world market. Trans-national entrepreneurs and various world organizations reduce“barriers to the free flow of goods, workers, and investments across national borders”（Burbules &Torres,2000:14）. A global market has been underway, with a strong incentive for economic competition.
Today, all countries are faced with the fact that education is the gateway into the global market and a decisive factor in international economic competition. Education“helps to enrich human lives, to empower people and thereby to raise human well-being”（Steward, 1996:328）. It affects labour productivity and hence a country' s ability to compete in the global market. It is also necessary for the accumulation of capital. In an economic sense, the term“capital”includes all the resources that can be transferred into a kind of investment for further production. In a time when knowledge is taken as a property and is commercialised in the market, it' s understandable that education has had much importance attached to it. Actually, a country' s competitive capacity depends more and more on its being the owner of knowledge and skill. Education has become the core stcompetitiveness in the 21 century.
In China, the idea of constructing an economic market has led to a series of social reforms, including both political and education areas. In Higher Education, the last three decades have witnessed a trend of marketization as systemic adjustment, managerialism in the shift of responsibilities, decentralization in schooling, battles for resources, and paradox between homogenisation and particulization in terms of English spreading. A consequence resulting from the construction of the economic market is a tendency to shift from a“student-centered”to“economy-centered”motivation, which has brought about further problems relevant to EFL teaching. Problems cover a wide range of concerns, from the quality of education to quality of teachers, competitive capacity at institutional level, and the operational dilemma on marketization.
Based on about 10 years of researches, the author in this book describes EFL Higher Education through revealing the social reality of economic changes and the consequences of the changes on the quality of education, EFL teachers, and EFL learners. In the last part of the book, further responses are advocated in perspectives of quality education, teacher education and informationalization.Part ⅠBackgroundChapter 1Economic Globalization
For many reasons, drastic changes happen in various aspects of thhuman society in the 20 century. Changes began with the capitalist ambitions of market expansion and are resulting in a restructuring of ththe world market. First, in the 16 century trans-national entrepreneurs tried to produce a globalizing effect on the formation of world capitalism, which brought about the first sign of convergence across national borders. Later, the constant development in transportation and communication networks greatly shortened the geographical distance and communicational time. Desires for capital accumulation have also made states and nations become more interdependent. They reduce“barriers to the free flow of goods, workers, and investments across national borders”（Burbules &Torres, 2000: 14）. A global market has been underway, with a strong incentive of economic competition.1.1 Globalization:Avisibleworldtrend
The origin of the global change can be traced back on Robertson' s（1997）universalistic religions theory of human civilization generally,part of a process that is now more than five centuries old. A second theory—the world-systems theory—links Globalization with the origins of capitalism, culminating in the sixteenth-century emergence of a global economy. In the third theory, the origin of globalization is pinpointed more than a century ago with changes in communication technologies, migration patterns, and capital flows. The last theory—Globalization theory—describes Globalization emerging only from the mid-twentieth century and spreading during the last two decades. Of these four perspectives, the most realistic seems to be“to place the origins of contemporary Globalization around 1971 -1973, with the petroleum crisis that prompted several important technological and economic changes directed toward finding replacement sources for strategic raw materials and searching for new forms of production that would consume less energy and labour”（Burbules and Torres, 2000:12）. This idea is shared by Waters（1995）and Bottery（2000）.
Globalization as a phenomenon has been well recognized in many recent studies. However, because of its rapid spread and wide influence in the late-modern society, its definition has always been an elusive one. Different writers have offered different definitions, showing a variety of concerns with global trends. Globalization is defined as“a concept”（Robertson, 1992）, “a set of processes”（Waters, 1995; Power, 2000; Yang, 2000）, “the intensification of worldwide social relations”（Held, 1991, quoted in Morrow and Torres, 2000）, “a perceived set of changes and a construction used by the policy-makers”（Burbules & Torres, 2000）, “the complex pattern of interconnections and interdependencies”（Tomlinson, 1999）, and“a dense and fluid network of global flows”（Appadurai, 1990）. Waters（1995:3）defines“Globalization”as“a social process in which the constraints of geography on social and cultural arrangements recede and in which people become increasingly aware that they are receding. ”Robert says, “Globalization as a concept refers both to the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole”（Robertson, 1992, quoted in Du, 2001: 33）. Globalization means“interdependence”（Capella, 2000:228）, it is not“internationalisation”, nor is it the same as“colonialism”or“imperialism”（Bottery, 2000:6）. Globalization is a set of social changes with a global trend.
For many people, there is a consensus that Globalization is a visible trend. As a hugely important aspect of life in the 1990s, Globalization dwarfs other realities with its spreading influence on the opening up of world markets and the relatively free movement of capital and technology. Many countries have joined in the fluid network of global flows. On the one hand, in order not to be stuck in a vicious circle of low incomes and small markets, governments of planned economies have been forced to broaden the scope of privatization, deepen the immersion in marketization, alter their traditional functions, and make policies in favor of competitive capacity. On the other hand, many developed countries have been seen as eager to adjust their policies in public services to cater for the need of quality assurance and market effectiveness. For example, to raise the efficiency of education, national governments may pursue“simultaneously a loose tight centralization（of teachers pay and conditions of service, curriculum control, testing and school inspections）and decentralization（delegating school budgets, school management planning and control of management of schools to governing bodies）”（Day, 2000:101）.
