自愿限制还是自由发展?商业辅导机构管理影子教育的自我规制

IF 3.6 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Mohan Dhall
{"title":"自愿限制还是自由发展?商业辅导机构管理影子教育的自我规制","authors":"Mohan Dhall","doi":"10.1111/ejed.70244","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Private tutoring, also called private supplementary education or shadow education, has experienced rapid growth in the past two decades. As the phenomenon has expanded globally, so too has the academic literature calling for understanding and effective governance of the sector. Concerns about the deleterious effects of private supplementary tutoring on mainstream education and on wider society have led to calls for regulatory responses by governments at different levels. Such responses could address, among other things, corruption, amplified social stratification, consumer protection, and employee protection. Most governments take a hands-off approach, leaving the industry largely unencumbered by particularised regulations. Between a laissez-faire approach and government regulation lies self-regulation, perhaps government-supported. The self-regulation of tutoring markets, featuring peak representative bodies, may bring accountability through the articulation of codes of practice and standards of conduct. In this international study, varying approaches to self-regulation are explored. Drawing on both the academic and grey literature, this paper assesses approaches by nine self-regulating tutoring bodies in seven countries. The study stresses the place of ‘self-regulation’ as a policy option for consideration in the literature on shadow education.</p>","PeriodicalId":47585,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Education","volume":"60 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ejed.70244","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Voluntary Restriction or Freedom to Flourish? Self-Regulation of Commercial Tutoring Providers for Managing Shadow Education\",\"authors\":\"Mohan Dhall\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ejed.70244\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Private tutoring, also called private supplementary education or shadow education, has experienced rapid growth in the past two decades. As the phenomenon has expanded globally, so too has the academic literature calling for understanding and effective governance of the sector. Concerns about the deleterious effects of private supplementary tutoring on mainstream education and on wider society have led to calls for regulatory responses by governments at different levels. Such responses could address, among other things, corruption, amplified social stratification, consumer protection, and employee protection. Most governments take a hands-off approach, leaving the industry largely unencumbered by particularised regulations. Between a laissez-faire approach and government regulation lies self-regulation, perhaps government-supported. The self-regulation of tutoring markets, featuring peak representative bodies, may bring accountability through the articulation of codes of practice and standards of conduct. In this international study, varying approaches to self-regulation are explored. Drawing on both the academic and grey literature, this paper assesses approaches by nine self-regulating tutoring bodies in seven countries. The study stresses the place of ‘self-regulation’ as a policy option for consideration in the literature on shadow education.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47585,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Education\",\"volume\":\"60 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-15\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/ejed.70244\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.70244\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ejed.70244","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

私人辅导,也被称为私人补充教育或影子教育,在过去的二十年中经历了快速增长。随着这一现象在全球范围内的蔓延,呼吁理解和有效治理这一领域的学术文献也在不断增多。由于担心私人补习对主流教育和更广泛社会的有害影响,人们呼吁各级政府采取监管措施。这些应对措施可以解决腐败、社会分层加剧、消费者保护和雇员保护等问题。大多数政府采取不干涉的方式,使该行业在很大程度上不受特定法规的阻碍。介于自由放任和政府监管之间的是自我监管,也许是政府支持的。辅导市场的自我监管,以高峰代表机构为特色,可能会通过明确的行为准则和行为标准带来问责制。在这项国际研究中,探讨了不同的自我调节方法。利用学术文献和灰色文献,本文评估了七个国家的九个自我调节辅导机构的方法。该研究强调了“自我监管”作为影子教育文献中考虑的政策选择的地位。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

Voluntary Restriction or Freedom to Flourish? Self-Regulation of Commercial Tutoring Providers for Managing Shadow Education

Voluntary Restriction or Freedom to Flourish? Self-Regulation of Commercial Tutoring Providers for Managing Shadow Education

Private tutoring, also called private supplementary education or shadow education, has experienced rapid growth in the past two decades. As the phenomenon has expanded globally, so too has the academic literature calling for understanding and effective governance of the sector. Concerns about the deleterious effects of private supplementary tutoring on mainstream education and on wider society have led to calls for regulatory responses by governments at different levels. Such responses could address, among other things, corruption, amplified social stratification, consumer protection, and employee protection. Most governments take a hands-off approach, leaving the industry largely unencumbered by particularised regulations. Between a laissez-faire approach and government regulation lies self-regulation, perhaps government-supported. The self-regulation of tutoring markets, featuring peak representative bodies, may bring accountability through the articulation of codes of practice and standards of conduct. In this international study, varying approaches to self-regulation are explored. Drawing on both the academic and grey literature, this paper assesses approaches by nine self-regulating tutoring bodies in seven countries. The study stresses the place of ‘self-regulation’ as a policy option for consideration in the literature on shadow education.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
European Journal of Education
European Journal of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
47
期刊介绍: The prime aims of the European Journal of Education are: - To examine, compare and assess education policies, trends, reforms and programmes of European countries in an international perspective - To disseminate policy debates and research results to a wide audience of academics, researchers, practitioners and students of education sciences - To contribute to the policy debate at the national and European level by providing European administrators and policy-makers in international organisations, national and local governments with comparative and up-to-date material centred on specific themes of common interest.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信