|本期目录/Table of Contents|

[1]杨大可 姚贝林.数字时代的教育公平构建:德国的结构困境与法治回应[J].清华大学教育研究,2026,(05):54-64.[doi:10.14138/j.1001-4519.2026.05.005411]
 YANG Da-ke YAO Bei-lin.Constructing Educational Equity in the Digital Age:Germany’s Structural Dilemmas and Legal Responses[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2026,(05):54-64.[doi:10.14138/j.1001-4519.2026.05.005411]
点击复制

数字时代的教育公平构建:德国的结构困境与法治回应
分享到:

清华大学教育研究[ISSN:1001-4519/CN:11-1610/G4]

卷:
期数:
2026年05期
页码:
54-64
栏目:
教育公平
出版日期:
2026-10-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
Constructing Educational Equity in the Digital Age:Germany’s Structural Dilemmas and Legal Responses
作者:
杨大可 姚贝林
同济大学 法学院
Author(s):
YANG Da-ke YAO Bei-lin
School of Law, Tongji University
关键词:
数字教育; 教育治理; 结构性公平; 教育正义
Keywords:
digital education;  educational governance;  structural equity;  educational justice
分类号:
G551.6
DOI:
10.14138/j.1001-4519.2026.05.005411
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
德国在推进教育数字化改革过程中,数字鸿沟呈现出多维扩张与结构固化的态势。其根源并不在于资源分配的偶然失衡,而在于联邦体制下教育权属分散、治理逻辑偏移以及法律体系碎片化所造成的系统性不公。要扭转这一局面,需要在全国范围内确立统一的教育目标与联邦协调机制,重构财政再分配结构,并引入“公平拨款触发器”和全周期程序正义原则,形成覆盖责任分配、项目执行与纠错救济的动态平衡机制。同时,以教育数据专门立法和人工智能最低保护标准强化前瞻性风险规制,为教育公共性提供制度保障。数字教育公平不应依赖持续的行政补贴,而应通过法治化、多层级协同的治理体系,重建德国数字教育的制度正义。
Abstract:
In the course of Germany’s digital education reform, the digital divide has widened across multiple dimensions and become structurally entrenched. Its underlying causes do not lie in contingent imbalances in resource allocation, but in systemic inequities produced by fragmented educational authority under federalism,misaligned governance logics, and a fragmented legal framework. To address these challenges, Germany must establish unified national education goals and federal coordination mechanisms, restructure its fiscal redistribution system, and introduce a “fair-funding trigger” together with principles of procedural justice across the entire policy cycle, thereby establishing a mechanism for maintaining a dynamic balance across the allocation of responsibilities, project implementation, and corrective and remedial procedures. At the same time,forward-looking risk regulation should be strengthened through specialized legislation on educational data and minimum protection standards for the use of AI, so as to safeguard the public character of education. Achieving digital educational equity should not rely on continuous administrative subsidies, but on a rule-of-law-based,multi-level collaborative governance system capable of reconstructing institutional justice within Germany’s digital education landscape.

相似文献/References:

[1]金 国.“新教育中国化”运动中的政府参与及教育治理逻辑[J].清华大学教育研究,2016,(03):100.
[2]杨东平.新一轮“教育产业化”的特征与治理[J].清华大学教育研究,2018,(01):35.[doi:10.14138/j.1001-4519.2018.01.003504]
 YANG Dong-ping.The Characteristics and Governance ofthe New Round of Educational Industrialization[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2018,(05):35.[doi:10.14138/j.1001-4519.2018.01.003504]
[3]周秀平.学生群体的政策分类与教育治理[J].清华大学教育研究,2019,(03):84.
 ZHOU Xiu-ping.Policy?Classification?of?Student?Groups?and?EducationGovernance[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2019,(05):84.
[4]高 杭.以整体性治理助力学前教育改革发展[J].清华大学教育研究,2019,(05):112.
 GAO Hang.Advancing?the?Reform?and?Development?of?PreschoolEducation?by?Holistic?Governance[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2019,(05):112.
[5]马健生 刘云华.教育中的资本扩张:危害与治理[J].清华大学教育研究,2021,(04):50.
 MA Jian-sheng LIU Yun-hua.Capital Expansion in Education: Harm and Governance[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2021,(05):50.
[6]吕云震 高益民.OECD教育治理合法化与规避治理风险研究[J].清华大学教育研究,2024,(04):104.
 LYU Yun-zhen GAO Yi-min.Research on OECD’s Measures to Legitimize Education Governance and Avoid Governance Risks[J].TSINGHUA JOURNAL OF EDUCATION,2024,(05):104.

更新日期/Last Update: 2026-10-20