Globalization as a set of social changes is of many dimensions. Appadurai（1990）identifies“ethnoscapes”, referring to flows of people; “technoscapes”, involving the rapid movement of high and low technologies between multinational, national, and government organizations; “finanscapes”, denoting flows of money through currency markets and stock exchanges; “mediascapes”, referring both to information technologies and to the images of the world they create;and“ideoscapes”, ideological discourses concerning freedom, democracy and so forth. Moreover, scholars such as Billig（1995）, Latouche（1996）and Ritzer（1998）point out, “the McDonaldization of our lives is a global phenomenon as ways of doing, thinking and being（what we might call culture）, most of which originate in the USA, flow outwards and eventually are taken up in one form or another around the world. Globalization is another means to economic and political dominance by already privileged parties”（Bottery, 2000:6）.
Based on Waters' s（1995） division of Globalization into Economic Globalization, Political Globalization, and Cultural Globalization, Bottery（2000）developed the paradigm by adding three more dimensions: Demographic Globalization, Managerial Globalization, and Environmental Globalization. Of these six dimensions, Economic Globalization is the most influential and Cultural Globalization the most advanced. “While the concept of Globalization spans separate, overlapping domains, it is fundamentally an economic process of integration that transcends national borders and ultimately affects the flow of knowledge, people, values and ideas”（Yang, 2000:82）. Economic ideology seems to dominate most social concerns, including education.
Economic Globalization is a long-term trend, initiated by the imperialist motivation of economic expansion and later driven by the uncontrollable construction of a global market（Waters, 1995;Bottery, 2000）. “The need of a constantly expanding market for its products chases the bourgeoisie over the whole surface of the globe. It must nestle everywhere, settle everywhere, establish connections everywhere”（Marx, 1977, quoted in Waters, 1995:6）. By the mid-1970s, this need has been urged on by the world petroleum crisis, accounting partially for an increasing role of the market and a reduced role of the state. The restructuring of the world economic order is realized with a re-allocation of capital.
Economic Globalization implies two social development trends: a shift toward a global economy and the intensified economic interdependence. As is described by Ove Korsgaard（1997）, true economic Globalization invokes a qualitative shift toward a global economic system no longer based on autonomous national economies but on a consolidated global marketplace for production, distribution and consumption. The very idea of national economies is becoming illusory and meaningless. Increasingly, the national governments become incapable of controlling international capital because of its rapid spread across international borders. Instead, new international institutions, such as WTO, WB, EU, OPEC and IMF have been created to regulate and co-ordinate economic policies on a world scale. This has, in turn, significantly affected national economy policymaking, for intensified economic interdependence involves the increase of economic intercourse between national economies. To survive the global economy requires a sharp awareness of global economic regulations as well as an increase of international communication and cooperation.
Today, transition to the market economy features in part a global economy. When China began to open its doors to the outside world in 1970s, its old planned economy encountered great difficulty in joining the global market. A series of subsequent systematic reforms were launched in the last three decades with economic motivations, Chinese mediation is a good case to show the consequences of economic globalization on a local market for raising productivity as internal incentive and competing in the global market as external pressure.1.2 Chinesemediation
In China, the initiatives of changes come from two dimensions:the internal demands of social development and the external force of Globalization. Usually, the year of 1978 is regarded as a watershed in the contemporary history of social development. In this year, economic changes started with the shift of the political struggle to economic construction. The idea of constructing an economic market has led China into a series of social reforms, including both political and education areas. Since the central government has granted more autonomy to local governments and organizations, together with more responsibilities（Qiang, 1996; Kwong, 2000; Mok, 2000; Wang, 2001）, economic ideology has become a symbolic language penetrating in many areas of the society. It has also helped to form a new cultural scenario in present-day China, where the pursuit of economy, efficiency, and effectiveness works as a target language in education.1.2.1 Economicre forms: Moving to ward a market economy
In the year of 1978, the Third Plenary Session of the Eleventh Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, with the motto“Practice is the only real criterion to test the truth”, decided that“economic construction should be the central task of the whole country and that China should reform and carry out an opening-to-the-outside-world policy”（Deng, 1978, quoted in Du, 2001: 128）. New thinking, new institutional frameworks, new modes of programme funding geared the country into a period of economic construction.
