中美高�；I資渠道的比較研究
發(fā)布時(shí)間：2019-01-07 12:04
【摘要】：本文研究的目的是比較研究中美高校在籌資渠道上存在的差異,分析中美高校目前存在的差異的原因,結(jié)合中國(guó)高校目前所處環(huán)境提出建議。 首先,本在探討國(guó)內(nèi)外高�；I資渠道現(xiàn)狀的基礎(chǔ)上提出課選題理由和選題意義,并在研究國(guó)內(nèi)外關(guān)于高�；I資綜述的基礎(chǔ)上界定籌資、籌資渠道、籌資機(jī)制等有關(guān)籌資的相關(guān)概念,并解釋高�；I資的可行性和必要性。此外還敘述了高校準(zhǔn)公共產(chǎn)品性質(zhì)理論、高校人力資本理論、成本分擔(dān)理論等有關(guān)理論和高�；I資的四個(gè)原則,這些概念、理論和原則為本文進(jìn)行的研究奠定堅(jiān)實(shí)的理論基礎(chǔ)。 其次,分析中美高校主要的籌資渠道,包括政府的財(cái)政支持、社會(huì)捐贈(zèng)收入、高校收取的學(xué)費(fèi)、債務(wù)籌資和服務(wù)性收入,通過(guò)中美高校各種籌資渠道的歷史、現(xiàn)實(shí)狀況和特點(diǎn)等影響因素從不同的角度對(duì)其進(jìn)行分析。 再次,對(duì)美國(guó)高校與中國(guó)高校的五個(gè)主要籌資渠道進(jìn)行比較分析,通過(guò)各高校具體的數(shù)據(jù)進(jìn)行比對(duì),得出美國(guó)高校和中國(guó)高校在五個(gè)主要籌資渠道上的差別。得出中國(guó)高校在社會(huì)捐贈(zèng)籌資、債務(wù)籌資兩個(gè)方面與美國(guó)高�；I資有巨大的額差異。結(jié)合美國(guó)和中.國(guó)目前的國(guó)情對(duì)其差別進(jìn)行分析,尋找其產(chǎn)生差別的原因,包括政府行為、市場(chǎng)經(jīng)濟(jì)、文化傳統(tǒng)和高校自身。 最后,在分析原因的基礎(chǔ)上,結(jié)合美國(guó)高校和中國(guó)高�；I資渠道上的差別,并比對(duì)中美兩國(guó)國(guó)情和高校所處宏觀條件,得出美國(guó)高�；I資過(guò)程中對(duì)高校的可借鑒部分,并分別根據(jù)五個(gè)主要的籌資渠道提出加強(qiáng)政府在高�；I資中影響、健全高校收費(fèi)差異化制度、深化高校對(duì)社會(huì)捐贈(zèng)的支持與管理、積極推進(jìn)中國(guó)教育債券的發(fā)展以及加強(qiáng)市場(chǎng)聯(lián)系等五條建議。
[Abstract]:The purpose of this study is to compare the differences in funding channels between Chinese and American universities, to analyze the causes of the differences, and to put forward some suggestions based on the current environment of Chinese colleges and universities. First of all, on the basis of discussing the current situation of financing channels at home and abroad, this paper puts forward the reasons and significance of selecting the subject, and defines the financing and financing channels on the basis of studying the summary of university financing at home and abroad. It also explains the feasibility and necessity of raising funds in colleges and universities. In addition, it also describes the theory of quasi-public goods, the theory of university human capital, the theory of cost sharing, and the four principles of raising funds in colleges and universities. These concepts, theories and principles lay a solid theoretical foundation for the research in this paper. Secondly, it analyzes the history of the main financing channels of Chinese and American universities, including government financial support, social donation income, tuition fees collected by colleges and universities, debt financing and service income, and through various funding channels of Chinese and American universities. The influence factors, such as reality and characteristics, are analyzed from different angles. Thirdly, by comparing the five main financing channels between American universities and Chinese universities, the differences between American universities and Chinese universities in the five main financing channels are obtained by comparing the specific data of each university. It is concluded that there is a huge difference between Chinese universities and American universities in social donation financing and debt financing. Combined with the United States and China. The country's current national conditions analyze the differences and find out the causes of the differences, including government behavior, market economy, cultural traditions and universities themselves. Finally, on the basis of the analysis of the reasons, combining the differences in the financing channels between American universities and Chinese universities, and comparing the national conditions of China and the United States and the macro conditions of colleges and universities, the paper draws a conclusion that the financing process of American colleges and universities can be used for reference. According to the five main financing channels, the paper proposes to strengthen the influence of the government in the financing of colleges and universities, improve the system of charging differentiation in universities, and deepen the support and management of social donation in colleges and universities. Actively promote the development of China's education bonds and strengthen market linkages and other five recommendations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：東北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：G649.1
