以学为本,提高质量,内涵发展:中国大学生学情研究的学术涵义与政策价值

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2018.04.002

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 注重以"学"（学生、学习、学校）为本，提高人才培养质量，是实现高等教育内涵发展的核心要义。本研究通过梳理国内外有关大学生学习研究的主要理论和成果，总结清华大学"中国大学生学习与发展追踪研究"（China College Student Survey，CCSS）十年来在学术研究和实践改革中积累的经验与思考，结合新时代中国高等教育发展的需要与前景，提出具有中国特色的大学生学情研究的整体分析框架，并阐释大学生学情研究的学术涵义与政策价值。

关键词: 大学生学情研究, 大学生学习投入, 高等教育内涵式发展, 中国大学生学习与发展追踪研究(CCSS)

Abstract: Quality improvement through learner-centered education is the core of the sustainable develop-ment in higher education. This study is based on a review of some related theories and researches on college student learning and the experience of China College Student Survey (CCSS) over the past decade in educa-tional research and practice. Additionally, a holistic analytical framework of student learning with Chinese characteristics is developed and the policy and academic implications of the study have been discussed in the paper.

Key words: research on college student learning and development, college student engagement, sustain-able development of higher education, China College Student Survey (CCSS)

史静寰, 王文. 以学为本,提高质量,内涵发展:中国大学生学情研究的学术涵义与政策价值[J]. 华东师范大学学报(教育科学版), 2018, 36(4): 18-27+162.

SHI Jinghuan, WANG Wen. Learner-Centered Education for Sustainable Development: The Academic and Policy Implication of Research on China College Student Learning[J]. Journal of East China Normal University(Educationa, 2018, 36(4): 18-27+162.

