本文選題：中美比較　切入點(diǎn)：法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位　出處：《武漢大學(xué)》2017年碩士論文　論文類(lèi)型：學(xué)位論文

【摘要】：隨著法治社會(huì)發(fā)展步伐的加快,法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生教育正不斷被人們所熟知,并顯現(xiàn)出強(qiáng)烈的發(fā)展勢(shì)頭,成為我國(guó)培養(yǎng)高層次法律實(shí)務(wù)人才的重要途徑。美國(guó)是世界上較早開(kāi)展法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生教育的國(guó)家,在其近兩百年的發(fā)展歷程中,培養(yǎng)出了大批優(yōu)秀的法律工作者,積累了較為豐富的培養(yǎng)經(jīng)驗(yàn)。他山之石,可以攻玉,中國(guó)法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生教育正處于發(fā)展的重要時(shí)期,對(duì)其培養(yǎng)模式進(jìn)行研究和借鑒,具有較強(qiáng)的理論和現(xiàn)實(shí)意義。參考US News美國(guó)法學(xué)院排名和艾瑞深中國(guó)校友會(huì)網(wǎng)法學(xué)排名選取了耶魯大學(xué)、哈佛大學(xué)、威廉·瑪麗學(xué)院、中國(guó)人民大學(xué)和天津師范大學(xué)5所代表性高校,以這5所高校的法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生培養(yǎng)方案為研究對(duì)象,從專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生培養(yǎng)模式的六大構(gòu)成要素——培養(yǎng)目標(biāo)、招生入學(xué)、課程設(shè)置、專(zhuān)業(yè)實(shí)踐、學(xué)業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、質(zhì)量保障出發(fā),分別對(duì)其進(jìn)行了研究。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)中美兩國(guó)研究型大學(xué)的法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位教育在考生入學(xué)成績(jī)、各類(lèi)課程數(shù)量、專(zhuān)業(yè)實(shí)踐要求等方面均高于教學(xué)型大學(xué)。對(duì)中美5所代表性高校培養(yǎng)模式進(jìn)行了對(duì)比分析,發(fā)現(xiàn)中美兩國(guó)法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生培養(yǎng)存在著異同點(diǎn)。其中相同點(diǎn)有:兩國(guó)培養(yǎng)目標(biāo)中的職業(yè)定位相似,并突出了實(shí)踐性特征;課程設(shè)置注重必修與選修的結(jié)合;將專(zhuān)業(yè)實(shí)踐作為重要環(huán)節(jié)來(lái)抓,使之成為獲得學(xué)位的必要條件;要求學(xué)生必須完成教學(xué)計(jì)劃規(guī)定的課程,并至少達(dá)到最低學(xué)分要求;提供了內(nèi)外部質(zhì)量保障體系。不同點(diǎn)有:美國(guó)的招生制度注重對(duì)考生學(xué)習(xí)法律的能力和綜合素質(zhì)的考量,我國(guó)更注重法律知識(shí)和考試成績(jī)的考量;兩國(guó)在選修課、專(zhuān)業(yè)技能課、職業(yè)道德課的數(shù)量及類(lèi)型方面有所差異;美國(guó)將專(zhuān)業(yè)實(shí)踐融入到了日常課程設(shè)計(jì)中,我國(guó)是與課程分開(kāi)的定期實(shí)踐;美國(guó)無(wú)學(xué)位論文要求,更注重對(duì)學(xué)生的課程要求,而我國(guó)更注重學(xué)位論文的撰寫(xiě),對(duì)課程的要求稍低;從兩國(guó)內(nèi)外部質(zhì)量保障體系的規(guī)模、影響、規(guī)范等方面來(lái)看,美國(guó)更具優(yōu)勢(shì)。針對(duì)我國(guó)法學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生培養(yǎng)模式自身存在的問(wèn)題,借鑒了美國(guó)相關(guān)培養(yǎng)經(jīng)驗(yàn),并從完善入學(xué)考試制度、優(yōu)化課程設(shè)置、不斷強(qiáng)化專(zhuān)業(yè)實(shí)踐、嚴(yán)格學(xué)業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)、建立健全的質(zhì)量保障體系方面提出了建議。
[Abstract]:With the quickening of the pace of the development of the society ruled by law, graduate education of law major is becoming more and more familiar and has shown a strong momentum of development. It has become an important way to train high-level legal practitioners in our country. The United States is an early country in the world to develop graduate education in law major. In its nearly 200 years of development, it has trained a large number of outstanding legal workers. The author has accumulated rich training experience, the stone of other mountains, can attack jade, China law major graduate student education is in the important period of development, carries on the research and the reference to its training pattern, It is of great theoretical and practical significance. Referring to the US News ranking of American Law School and China Alumni Association of China Law ranking, Yale University, Harvard University, William Mary College, The five representative universities of Renmin University of China and Tianjin normal University, taking the training scheme of graduate students of law major in these five universities as the research object, recruit students from the six main elements of the training mode of professional degree graduate students, that is, the training target. The course setup, professional practice, academic standards and quality assurance are studied separately. The study found that the degree education of law major in the research universities of China and the United States has the scores of entering students and the number of courses of all kinds. The requirements of professional practice are higher than those of teaching-oriented universities. This paper makes a comparative analysis of the training models of five representative universities in China and the United States. It is found that there are similarities and differences in the training of graduate students of law major in China and the United States. Among them, the two countries' training objectives are similar in career orientation and prominent in practical features, and the curriculum design emphasizes the combination of compulsory and elective courses. Taking professional practice as an important link to make it a necessary condition for obtaining a degree requires students to complete the courses stipulated in the teaching plan and at least to meet the minimum credit requirements; It provides internal and external quality assurance systems. The differences are: the United States' enrollment system focuses on the examinee's ability and comprehensive quality to study the law, and our country pays more attention to the consideration of legal knowledge and examination results; the two countries are taking elective courses, professional skills courses, There are differences in the number and type of professional ethics courses; the United States integrates professional practice into the daily curriculum design, and our country is a regular practice separated from the curriculum; the United States has no degree thesis requirements, and pays more attention to the curriculum requirements of students. However, China pays more attention to the writing of degree papers and has lower requirements for courses. From the aspects of the scale, influence and standardization of the external quality assurance systems in the two countries, The United States has more advantages. In view of the problems existing in the training mode of the graduate student of law major in China, the author draws lessons from the relevant training experience of the United States, and from the aspects of perfecting the entrance examination system, optimizing the curriculum setting, and strengthening the professional practice, Strict academic standards, the establishment of a sound quality assurance system put forward suggestions.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：武漢大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類(lèi)號(hào)】：G643

