【正文】 t meanstested) with a mandatory ine contingent loan (paid for by students), called a “contribution” to the Scottish University Endowment Fund. ? Australia, inaugurated the Higher Education Contribution Scheme (HECS) in 1989, officially described as a “… fair and equitable way of ensuring that students contribute to the cost of their higher education.” The tuition in 2020 was about $2600 (US) for undergraduate arts and sciences, but could be borrowed and repaid as an ine contingent loan at a rate of interest—like that proposed for the UK—that would mirror the prevailing Australian rate of inflation. 6? In much of Latin America, as well as much of East Asia, costsharing and revenue diversification generally have taken the form of increasing reliance on a tuition and feedependent private higher education sector (where the public universities continue to feature either no, or very low, tuition). This leads to the anomaly of students from upper and uppermiddle ine families, frequently benefiting from vastly superior (and often private) secondary education, and thus able to pass the rigorous public university entrance examinations, attending “free,” while “ordinary” students, and students from middle and lowermiddle ine and rural families are either excluded altogether, or are forced to pay for tuitiondependent and frequently inferior higher education. This questionable equity continues to put pressure on government to find a way to shift some of the higher education cost burden on to families and students in the public sector. ? Russia, where higher education by law must be without cost to the student, in the early years of the 21st century is securing up to 50 percent of all university revenue from tuition through the dual track tuition, described above. This was also a “l(fā)egal loophole” used by the Chinese prior to 1997, but who dropped the dual track tuition fee in favor of a unitary tuition policy out of a concern for the awkwardness and the potential for abuse in a system that made such a momentous distinction between students all of who were deemed able to enter and plete a higher education. ? India, where tuitionsupported private higher education is growing and where the several official missions have reported and remended the inauguration of some limited costsharing, still cannot (as of 2020) openly embrace even the concept, much less the actual implementation of an official policy of tuition fees. ? China, also still officially a Socialist country, in which higher education was once assumed to be just another part of the vast public sector, like health care or retirement pensions, the costs of which were supposed to be born by the government, charges tuition to nearly all students in the neighborhood of 35005000 Yuan (US$400600). New forms of student loans and meanstested grants in 2020 are only being developed, as reported by Shen and Li (2020).What these and countless other illustrations show is that governments throughout the world are embracing—however tentatively and frequently with euphemisms and political “spin, some version of cost sharing in the form of tuition, user fees, and official encouragement of a tuitiondependent private higher education sector. 高等教育成本分擔(dān)中的財(cái)政與政治 約翰斯通 一、高等教育成本分擔(dān) 高等教育成本分擔(dān)這個術(shù)語源于這樣一個假設(shè)，即高等教育的成本可以看成來自四大塊： 1) 政府、納稅人； 2) 家長； 3) 學(xué)生； 4) 個人或機(jī)構(gòu)捐助者。 3 ．學(xué)生 他們通過勤工助學(xué)或暑期打工的形式，或通過借款來負(fù)擔(dān)部分成本。當(dāng)大學(xué)向來自窮困家庭但有才華的學(xué)生提供特別的經(jīng)過經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況調(diào)查后的助學(xué)金時，大學(xué)本身似乎也是捐助人，但這種情況下，真正的捐助人更有可能是富裕學(xué)生的家長，他們可能比要求他們分擔(dān)的教學(xué)成本要多，但他們或許會認(rèn)為大學(xué)設(shè)立一些必需的獎學(xué)金是提高大學(xué)的質(zhì)量和聲譽(yù)所必不可少的 —— 因而這也是大學(xué)的合法性支出。 3．負(fù)擔(dān)“使用費(fèi)”或雜 費(fèi)以補(bǔ)償由學(xué)院提供以前由學(xué)院補(bǔ)貼良多的膳宿費(fèi)。這可以通過減少對學(xué)生貸款的補(bǔ)貼的形式來實(shí)現(xiàn) (這點(diǎn)類似于毋須償還的助學(xué)金的貶值 )，也可以通過提高利率或利率不變但縮短還款期限來實(shí)現(xiàn)，還可以通過減少貸款數(shù)額 (其中一部分還款是因?yàn)楦鞣N原因要減免掉 )來實(shí)現(xiàn)。 ?在英國、荷蘭 及最近的奧地利開始征收學(xué)費(fèi)，而這些地方高等教育是“免費(fèi)”的 —— 也就是說由普通納稅人、公民及消費(fèi)者付費(fèi)。 ?在俄羅斯，法律規(guī)定高等教育是免收學(xué)費(fèi)的，但現(xiàn)在俄 羅斯卻有 20%多的高教經(jīng)費(fèi)是來自學(xué)費(fèi)。 上述例子表明，全球各國政府都在接受成本分擔(dān)的理念開始征收學(xué)費(fèi)、使用費(fèi)，并鼓勵發(fā)展依靠學(xué)費(fèi)運(yùn)行的 私立高等教育。顯然 ，在高等教育領(lǐng)域就像在其它領(lǐng)域一樣，存在著過分的“消費(fèi)者敏感”，在那里消費(fèi)者 (學(xué)生或家長 )可能很難判斷他們所要購買的東西的價值，而且也很容易為廣告所誤導(dǎo)，或者被“消費(fèi)欺詐”所蒙騙