薄弱学校委托管理的法律保障机制研究——以美国《特许学校法》问责条款为例

被引:4
作者
索磊 [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] 西南大学教育学部
[2] 闽南师范大学教育系
关键词
美国特许学校; 薄弱学校; 委托管理; 法律保障; 问责;
D O I
10.14121/j.cnki.1008-3855.2013.24.003
中图分类号
D971.2 []; DD912.1 [];
学科分类号
0301 ; 03 ;
摘要
薄弱学校改进有赖于法律提供保障,而问责又是薄弱学校改进法律保障体系不可或缺的内容。薄弱学校委托管理的根基是市场化和公益信托,强有力的问责机制是其成败的关键。基于信托机制的特许学校政策是美国改进薄弱学校的主要措施,美国允许开办特许学校的州均颁布了《特许学校法》。由于一些州《特许学校法》的问责条款不够完善,导致法律的可操作性较弱,对不合格特许学校的问责未能落到实处,从而引起人们对特许学校这一改革措施成效的极大争议。我国薄弱学校改进中的"委托管理"也面临着法律保障的问题,美国《特许学校法》的经验与教训可以为我们提供些许借鉴与启示。
引用
收藏
页码:55 / 61
页数:7
相关论文
共 16 条
[1]  
Accreditation Status. Texas Education Agency. http://www.tea.state.tx.us/accredstatus/ . 2013
[2]  
Charter Revocations:Legal Considerations Concerning Procedure. Eckes S E,Plucker J A. Education Policy Briefs . 2004
[3]  
Model Legislation forStates:Grounded on Experience andPractice. Allen J,Consoletti A,Kerwin K. . 2012
[4]  
TheImportance ofMultipleAuthorizers inCharterSchoolLaws. The center for education reform. http://www.edreform.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/CERPrimerMultipleAuthorizersDec2011.pdf . 2013
[5]  
charter school law. The center for education reform. http://www.edreform.com/issues/choice-charter-schools/lawslegislation/ . 2013
[6]  
Charter School Revocation:A Method for Efficiency,Accountability,and Success. Grady D P. Journal of Law&Education . 2012
[7]  
Selecting the Intervention Model and Partners/Providers for a Low-Achieving School:A Decision-Making and Planning Tool for the Local Education Agency. Center on Innovation&Improvement. http://www.centerii.org/leamodel/resources/Selecting%20the%20Interventi on%20 Model%20and%20Partners%20-%20DOCUMENT.doc . 2013
[8]  
Unchartered Territory:Market Competition’’s Constitutional Collision with Entrepreneurial Sex-Segregated CharterSchools. GroshoffD. B.Y.U.Education and Law Journal . 2010
[9]  
The Politics of Charter Schools. Sandra Vergari. Educational Policy . 2007
[10]  
The effect of charter schools on charter students and public schools[J] . Eric P. Bettinger. &nbspEconomics of Education Review . 2004 (2)