An Exploration of Higher Education Governance and Educational Management Practice Paths from the Perspective of Comparative Education
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/5pxt2d56Keywords:
Comparative education; Higher Education Governance; Educational management; Practice approach; Modernization of governance.Abstract
Domestic higher education has fully entered the stage of massification, and the traditional development model relying solely on expanding institutional scale can no longer meet the practical demands for high-quality, connotative development. To continuously improve educational standards, universities must promptly update their management philosophies and refine their internal governance systems. Currently, the focus of higher education development has shifted significantly—institutional scale is no longer the sole criterion for measuring institutional strength, while governance system construction and internal management capabilities are gradually becoming key factors in enhancing overall competitiveness and core strengths. The quality of university governance directly affects the effectiveness of three core functions: talent cultivation, scientific research innovation, and social service, and serves as a crucial basis for evaluating institutional performance. Existing research reveals notable gaps in comparative studies between Chinese and foreign university governance. Most studies remain superficial, focusing merely on surface-level model comparisons without deeply analyzing essential differences in educational systems or exploring core aspects such as power and responsibility mechanisms, university-government collaboration, and refined management. As a result, there is a relative scarcity of localized research grounded in China's actual university context that can directly guide reform efforts. Based on comparative education theory and drawing from firsthand experience in university administration, this paper examines the strengths and weaknesses of mainstream Western university governance models and identifies practical governance challenges faced by Chinese institutions in areas such as authority allocation, multi-party collaboration, and daily operations. By integrating the unique characteristics of China’s higher education development, the paper proposes optimization strategies at three levels—institutional building, empowerment of stakeholders, and smart governance—to offer feasible reference points for advancing modernization of governance and achieving sustainable, high-quality development in Chinese universities.
Downloads
References
[1] Gornitzka, Å., Maassen, P., & de Boer, H. (2017). Change in university governance structures in continental Europe. Higher Education Quarterly, 71(3), 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12130.
[2] Kwiek, M. (2015). The unfading power of collegiality? University governance in Poland in a European comparative and quantitative perspective. International Journal of Educational Development, 43, 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2015.04.003
[3] Dobbins, M., & Knill, C. (2017). Higher education governance in France, Germany, and Italy: Change and variation in the impact of transnational soft governance. Policy and Society, 36(1), 67–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2017.1278727
[4] Broucker, B., De Wit, K., Verhoeven, J., & Leišytė, L. (2019). New public management and higher education governance reforms: A comparative analysis of 12 European countries. Higher Education Policy, 32(4), 547–566. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-018-00118-0
[5] Bleiklie, I., Enders, J., & Lepori, B. (2011). New public management, network governance and the university as a changing professional organization. Higher Education, 61(4), 409–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-010-9347-9
[6] Stensaker, B., & Välimaa, J. (2013). Re-configuring higher education governance: A comparative analysis of national reforms. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 43(2), 211–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2012.730112
[7] Stransky-Can, K. (2022). In between new public management and network governance in Austria, Finland and Scotland: Potential conflicts in autonomy understandings of governments and universities. Journal of the Knowledge Economy, 14(3), 2742–2766. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13132-022-00964-8
[8] Gándara, D., & Daenekindt, S. (2022). Accountability or equity: Combining topic models and qualitative analysis to examine public rhetoric about performance-based funding. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 44(4), 734–758. https://doi.org/10.3102/01623737221092148
[9] Gándara, D., & Rutherford, A. (2018). Mitigating unintended impacts? The effects of premiums for underserved populations in performance-funding policies for higher education. Research in Higher Education, 59(6), 681–703. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-017-9484-3
[10] de Boer, H., & Maassen, P. (2020). The limits of managerial governance in European higher education. Journal of Educational Administration, 58(5), 523–540. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-08-2019-0134
[11] Pruvot, E.-B., Estermann, T., & Popkhadze, G. (2023). Institutional autonomy in European higher education: Twenty years of change. Higher Education Policy, 36(3), 489–510. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-022-00223-8
[12] Leišytė, L., & Dee, J. (2012). University governance and management: A comparative perspective on organizational change. Higher Education, 64(5), 627–642. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-012-9524-2
[13] Shin, J., & Kim, Y. (2018). Changing patterns of higher education governance under neoliberalism: Global and East Asian perspectives. In J.-C. Shin (Ed.), Higher education governance in East Asia (pp. 223–241). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-0162-3_12
[14] Nguyen, T. L., Cornish, P., & Minichiello, V. (2025). Becoming a university president: An accidental meritocratic career trajectory. Higher Education Quarterly, 79(1), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1111/hequ.12480
[15] Chant, C., & McPherson, M. (2018). Global trends in higher education governance: State steering and institutional management. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 40(3), 245–261. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360080X.2018.1457789
[16] Huang, F. (2021). State-university relationships in Chinese higher education: A comparative perspective. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 51(7), 1042–1060. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2020.1785371
[17] Christensen, T., & Lægreid, P. (2021). Autonomy and accountability in university governance reforms in a comparative perspective. Higher Education, 82(2), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-020-00634-4
[18] Vukasović, M., & Bowman, N. (2022). Stakeholder participation in university governance: Cross-national patterns. Higher Education Policy, 35(2), 317–338. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41307-021-00200-0
[19] Mok, K. H. (2019). The quest for world-class universities and higher education governance in East Asia. International Journal of Educational Development, 66, 11–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijedudev.2018.12.003
[20] Capano, G., & Pritoni, A. (2020). The governance of higher education between change and persistence: A comparative analysis. Policy and Society, 39(4), 477–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/14494035.2020.1780862
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 International Journal of Education and Social Development
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
