本文選題：支出責(zé)任　切入點(diǎn)：責(zé)任劃分　出處：《中國財(cái)政》2017年16期 　論文類型：期刊論文

【摘要】：正英、美、德、法、日等國雖然在管理體制機(jī)制、職業(yè)教育組織模式(國家辦學(xué)模式、企業(yè)培訓(xùn)和在崗培訓(xùn)模式、培訓(xùn)中心模式、合作式職業(yè)教育、雙元制職業(yè)教育體系)和職業(yè)教育理念(職業(yè)資格的本質(zhì)、教學(xué)方法)等方面與我國有很多不同,職業(yè)教育事權(quán)和支出責(zé)任的劃分也存在明顯差異,但還是能總結(jié)出一些規(guī)律性特點(diǎn)和發(fā)展趨勢(shì)。通過比較各國各級(jí)政府承擔(dān)的職業(yè)教育事權(quán)和支出責(zé)任,對(duì)于界定我國政府的職業(yè)教育事權(quán)和支出責(zé)任有一定的借鑒意義。
[Abstract]:Although Ching UK, US, Germany, France, Japan and other countries are in the management system mechanism, vocational education organization model (national school model, enterprise training and on-the-job training model, training center model, cooperative vocational education, The dual system of vocational education system) and the concept of vocational education (the essence of vocational qualifications, teaching methods) and other aspects are different from our country, the division of responsibility and responsibility of vocational education also has obvious differences. However, it can sum up some regular characteristics and development trends. By comparing the responsibility and responsibility of vocational education undertaken by governments at all levels in various countries, it is of certain reference significance to define the responsibility and responsibility of vocational education of our government.
【作者單位】： 中國財(cái)政科學(xué)研究院;
【分類號(hào)】：F812.2;G719.1
，

本文編號(hào)：1650088