Global Education, Heterarchies, and Hybrid Organizations
Global Education, Heterarchies, and Hybrid Organizations
复制标题
全球教育、异构组织和混合组织
DOI：
10.1057/9780230111554_2
复制
发表时间：
2010
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
S. Ball
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
S. Ball
我在本章中的意图是具有挑衅性和探索性，而不是确定性的。我想识别和探索国家形式和方式内的一系列全球趋势，以及这些趋势与教育服务提供变化以及随之而来的教育服务组织（国家和私人）的价值观和生态的关系。我还将利用本章作为讨论和发展异质性概念的机会。在某种程度上，我想借鉴和阐述莫克（Mok，2007）最近发表的一篇关于东亚新教育治理的文章中提出的一些观点，既发展他提出的一些论点，又给它们一个稍微不同的变形。在这样做的过程中，我想超越对新治理形式的更抽象的描述——尽管莫克的描述肯定不是完全抽象的——来指出“网络治理”的一些混乱的现实。我还想重申和强化杰索普的观点，即“方法”和异质关系并没有完全取代其他形式的政策形成和政策行动，而是在“市场、等级制度和网络的明智混合中占据一席之地，以实现最佳的可能结果”（Jessop 2002，242）。这种混合在许多方面和多个层面上都很明显。其结果是资本、国家以及这里的例子中的学术界之间出现各种杂质和渗漏。我还想通过举一些例子，以多种不同的方式使用混合性的概念——指国家战略、“公共部门组织”的新迭代、公共部门与私营部门之间的关系以及新的公共服务价值观。这些发展反映并嵌入其中，如
My intention in this chapter is to be provocative and exploratory rather than definitive. I want to identify and explore a set of global trends within the forms and modalities of the state and the relationships of these trends to changes in the delivery of educational services and concomitantly in the values and ecologies of educational service organizations (both state and private). I will also use the chapter as an opportunity to discuss and develop the concept of heterarchy. To some extent I want to draw upon and elaborate some of the points made in a recent article by Mok (2007) on new educational governance in East Asia both to develop some of the arguments he makes and to give them a slightly different inflection. In doing this I want to move beyond the more abstract accounts of new forms of governance—although Mok’s account is certainly not entirely abstract—to indicate some of the messy realities of “network governance.” I also want to reiterate and reinforce Jessop’s point that the “methods” and relations of heterarchy do not totally displace other forms of policy formation and policy action but rather take their place in “the judicious mixing of market, hierarchy, and networks to achieve the best possible outcomes”(Jessop 2002, 242). This mixing is evident in a number of ways and at a number of levels. The result is impurity and leakages of various sorts between capital, the state, and in the examples here, academe.I also want, by giving some examples, to use the concept of hybridity in a number of different ways—to refer to state strategies, to a new iteration of “public sector organizations,” to relationships between the public and the private sector, and to new public service values. Reflected by and embedded in these developments, as