‘What is truth?” said jesting Pilate – in Bacon’s famous phrase. What is public and what is private? This is a question that people in higher education could well ask themselves in 2015.
“真相是什么”Pilate打趣地说道——这是培根著名的句子。什么事公共的什么事私人的?这是高等教育的人们在2015年会问起的一个问题。
They should ask not so much because of the scattering of private – some for-profit, some charitable – institutions that has been allowed into the (English) system either through the front door by being given degree-awarding powers or university titles or via the back door by being able to tap into student loans.
他们不应该问这么多，因为私立的院校，不论是盈利为目的还是慈善的，已经进入了英国的体系，有些是光明正大地因为学校的学术能力或者学校名声，有些是靠走后门收取学生费用。
Most are small niche players. Their students are counted in the hundreds, not the thousands. They are no threat – yet – to the established universities. Maybe they never will be.
很多私立学校是小学校。学生只有几百人不到上千人。他们对已经成立的院校没有任何威胁。也许永远都不会。
The question needs to be asked because the mainstream, still-just-about public, system is becoming increasingly “private”. Universities now conceive of themselves as corporate organisations driven by business plans.
这个问题值得一问是因为主流的公立教育变得越来越私有化了。学校门把自己看做是以商业目的为驱使的公司企业。
We need to knock three myths on the head. The first is that the public-private distinction has something to do with legal status. All public universities, in effect, have been legally established as independent corporations.
我们立马会想到三件事。第一件是公立和私立在法律地位上有差异。事实上所有公立大学都是像独立企业一样建立的。
The precise terms in which this independence is expressed differ – royal charters, statute-led instruments and articles of government, companies limited by guarantee. But the effects are the same – and not as different as we imagine from the governance of so-called private institutions.
在这里独立表示的精确意思是有区别的——皇家特许状，法令规定的法律文件，政府文件，有担保人的公司。但是其作用是一致的——并不是跟我们所想的私立学校的管理一样。
The only substantial difference is that all public institutions are regarded as charities – and regulated accordingly. Only some of the new private institutions fall into the same category.
唯一一个主要的区别在于所有的公立学校都被认为是慈善的并且根据相应法规约束的。只有少数的私立院校在这一类别里面。
The second myth is that the distinction has something to do with receiving public money. Some private colleges that have attracted the beady attention of Margaret Hodge’s public accounts committee get more public money in proportion to their turnovers than the London School of Economics, one of our world-class universities.
第二件事就是收取公众费用的差别。一些私立学校吸引了Margaret Hodge的公有账户投入更多的财政，比例甚至超过了世界一流的伦敦经济学院。
The third myth is that private institutions are freer from state interference. They may not have to conform to the control exercised by the Higher Education Funding Council for England through its financial memorandum or may be more sheltered from the requirements imposed by freedom of information legislation. But private institutions owe their licence to operate to the state, by being given degree-awarding powers or university titles (which can be revoked). Private colleges are also far more likely to be exposed to censure by the Quality Assurance Agency. The more public money they receive, the more they will be bound by regulation.
第三件事就是私立院校不受国家干涉更自由。他们可以不必遵循高等教育基金委员会通过其财政备忘录对英国执行的管理控制，或者也可以躲避信息自由法所强加的要求。但是私立学校有自己运营的证件，有学位授予的能力还有学校名称的影响力。私立学校不太可能受到质量保障事务所的审查。他们收的钱越多，受法律的限制就越大。
以上就是留学群为您整理的最新留学资讯，内容均来自《卫报》，如果喜欢请按Ctrl+D进行收藏!
小编推荐：