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 張秀峰;;美國(guó)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位教育發(fā)展歷程及其特點(diǎn)分析[J];山東高等教育;2016年05期

2 孫國(guó)友;;追本溯源:專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生教育的本質(zhì)屬性探驪[J];研究生教育研究;2016年02期

3 張秀峰;高益民;;美國(guó)法學(xué)教育中專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位與學(xué)術(shù)學(xué)位人才培養(yǎng)模式比較研究——以耶魯大學(xué)法學(xué)院法律博士和法學(xué)博士培養(yǎng)為例[J];學(xué)位與研究生教育;2015年09期

4 李響;;美國(guó)經(jīng)驗(yàn)啟示下我國(guó)法學(xué)教育改革的路徑探索[J];學(xué)位與研究生教育;2014年07期

5 劉勇;;論法律碩士專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位入學(xué)考試制度的完善[J];研究生教育研究;2014年03期

6 張海麗;趙秋利;張健;;國(guó)內(nèi)外護(hù)理學(xué)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位碩士研究生的培養(yǎng)現(xiàn)狀[J];中華護(hù)理雜志;2013年06期

7 劉志剛;宋偉衛(wèi);丁玉玲;;法學(xué)教育的轉(zhuǎn)型與法律碩士專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生培養(yǎng)模式的探索[J];研究生教育研究;2013年01期

8 陳麟;;全日制法律碩士生培養(yǎng)模式改革的思考——基于學(xué)徒制的分析[J];中國(guó)高教研究;2012年06期

9 杜志淳;丁笑梅;;國(guó)外法律人才培養(yǎng)模式述評(píng)[J];華東政法大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期

10 裴強(qiáng);;我國(guó)專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位培養(yǎng)模式研究——以翻譯碩士專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位(MTI)為例[J];洛陽(yáng)師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2010年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前3條

1 馬晴雪;全日制法律碩士教育實(shí)踐的研究[D];安徽大學(xué);2012年

2 商政亭;我國(guó)碩士專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位研究生培養(yǎng)模式研究[D];東北師范大學(xué);2011年

3 楊寧;我國(guó)全日制專(zhuān)業(yè)學(xué)位碩士研究生培養(yǎng)模式研究[D];大連理工大學(xué);2010年

，

本文編號(hào)：1644785