参考文献

傅承哲. (2012). 本土化学生学习调查工具的开发初探. 复旦教育论坛, 10(3), 43-47.
龚放,吕林海. (2012). 中美研究型大学本科生学习参与差异的研究——基于南京大学和加州大学伯克利分校的问卷调查. 高等教育研究, 33(9), 90-100.
贵州大学. (2016-11-24). 贵州大学2015 年度本科教学质量报告. 2018-01-12.取自http://www.gzu.edu.cn/picture/article/2/63/5f/0f427c6148deb4fdce89ba5d7d9a/c0d46a2c-d552-4b6d-adcc-37dfcad1f33e.pdf.
华东师范大学学报教育科学版. (2018-03-10). "交叉融合的教育科学基础研究暨自然科学基金项目研讨会"举行. 2018-03-11.取自http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/buWr0PtcsVBzMIXJ9Y-J8Q.
林惠青.(2017-11-13).努力开创高等教育发展新局面. 中国教育报, 001版, 1-2.
陆根书, 胡文静, 闫妮. (2013). 大学生学习经历:概念模型与基本特征——基于西安交通大学本科生学习经历的调查分析. 高等教育研究, 34(8), 53-61.
罗燕, 海蒂·罗斯,岑逾豪. (2009). 国际比较视野中的高等教育测量——NSSE-China工具的开发:文化适应与信度、效度报告. 复旦教育论坛, 7(5), 12-18.
罗燕, 史静寰,涂冬波. (2009). 清华大学本科教育学情调查报告2009——与美国顶尖研究型大学的比较. 清华大学教育研究, 5, 1-13.
吕林海,张红霞. (2015). 中国研究型大学本科生学习参与的特征分析——基于12所中外研究型大学调查资料的比较. 教育研究, 9, 51-63.
吕林海. (2016). 大学生学习参与的理论缘起、概念延展及测量方法争议. 教育发展研究, 21, 70-77.
南京理工大学课题组. (2016-01-08). 学情调查数据在实践中的应用. CCSS 2015年度数据分析研讨会上的发言, 北京.
清华大学. (2013-09-27). 清华大学第24次教育工作讨论会开幕. 2018-03-29.取自http://news.tsinghua.edu.cn/publish/thunews/9948/2013/20130927173455499728551/20130927173455499728551_.html.
清华大学. (2018-03-29). 清华大学第25次教育工作讨论会开幕. 2018-03-29.取自http://news.tsinghua.edu.cn/publish/thunews/9648/2018/20180329192748224920128/20180329192748224920128_.html.
瞿振元. (2013). 高等教育内涵式发展的实现途径. 中国高等教育, 2, 12-13, 21.
上海师范大学高等教育研究所项目组. (2016). 大学生学习性投入的理论与实践. 上海:上海教育出版社.
史静寰. (2016). 走向质量治理:中国大学生学情调查的现状与发展. 中国高教研究, 2, 37-41.
史秋衡,郭建鹏. (2012). 我国大学生学情状态与影响机制的实证分析. 教育研究, 2, 109-121.
涂冬波, 史静寰,郭芳芳. (2013). 中国大学生学习性投入调查问卷的测量学研究. 复旦教育论坛, 1, 55-62.
汪雅霜. (2013). 大学生学习投入度的实证研究——基于2012年"国家大学生学习情况调查"数据分析. 中国高教研究, 1, 32-36.
王文, 张清,史静寰. (2014). 基于学习过程的基础学科拔尖人才培养研究——以山东大学泰山学堂为例. 大学教育科学, 2, 58-64.
王战军. (2013). 推进内涵式发展提高高等教育质量. 北京联合大学学报, 27(2), 1-5.
魏署光,陈敏. (2016). 本科生学习效果影响机制研究——基于华中科技大学SSLD的分析. 高等工程教育研究, 2, 167-173.
文雯,管浏斯. (2012). 自主招生学生大学学习过程初探——以九所"985"、"211"高校自主招生群体为例的实证研究. 清华大学教育研究, 33(3), 98-104.
新华网. (2018-03-11). 刘伟:高等教育自信是文化自信的有机组成部分. 2018-03-29.取自http://www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2018lh/2018-03/11/c_129827408.htm.
吴岩. (2014). 高等教育公共治理与"五位一体"评估制度创新. 中国高教研究, 12, 14-18.
徐波. (2013). 高校学生投入:从理论到实践. 教育研究, 7, 147-154.
杨立军,韩晓玲. (2014). 基于NSSE-CHINA问卷的大学生学习投入结构研究. 复旦教育论坛, 12(3), 83-90.
杨钋,许申. (2010). 本专科学生能力发展的对比研究——基于"2008年首都高校学生发展状况调查"相关数据的分析. 教育发展研究, 5, 17-22.
尹弘飚. (2016). 大学生学习投入的研究路径及其转型. 高等教育研究, 11, 70-76.
曾家延. (2017). 指向大规模测量建构的学生参与研究评析. 比较教育研究, 4, 46-53.
张娜. (2012). 国内外学习投入及其学校影响因素研究综述. 心理研究, 5(2), 83-92.
中国高等教育学会专题研究组.(2017).走向2030:中国高等教育现代化建设之路.中国高教研究, 5, 1-14.
中国青年网. (2018-03-08). 全国政协委员张炜:高等教育既要重数量也要重质量. 2018-03-29.取自http://news.youth.cn/2018qglhyc/201803/t20180308_11480538.htm.
中青在线. (2018-03-05). 吕建代表:追求内涵式发展的高等教育没有休止符. 2018-03-29.取自http://news.cyol.com/content/2018-03/05/content_16992553.htm.
赵炬明. (2018). 聚焦设计:实践与方法——美国以学生为中心的本科教学改革研究之三(下), 高等工程教育研究, 3. 2018-04-03.取自http://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/EP1SGM5ETmNAdSNm-dYO8g.
周廷勇, 周作宇,杜瑞军. (2016). 大学生发展的影响因素模型:一个理论构想. 教育学报. 12(5), 68-80.
周廷勇,周作宇. (2012). 高校学生发展影响因素的探索性研究. 复旦教育论坛, 10(3), 48-55, 86.
朱红. (2010). 高校学生参与度及其成长的影响机制——十年首都大学生发展数据分析. 清华大学教育研究, 31(6), 35-43, 63.
Appleton, J. J., Christenson, S. L., Kim, D., & Reschly, A. L. (2006). Measuring cognitive and psychological engagement:Validation of the Student Engagement Instrument. Journal of School Psychology, 44,427-445.
Arnett, J. J. (1997). Young people's conceptions of the transition to adulthood. Youth & Society, 29(1):2-23.
Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging adulthood:A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5):469-480.
Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement:A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What Matters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited. San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Christenson, S. L., Reschly, A. L., Appleton, J. J., Berman, S., Spanjers, D., & Varro, P. (2008). Best practices in fostering student engagement. In A. Thomas & J. Grimes (Eds.), Best practices in school psychology (5th ed.). Bethesda, MD:National Association of School Psychologists.
Finn, J. D. (1993). School engagement and students at risk. Washington, DC:National Center for Education Statistics.
Finn, J. D. (2006). The adult lives of at-risk students:The roles of attainment and engagement in high school (NCES 2006-328). Washington, DC:National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education.
