UTokyo Repository 東京大学

UTokyo Repository >
119 教育学研究科・教育学部 >
東京大学教育学部紀要 >

このページ(論文)をリンクする場合は次のURLを使用してください: http://hdl.handle.net/2261/557

タイトル: アメリカの市政改革と教育委員会制度改革 (2) : 教育長の法的地位の確立
その他のタイトル: The Reform of Municipality and School Board in America (2) : The Establishment of Superintendency
著者: 藤本, 典裕
著者(別言語): Fujimoto, Norihiro
発行日: 1988年2月10日
出版者: 東京大学教育学部
掲載誌情報: 東京大学教育学部紀要. 27巻, 1988.2, p.403-415
抄録: City council and school board have grown in the same process. At first, both of them were included among the many functions of so-called 'town-meeting'. Town-meeting had all the powers; legislative, administrative and judicial, and covered the whole public affairs of the community, which also included education. So education was only one of the functions town-meeting dealt with, and didn't have its own organ nor staff. As the functions grew complicated and technical, it was required to select some members and to leave them the administrative power. Those members were 'selectmen'. They were the origin of later standing committee of the city council. Then the standing committee on education was separated from the city council and turned into the school board. But the school board didn't have any administrative officer, and so did the city council. Because of this, they grew in number and had difficulty and delay in administering process. So naturally it was sought to reduce the members of legislative committee and to employ an officer who served, under the direction of the committee, as the head of administrative staff. This officer is 'city manager' in municipalities and 'superintendent of schools' in school boards. City manager and superintendent were expected to overcome the defects of 'commission' form of city council and 'committee' form of school board, respectively. Both city manager and superintendent have their origins in the 'Municipal Reform'. They were created after the principles of the Reform. The principles are summarized into following three points. (1) The myth of 'separation'; separation of administration from politics, of education from politics. (2) 'Common' interest; belief in the existence of common interest of the community. (3) 'Neutral' profession; neutral exercise of administration, separated from politics, by professional officer. The Municipal Reform guided by these three principles, however, was the 'administerizing' process of politics, through the 'apoliticalization' of administration. And, in fact, it represented and realized, under the name of 'neutrality', the interests of white-middle Americans. 'Popular control' concept inherent in town-meeting was preserved as 'layman-control' concept opposed against 'professional-control' of administration by administrative 'profession'. And 'layman' was substantially forced to be under the control of 'professional' decision-making and exercise. Municipal Reform represented this turnover of the tables; popularity and professionality. Superintendent and city manager were born as 'experts', through 'administrators', grew into 'professions'. In this paper, as the second step of the study, I tried to clarify the establishment process of superintendent as 'expert'. By examining the change of provisions of state laws, I clarified that superintendent was established as 'educational expert'. He was the supervisor of schools, leader of teachers, educator, but not so much an administrator. (He sometimes even taught.) Superintendent and city manager didn't remain 'expert'. But the development of them afterwards will be dealt with in my next paper. Note : I've already theoretically summarized the development process of city manager and superintendent in the other paper. So this paper is the second step of my study, but the first as positive one.
URI: http://hdl.handle.net/2261/557
ISSN: 04957849


ファイル 記述 サイズフォーマット
KJ00000126204.pdf1.22 MBAdobe PDF見る/開く



Valid XHTML 1.0! DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2010  Duraspace - ご意見をお寄せください