A comparative study of educational decentralization in China and Korea, 1985–1995: Motives, actions, and results

2008 2008

Other formats: Order a copy

Abstract (summary)

Theoretically, the benefits of decentralization include the enhancement of democratic participation and managerial efficiency, and the reduction of financial deficiencies. Empirically, however, there is little consistent evidence supporting this premise. The consequences of reform vary in accordance with country-specific conditions: they appear to be successful, mixed, or failed.

This study seeks to shed light on how the goals, strategies, and consequences of decentralization interact with each other. It focuses on educational governance reform in China and Korea, which have different historical, economic, and political backgrounds. Two main themes are identified in this work: how different problems were addressed by the same policy instrument, decentralization, and how the results differed depending upon environmental conditions.

This led to three areas of investigation: the motivating forces for the decentralization of education, the manners of actuation, and the consequences in China and Korea between 1985 and 1995. A comparative approach was used involving a mixture of longitudinal (vertical) and cross-sectional (horizontal) analyses, which had been proposed and developed subsequent to the work of Bereday, Hilker, and Noah.

These longitudinal and cross-sectional analyses identified several isomorphic and idiosyncratic aspects of the educational governance reforms in China and Korea. The major similarities found include: (1) the economic and political crises as motivating forces, (2) the establishment of legal infrastructures, and the utilization of the incremental and asymmetric vi approaches in the manner of reform actuation, and (3) some positive consequences of reform such as increased educational funds and local educational autonomy.

However, coupled with these similarities were three important differences: (1) the key objectives to be solved: the financial problem in China versus the political problem in Korea, (2) the major actuation strategies: restructuring fiscal authority by decentralization and diversification in China, versus rearranging political power for public education between the central and local governments in Korea, and (3) the main consequences of educational decentralization: improved fiscal efficiency in China, versus enhanced political autonomy in Korea. Both countries experienced some side-effects or limits of decentralization such as financial disparities in education among regions in China, and rhetorical decentralization and citizen apathy regarding local educational autonomy in its early stage in Korea.

Indexing (details)

School administration;
Comparative studies;
0514: School administration
Identifier / keyword
Education; China; Decentralization; Educational decentralization; Governance reform; Korea
A comparative study of educational decentralization in China and Korea, 1985–1995: Motives, actions, and results
Chung, Yeon Han
Number of pages
Publication year
Degree date
School code
DAI-A 69/07, Dissertation Abstracts International
Place of publication
Ann Arbor
Country of publication
United States
Eiseman, Jeffrey W.
Committee member
Dolan, Micael F.; McDermott, Kathryn A.
University of Massachusetts Amherst
University location
United States -- Massachusetts
Source type
Dissertations & Theses
Document type
Dissertation/thesis number
ProQuest document ID
Database copyright ProQuest LLC; ProQuest does not claim copyright in the individual underlying works.
Document URL
Access the complete full text

You can get the full text of this document if it is part of your institution's ProQuest subscription.

Try one of the following:

  • Connect to ProQuest through your library network and search for the document from there.
  • Request the document from your library.
  • Go to the ProQuest login page and enter a ProQuest or My Research username / password.