Fredricks, J. A., Blumenfeld, P., & Paris, A. (2004). School engagement:Potential of the concept, state of the evidence. Review of Educational Research, 74, 59-109.
Fryer, L., & Gijbels, D. (2017). Student Learning in Higher Education:Where We Are and Paths Forward. Educational Psychology Review, 29, 199-203.
Hu, S. & Kuh, G.D. (2003). Diversity Experiences and College Student Learning and Development. Journal of College Student Development, 44, 320-334.
Kahu, E. R. (2013). Framing student engagement in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 38, 758-773.
Kezar, A., & J. Kinzie. (2006). Examining the ways institutions create student engagement:The role of mission. Journal of College Student Development, 47, 149-172.
Khan, P. E. (2014). Theorising student engagement in higher education. British Educational Research Journal, 40, 1005-1018.
Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement:Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 141, 5-20.
Luo, Y. (2015). Learning ants:A portrait of Chinese college students in mass higher education. In J. C. Shin, G. A. Postiglione, & F. Huang (Eds.), Mass higher education development in East Asia:Strategy, quality, and challenges (pp. 177-188). Cham:Springer International Publishing.
McCormick, A. C., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2013). Student engagement:Bridging research and practice to improve the quality of undergraduate education. In M. B. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education:Handbook of theory and research, (Vol. 28, pp. 47-92). Dordrecht:Springer.
National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). (2018). About NSSE. 2018-01-10.取自http://nsse.indiana.edu/html/about.cfm.
Newmann, F.M., Wehlage, G. G., & S. Lamborn. (1992). The significance and sources of student engagement. In Student engagement and achievement in American secondary schools, ed. F.M. Newmann, (pp. 11-39). New York:Teachers College Press.
Pace, C. R. (1980). Measuring the quality of student effort. Current Issues in Higher Education, 2, 10-16.
Pace, C. R. (1984). Measuring the quality of college student experiences. An account of the development and use of the College Student Experiences Questionnaire. Los Angeles:Higher Education Research Institute.
Pascarella, E.T. (1985). College environmental influences on learning and cognitive development:A critical review and synthesis. In:Smart, J.C. (ed.) Higher education:Handbook of theory and research. (pp. 1-62). New York:Agathon.
Pike, G. R. & Kuh, G. D. (2005). A typology of student engagement for American colleges and universities. Research in Higher Education, 2, 285-209.
Pintrich, P. R. (2004). A conceptual framework for assessing motivation and self-regulated learning in college students. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 385-407.
Richardson, J. T. E. (2004). Methodological Issues in Questionnaire-Based Research on Student Learning in Higher Education. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 347-358.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College:Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. 2nd ed. Chicago, IL:University of Chicago Press.
Vermunt, J. D., & Vermetten, Y. J. (2004). Patterns in student learning:Relationships between learning strategies, conceptions of learning, and learning orientations. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 359-384.
Yazzie-Mintz, E., & McCormick, K. (2012). Finding the humanity in the data:Understanding, measuring and strengthening student engagement. In S. L. Christenson, A. L. Reschly & C. Wylie (Eds.), Handbook of research on student engagement. (pp. 743-761). New York:Springer.
Wang, M., & Eccles, J. S. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement:A longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning and Instruction, 28, 12-23.
Zepke, N. (2014). Student engagement research in higher education:Questioning an academic orthodoxy. Teaching in Higher Education, 19, 697-708.
Zepke, N. (2015). Student engagement research thinking beyond the mainstream. Higher Education Research and Development, 34, 1311-1323.
Zusho, A. (2017). Toward an Integrated Model of Student Learning. Educational Psychology Review, 16, 301-324.