| Inherited from the American tradition of lay boards and first introduced into the public higher education system in the 1920s, the board of trustees in Chinese public universities has, over time, played a changing role, from being an autonomous top governing body, to being manipulated by government officials, to being completely removed from institutional governance structures. After China adopted reform policies in the late 1970s, boards of trustees were reintroduced in some public universities. However, higher education regulations and ideological influences have given the board an ambiguous and elusive role, little known to those both outside and inside the university sector.;This thesis investigates the role, function and structure of boards of trustees in Chinese public universities. By examining the policies and operations of these boards, the study aimed to identify whether and how these boards facilitate interaction between universities and their external stakeholders in the overall national context of adaptive institutional change. Following a qualitative approach, the study gathered data from document analysis, a national survey of 40 board secretariats, and semi-structured interviews with secretariat staff of 37 institutions. The study found that boards of trustees can be found in 84 public institutions. Predominantly composed of members from industry and government, the boards mainly serve as a medium for fundraising and a conduit for university--industry collaboration in teaching and research. The relationship between an institution and its board members is ostensibly interest-oriented and can even involve economic and personal gain. The board is essentially an advisory body, albeit its role in giving advice is very limited. The many challenges associated with board operation and functioning suggest that adaptive governance, which is characteristic of the Chinese party-state, has had both positive and negative impacts on the board. This thesis advances our understanding of the Chinese board through interlocking political, social, and educational dimensions. |
