重庆高教研究

在优绩主义主导的高校整体运行机制中，德育治理被优绩哲学的“技治主义”所裹挟，推崇“科学管理”和“专家政治”的“技治主义”似乎为高校德育治理困境找到了出路。技治主义在社会治理数据技治滥觞、德育人本性缺失的时代情景中，以自身的技术理性从“明大德”“守公德”“严私德”3个层面嵌入对学生的行为规训与思想引导，搭建以综合测评为核心的积分量化体系，推动德育工作可视化，且以专家决策的合法性保障高校德育层级有序运行。然而，颇具功利色彩的技治主义在促进高校德育治理“科学化”的同时，也带来了德育内在生命性物化、德育主体间性被悬置、德育伦理尺度被遮蔽三重风险。为规避这些风险，高校德育治理应超越技治主义，复归人性关怀，还原人之主体性；以价值理性为旨归，超越技术之宰制；明确专家角色定位，构建德育共同体，以此回归德育育德育人本位。

Within the overall operational mechanism of universities dominated by meritocracy, moral education governance has been shaped and constrained by technocracy, which is grounded in the philosophy of merit. Advocating “scientific management” and “expert politics” technocracy appears to offer a solution to the dilemmas faced by moral education governance in higher education. In the contemporary context—characterized by the proliferation of data-driven governance in society and the erosion of the humanistic dimension of moral education—technocracy embeds its own technological rationality into students' behavioral regulation and ideological guidance on three levels: cultivating great virtues(Ming Dade), upholding public virtues(Shou Gongde), and maintaining private virtues(Yan Side). It constructs a quantifiable points-based system centered on comprehensive evaluation to enhance the visibility and manageability of moral education, while relying on the legitimacy of expert decision-making to ensure the orderly functioning of hierarchical moral education governance.However, while technocracy promotes the “scientification” of moral education governance, it also entails three significant risks: the reification of the intrinsic vitality of moral education, the suspension of intersubjectivity among moral education agents, and the obscuring of ethical standards. To mitigate these risks, moral education governance in universities must transcend technocracy and return to humanistic care, restoring the subjectivity of the human person. It should take value rationality as its ultimate orientation to overcome the domination of technological rationality, clarify the role of experts, and construct a moral education community. Through these measures, moral education can return to its core mission of cultivating virtue and educating people.