This article builds on the ambiguous concept of the autonomy of universities with three historical turns in two dominant types of universities in the world – the Anglo-Saxon and American models, represented by the British and American institutions, and the Continental models, including the recently emerging Chinese University 3.0. Based on empirical data from two comparative case studies with a documentary analysis approach, I investigate the structure of the zhong-yong model of self-mastery, demonstrating how it may differ from the Western models and offering cultural interpretations for these nuances. The article concludes that self-mastery in the Chinese context provides an additional form of autonomy which is rooted in the pragmatic Confucian concept of zhong-yong. It is also found that through the pragmatism of self-mastery, the zhong-yong model enables Chinese universities to directly serve the state and, at the same time, to legitimate the priority given to their development by state power, thus creating abundant space and resources for them to fully unfold their potentialities. With multilayered and multidirectional power relationships, this model of governance has enabled Chinese universities to radically transform themselves in a short period of time and will allow them to eventually become global leaders, although they may have to sacrifice autonomous freedom in some ways.

以英美大学为代表的安格鲁-撒克逊模式和美国模式、以及欧陆模式，经历了三次历史性的大转型。本文探讨的，就是在英美模式以及包括最近崛起的中国大学3.0在内的欧陆模式基础上形成的模糊概念——自治。基于两个比较案例研究所收集的实证数据以及文档分析，本文作者探究了自主的中庸模式结构，试图证明它与西方模式的不同，并为它们的区别提供文化解释。论文的一个结论是，中国背景下的自主为世界提供了与自治不同的、根源于中庸的儒家实用主义理念。本研究也发现，通过自主的实用主义，中庸模式使中国大学直接服务于国家。与此同时，它把赋予大学优先发展的国家权力合法化，从而为它们潜力的充分拓展创造足够的空间及资源。伴随多层向的权力关系——尽管必须牺牲自治的某些自由，这一治理模式使中国大学在短期内奇迹般地稳步转型，并最终成为全球的引领者。