教育实证研究的一般路径:以教师情绪劳动研究为例

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2017.03.005

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 和偏重实证主义认识论和实验方法的“证据为本的教育研究”相比，既强调证据为本、又重视方法多元的实证研究对我国当前的教育研究来说尤为必要。它提倡教育研究者依据严谨的量化或质性探究所得的证据，抽象出经得起逻辑检验的关于特定对象的论断。对中国内地教师情绪劳动的量化与质性探究的介绍展示了教育实证研究的一般路径，即由回顾、反复搜寻和再概念化组成的3R之旅。教育实证研究者应注意理论与实践之间的辩证关系，在理念与经验的平稳转换中丰富我们的理解，并促进知识的增长。

关键词: 情绪劳动, 教师, 教学, 教育实证研究

Abstract: Unlike the evidence-based educational research which emphasizes the positivist epistemology and experimental methods, empirical research featuring evidence-based and diverse methods seems particularly important for contemporary educational research in China. Empirical educational researchers advocate that all claims about specific objects are based on the evidence obtained from rigorous quantitative or qualitative inquiry, which can be well examined by human logic. The investigation on teachers' emotional labor in mainland China presents an approach to empirical educational research, that is, the 3R journey consisting of re-view, re-search, and re-conceptualization. It's argued in this article that the empirical educational researchers should pay attention to the dialectical relationship between theory and practice, and ensure the smooth transfer between the ideas and the experiences in order to enrich our understanding and increase human knowledge.

Key words: emotional labor, teacher, teaching, empirical educational research

尹弘飚. 教育实证研究的一般路径:以教师情绪劳动研究为例[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2017, 35(3): 47-56+168+169.

YIN Hongbiao. Approach to Empirical Educational Research: A Case Study of Teachers' Emotional Labor[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educationa, 2017, 35(3): 47-56+168+169.

参考文献

尹弘飚. (2008). 重返课堂, 面对实事——评《课堂研究概论》. 教育研究, 29(7), 110-111.
米歇尔·克罗齐耶. (2007). 法令不能改变社会 (张月译). 上海: 格致出版社.
陈向明. (2000). 质的研究方法与社会科学研究. 北京: 教育科学出版社.
阎光才. (2006). 教育研究中量化与质性方法之争的当下语境分析. 教育研究, 27(2), 47-53.
霍秉坤, 胡婧菁. (2012). 课程研究范式: 量性研究和质性研究之整合. 教育学报(香港), 40(1-2), 1-14.
Ashforth, B. E., & Humphrey, R. H. (1993). Emotional labor in service roles: The influence of identity. Academy of Management Review, 18, 88-115.
Berliner, D. C. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18-20.
Biesta, G. (2007). Why "what works" won't work: Evidence-based practice and the democratic deficit in educational research. Educational Theory, 57, 1-22.
Boler, M. (1997). Disciplined emotions: Philosophies of educated feelings. Educational Theory, 47, 203-227.
Borland, K. W. Jr. (2001). Qualitative and quantitative research: A complementary balance. New Directions for Institutional Research, 112, 5-13.
Bridges, D., Smeyers, P., & Smith, R. (2009). Evidence-based education policy: What evidence? what basis? Whose policy? Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Brotheridge, C. M., & Grandey, A. (2002). Emotional labor and burnout: Comparing two perspectives of "people work". Journal of Vocational Behavior, 60, 17-39.
Bryman, A. (1984). The debate about quantitative and qualitative research: A question of method or epistemology. The British Journal of Sociology, 35, 75-92.
Chan, D. W. (2004). Perceived emotional intelligence and self-efficacy among Chinese secondary school teachers in Hong Kong. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, 1781-1795.
Chan, D. W. (2006). Emotional intelligence and components of burnout among Chinese secondary school teachers in Hong Kong. Teaching and Teacher Education, 22, 1042-1054.
Cheung, F., Tang, C. S. K., & Tang, S. (2011). Psychological capital as a moderator between emotional labor, burnout, and job satisfaction among school teachers in China. International Journal of Stress Management, 18, 348-371.
Clegg, S. (2005). Evidence-based practice in educational research: A critical realist critique of systematic review. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 26, 415-428.
Diefendorff, J. M., Croyle, M. H., & Gosserand, R. H. (2005). The dimensionality and antecedents of emotional labor strategies. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 66, 339-357.
Ercikan, K., & Roth, W.-M. (2006). What good is polarizing research into qualitative and quantitative? Educational Researcher, 35(5), 14-23.
Erickson, F., & Gutierrez, K. (2002). Culture, rigor, and science in educational research. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 21-24.
Firestone, W. A. (1987). Meaning in method: the rhetoric of quantitative and qualitative research. Educational Researcher, 16(7), 4-12.
Gelo, O., Braakmann, D., & Benetka, G. (2008). Quantitative and qualitative research: Beyond the debate. Integrative Psychological and Behavioral Science, 42, 266-290.
Grandey, A. A. (2000). Emotional regulation in the workplace: A new way to conceptualize emotional labor. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology, 5, 95-110.
Gross, J. J. (1998). The emerging field of emotion regulation: An integrative review. Review of General Psychology, 2, 271-299.
Hargreaves, A. (1998). The emotional practice of teaching. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14, 835-854.
Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart: Commercialization of human feeling. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Johnson, R. B., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm whose time has come. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
Karakus, M. (2013). Emotional intelligence and negative feelings: A gender specific moderated mediation model. Educational Studies, 39, 68-82.
Lather, P. (2004a). This IS your father's paradigm: Governmental intrusion and the case of qualitative research in education. Qualitative Inquiry, 10, 15-34.
Lather, P. (2004b). Scientific research in education: A critical perspective. British Educational Research Journal, 30, 759-772.
Lather, P., & Moss, P. A. (2005). Introduction: Implications of the Scientific Research in Education report for qualitative inquiry. Teachers College Record, 107(1), 1-3.
Naring, G., Vlerick, P., & Van de Ven, B. (2012). Emotion work and emotional exhaustion in teachers: The job and individual perspective. Educational Studies, 38, 63-72.
Pellegrino, J. W., & Goldman, S. R. (2002). Be careful what you wish for - you may get it: Educational research in the spotlight. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 15-17.
Sale, J. E. M., Lohfeld, L. H., & Brazil, K. (2002). Revisiting the quantitative-qualitative debate: Implications for mixed-methods research. Quality and Quantity, 36, 43-53.
Salovey, P., & Mayer, J. D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Imagination, Cognition and Personality, 9, 185-211.
Shavelson, R. J., & Towne, L. (2002). Scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Slavin, R. E. (2002). Evidence-based education policies: Transforming educational practice and research. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 15-21.
Smith, J., & Heshusius, L. (1986). Closing down the conversation: The end of the quantitative-qualitative debate among educational inquirers. Educational Researcher, 15(1), 4-12.
St. Pierre, E. A. (2002). "Science" rejects postmodernism. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 25-27.
Towne, L., Wise, L. L., & Winters, T. M. (2004). Advancing scientific research in education. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Winograd, K. (2003). The functions of teacher emotions: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Teachers College Record, 105, 1641-1673.
Yin, H. (2012). Adaptation and validation of the teacher emotional labour strategy scale in China. Educational Psychology, 32, 451-465.
Yin, H. (2015). The effect of teachers' emotional labour on teaching satisfaction: Moderation of emotional intelligence. Teachers and Teaching, 21, 789-810.
Yin, H. (2016). Knife-like mouth and tofu-like heart: Emotion regulation by Chinese teachers in classroom teaching. Social Psychology of Education, 19, 1-22.
Yin, H., & Lee, J. C. K. (2012). Be passionate, but be rational as well: Emotional rules for Chinese teachers' work. Teaching and Teacher Education, 28, 56-65.
Yin, H., Lee, J. C. K., Zhang, Z., & Jin, Y. (2013). Exploring the relationship among teachers' emotional intelligence, emotional labor strategies and teaching satisfaction. Teaching and Teacher Education, 35, 137-145.
Zapf, D. (2002). Emotion work and psychological well-being: A review of the literature and some conceptual considerations. Human Resource Management Review, 12, 237-268.
Zembylas, M. (2002). "Structures of feeling" in curriculum and teaching: Theorizing the emotional rules. Educational Theory, 52, 187-208.

