华东师范大学学报(教育科学版) ›› 2017, Vol. 35 ›› Issue (1): 39-46+118.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2017.01.004

• 专题现代学徒制研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

英国和德国现代学徒制的比较研究——基于制度互补性的视角

关晶   

  1. 上海师范大学教育学院, 上海 200234
  • 出版日期:2017-02-20 发布日期:2017-03-27
  • 基金资助:

    2015年度教育部哲学社会科学研究重大课题攻关项目“职业教育现代学徒制理论研究与实践探索”(15JZD046)

A Comparative Study of Modern Apprenticeship in England and Germany from the Perspective of Institutional Complementarity

GUAN Jing   

  1. College of Education, Shanghai Normal University, Shanghai 200234, China
  • Online:2017-02-20 Published:2017-03-27
  • Contact: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2017.01.004
  • About author:GUAN Jing

摘要:

西方国家现代学徒制的发展不是制度趋同的过程,而是制度多样化的过程。制度互补性理论为现代学徒制度的多样性发展提供了解释。制度互补性分析框架由规制性要素、规范性要素和文化-认知性要素三个互补性维度组成。对英国和德国现代学徒制的比较亦在此框架下围绕学徒激励、企业激励和质量保障三大制度基本功能分别展开。比较结果表明:相互加强或相互弥补是现代学徒制制度互补的两大形式,均衡性系统倾向于相互加强,发展性系统倾向于相互弥补;制度弥补的着力点在于规制性的制度要素;学徒激励的制度互补性核心在于提供良好的学徒职业前景预期;企业激励的制度互补性核心在于降低学徒培训外部性偷猎风险;质量保障的制度互补性依赖学徒培养资质、标准、过程、评价多环节制度保障的相互加强;数量功能和质量功能的制度亦存在互补性。

关键词: 英国现代学徒制, 德国现代学徒制, 制度互补性, 比较研究

Abstract:

By modifying the institutional analysis framework suggested by W. Richard Scott (2010), this paper offers a framework for analyzing the institutional complementarity of apprenticeship, in which the three dimensions of regulative, normative and cultural-cognitive factors interact with each other. England and Germany are selected as cases as they are the typical Anglo-Saxon countries and Rhine countries which have had great success.
In terms of apprentice participation, the German system shows better equilibrium than the English one. Regulative factors in the German system are at medium level, and the system relies more on the strong normative and cultural-cognitive factors. In England, both normative and cultural-cognitive factors are weak, while the regulative factors are strong due to the incentives for apprentices. However, the institutional arrangements in both countries aims at the same direction:providing apprentices with promising future.
In terms of employer's participation, the German system has better equilibrium, with relatively stronger normative and cultural-cognitive factors than regulative factors. The three factors reinforce each other. However, in the English system, strong regulative factors compensate the weak normative and cultural-cognitive factors. Despite great difference, Germany and England share the similarity in institutional arrangements.
In terms of quality assurance, Germany presents an excellent model, in which quality assurance goes along with all the process of apprenticeship training, including providers' accreditation, training standards, training process, evaluation and qualification. The regulative, normative and cultural-cognitive factors are all strong and they reinforce each other. Great efforts have also been made in England, but all the three factors are still not strong enough and need improvement.
To sum up, the results show that:a) matual-reinforcement and compensation are the two basic forms of institutional complementarity for apprenticeship; b) strengthening regulative factors could be an effective approach for government to developing apprenticeship; c) the key point to institutional complementarity for apprentice participation is to provide promising careers for apprentices; d) the institutional complementarity for employer participation lies in reducing the risk of poaching externality; e) institutional complementarity for quality assurance relies on the reinforcement of institutions upon all the process of apprenticeship training; f) complementarity also exists between institutions for quantity improvement and those for quality enhancement.

Key words: modern apprenticeship, institutional complementarity, comparison