Following the 1978 reforms, national policies promoted the transition from a planned to a market-oriented economy. In the early 1980s, the government acquiesced to the coexistence of central planned production and market pricing. The situation was broken in 1992 when the fourteenth Congress of the CCP endorsed the principle of“introducing the socialist market economy”therefore creating a favorable environment for the construction of a new economic order. Based on the progress of the socialist market economy, Sun, Vandenburghe, and Greemers（2003: 234）summarized briefly five stages of China' s economic reform:
...the first stage (1978 to the early 1980s) marked by the“responsibility system”( each individual peasant family was allocated a piece of land, while it must take full responsibility for output quotas) was carried out all over China. The second stage was marked by the establishment of special economic zones as a way to pilot a capitalistic system regulated by some“socialist”governmental rules and leaving some room for autonomy and independence. The third stage extended private business throughout companies and foreign businesses emerged. The fourth stage was striking for its anticorruption measures: more regulations and harsh punishment were added to stop the terrible corruption all over the country. The fifth stage is still in process and aims to further privatise China' s state-owned companies, a critical step to break away from its“old socialist”system.
Beginning with the introducing of market principles, China moved steadily on its way to a market economy. From 1978 to the early 1980s, the central government launched a series of campaigns involving the decollectivization of agriculture, the opening up of the country to foreign investment, and permission for entrepreneurs to start-up businesses. However, most industry remained state-owned. In the late 1980s and 1990s, further reforms involved the privatization and contracting out of much state-owned industry and the lifting of price controls, protectionist policies, and regulations, although state monopolies in sectors such as banking, electricity, gas, railway and petroleum remained. After 2000, the private sector grew remarkably, accounting for as much as 70 percent of China GDP by 2005（Engardio, 2005）. By the end of September, 2012, according to Xinhuanet, the private sectors reached a number of 10,598,000, increasing by 2.6% when compared to that of 2011（available at http: //news. xinhuanet. com/fortune/2013-02/01/c_114587467. htm）. Meanwhile, the central government also reduced tariffs, trade barriers and regulations, reformed the banking system, dismantled much of the Mao-era social welfare system, and joined the World Trade Organization. Since the beginning of economic reforms, China' s GDP has risen tenfold. China' s economy surpassed that of Japan in 2010 as Asia' s largest economy and became the second largest after the United States.
However, despite of some progress in reducing poverty and increasing China' s GDP, the economic reforms have been criticized for increasing official corruption, income inequality, high tax rates, and state-owned monopoly. The government is questioned for its incapatability of controlling house prices, health care expenses, imbalanced resource distribution and test-driven education. These are phenomena that might be far beyond the expectation of the reform initiator and now have generated serious social problems. To exam carefully the operational causes of the worrying phenomena, managerialism is found one that at least partially account for them.1.2.2 Managerialism in China
Though Hoskin believes that“far from modern business inventing management, the complete opposite is the case”（Hoskin, 1990:17）, thmany more scholars take the early 20 century as the beginning of managerilism. The main origin of Managerialism lay in the human relations movement that took root at the Harvard Business School in the 1920s and 1930s under the guiding hand of Professor Elton Mayo. Elton Mayo saw democracy as divisive and lacking in community spirit. He looked to corporate managers to restore the social harmony that he believed the uprooting experiences of immigration and industrialization had destroyed and that democracy was incapable of repairing（Hoopes, 2003）. According to Enteman（1993）, the managerialist society does not respond to the needs, desires, and wishes of a majority of its citizens, but one which is influenced by organizations. In other words, the managerialist society responds to whatever the managements of various organizations can gain in their transactions with each other. The needs, desires and wishes of the individual are heard through their membership of an organization.
What is managerialism? Managerialism is the ideological principle that says that societies are equivalent to the sum of the transactions made by the managements of organizations（Enteman, 1993）. Also, it is essentially the belief in a strategic approach. The belief is that by setting goals all of us will get to where we wish to be（Preston, 2001）. Managerialism has been characterized in a variety of ways. Pollitt（1990:1）takes it as a“set of beliefs and practices,（that）will prove an effective solvent for. . . economic and social ills”. Enteman（1993）describes managerialism as an international ideology on which rests the economic, social, and political order of advanced industrialised societies and from which arises the impoverished notion that societies are equivalent to the sum of the transactions made by the managements of organizations. In this view, social institutions are primarily a function of the practices of management. For Davis（1996:305）, managerialism has swept aside“an idyllic older bureaucratic world. . . , reducing every relation to a mere money exchange”. Drucker（1974: 19）claims that“management has as its first dimension an economic dimension”. Managerialism has also been explained as a form of instrumental reasoning where, in the interests of efficiency, value does not inhere in the activity itself.
On these accounts, managerialism is emerging as a unifying force in the wake of the predicted breakdown of Fordist notions of production. It' s a peculiar form of management, known as New Public Management（NPM）, a form of rationality that depends upon efficiency in the market. It was during the development of state regulated capitalism that managerialism in its current forms of NPM came to the fore. Taken together, these representations of managerialism imply a transcendent theory that Lyotard（1984）calls a meta-narrative. It is significant that throughout these accounts managerialism has remained implicit as a mode of governance, preferring instead to account for itself explicitly as a mode of domination. An alternative characterisation of managerialism is as a form of what Michel Foucault（1991）has termed Governmentality. In this sense, managerialism is a regime of governmentalising practices rather than a meta-narrative where it is presented as a politically
试读结束[说明：试读内容隐藏了图片]