[1]	周加仙, 张志聪, 陈丹, 沈洁. 教育中神经神话的可视化分析及教育启示[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(8): 63-78.
[2]	宋宇, 许昌良, 朱佳, 柴少明. 面向思维培养：基于精准标注技术的智能化课堂教学分析及应用[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(8): 79-89.
[3]	夏雪梅. 项目化学习中“教师如何支持学生”的指标建构研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(8): 90-102.
[4]	陈玉琨. ChatGPT/生成式人工智能时代的教育变革[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(7): 103-116.
[5]	贺樑, 应振宇, 王英英, 孙文琪. 教育中的ChatGPT：教学能力诊断研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(7): 162-176.
[6]	陈静远, 胡丽雅, 吴飞. ChatGPT/生成式人工智能促进以知识点为核心的教学模式变革研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(7): 177-186.
[7]	杨宗凯, 王俊, 吴砥, 陈旭. ChatGPT/生成式人工智能对教育的影响探析及应对策略[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(7): 26-35.
[8]	宋萑, 林敏. ChatGPT/生成式人工智能时代下教师的工作变革：机遇、挑战与应对[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(7): 78-90.
[9]	苏强, 蔡晓卫. 效率还是价值：高校教师评价制度的逻辑困境及其张力调适[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(6): 133-141.
[10]	赵伶俐, 经刚. 美育评价智能化平台与实验教室建构——基于美育教学与美感体验过程[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(6): 92-107.
[11]	叶晓梅, 曹晓婕. 教师关怀对农村儿童非认知能力发展的影响——家校共育的机制分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(5): 98-112.
[12]	郑永和, 杨宣洋, 王晶莹, 李佳, 卢阳旭, 李书惠, 杨玉静, 张晓琳. 我国小学科学教师队伍现状、影响与建议：基于31个省份的大规模调研[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(4): 1-21.
[13]	李锋, 盛洁, 黄炜. 教育数字化转型的突破点：智能教材的设计与实现[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(3): 101-109.
[14]	朱德全, 彭洪莉. 教师跨学科教学素养测评模型实证研究[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(2): 1-13.
[15]	韩玉梅, [美]严文蕃, 蒋丹. 探索增值评价的中国路向：基于美国实践经验的批判性分析[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2023, 41(2): 63-80.