本文編號(hào)：2403644
[Abstract]:The purpose of this study is to compare the differences in funding channels between Chinese and American universities, to analyze the causes of the differences, and to put forward some suggestions based on the current environment of Chinese colleges and universities. First of all, on the basis of discussing the current situation of financing channels at home and abroad, this paper puts forward the reasons and significance of selecting the subject, and defines the financing and financing channels on the basis of studying the summary of university financing at home and abroad. It also explains the feasibility and necessity of raising funds in colleges and universities. In addition, it also describes the theory of quasi-public goods, the theory of university human capital, the theory of cost sharing, and the four principles of raising funds in colleges and universities. These concepts, theories and principles lay a solid theoretical foundation for the research in this paper. Secondly, it analyzes the history of the main financing channels of Chinese and American universities, including government financial support, social donation income, tuition fees collected by colleges and universities, debt financing and service income, and through various funding channels of Chinese and American universities. The influence factors, such as reality and characteristics, are analyzed from different angles. Thirdly, by comparing the five main financing channels between American universities and Chinese universities, the differences between American universities and Chinese universities in the five main financing channels are obtained by comparing the specific data of each university. It is concluded that there is a huge difference between Chinese universities and American universities in social donation financing and debt financing. Combined with the United States and China. The country's current national conditions analyze the differences and find out the causes of the differences, including government behavior, market economy, cultural traditions and universities themselves. Finally, on the basis of the analysis of the reasons, combining the differences in the financing channels between American universities and Chinese universities, and comparing the national conditions of China and the United States and the macro conditions of colleges and universities, the paper draws a conclusion that the financing process of American colleges and universities can be used for reference. According to the five main financing channels, the paper proposes to strengthen the influence of the government in the financing of colleges and universities, improve the system of charging differentiation in universities, and deepen the support and management of social donation in colleges and universities. Actively promote the development of China's education bonds and strengthen market linkages and other five recommendations.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：東北大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：G649.1
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 鄒曉東;呂旭峰;;校友情結(jié):美國(guó)高校捐贈(zèng)的主要?jiǎng)右騕J];比較教育研究;2010年07期
2 魏建國(guó);;美國(guó)《高等教育法》修訂與高等教育財(cái)政改革[J];北京大學(xué)教育評(píng)論;2008年04期
3 陳曉宇;馮倩倩;;我國(guó)高校的捐贈(zèng)收入及捐贈(zèng)人行為研究[J];北京大學(xué)教育評(píng)論;2011年01期
4 樊華強(qiáng);;從宗教文化透視美國(guó)高等教育捐贈(zèng)傳統(tǒng)[J];湖南文理學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2007年01期
5 曹玉潔;;美國(guó)高�；I資之鑒[J];成功(教育);2010年02期
6 張立巍;;高校社會(huì)籌資模式研究[J];財(cái)會(huì)通訊;2009年20期
7 劉艷華;王志;李朋;;基于人力資本理論的高校多元化籌資模式構(gòu)建[J];財(cái)會(huì)通訊;2011年23期
8 劉平;羅貞禮;;我國(guó)高�；I資相關(guān)理論與籌資方式的協(xié)同分析[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2010年24期
9 劉新榮;羅毅;;教育債券——高校融資新選擇[J];財(cái)會(huì)月刊;2010年32期
10 范俊芳;;淺析美國(guó)高�；I資方式[J];重慶電子工程職業(yè)學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年03期
，本文編號(hào)：2403644
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/jiaoyulunwen/suzhijiaoyulunwen/2403644.html
最近更新
教材專著
