华东师范大学学报(教育科学版) ›› 2023, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (11): 85-96.doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2023.11.007

• 基本理论与基本问题 • 上一篇    下一篇

加强中国教育量化研究的可重复性

李毅1,2,3, 张涧清4, 杨焱灵5   

  1. 1. 西南大学教育学部,重庆 400715
    2. 西南大学基础教育研究中心,重庆,400715
    3. 中国基础教育质量监测协同创新西南大学分中心,重庆 400715
    4. 西南大学附属小学,重庆400700
    5. 重庆市渝中区中华路小学,重庆 400010
  • 接受日期:2022-05-16 出版日期:2023-11-01 发布日期:2023-10-27
  • 基金资助:
    全国教育科学规划国家一般项目“新时代初中生阅读素养发展指数建构与应用研究”(BHA210150)

Strengthen Replication of Educational Quantitative Research in China

Yi Li1,2,3, Jianqing Zhang4, Yanling Yang5   

  1. 1. Faculty of Education, Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China
    2. Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment Toward Basic Education Quality Southwest University Branch, Chongqing 400715, China
    3. Basic Education Research Center of Southwest University, Chongqing 400715, China
    4. Primary School Attached to Southwest University, Chongqing 400700, China
    5. Zhonghua Road Primary School, Yuzhong District, Chongqing 400010, China
  • Accepted:2022-05-16 Online:2023-11-01 Published:2023-10-27

摘要:

本研究理论辨析了可重复原则、研究的可重复性与重复性研究的关系, 探讨了重复性研究的精确重复、直接重复、概念重复等三种类型 及其验证和延展两重功能 , 并阐述了教育量化研究可重复性的意义和价值。在此基础上, 以我国37本教育学类CSSCI期刊在2015—2020年间发表的重复性量化研究为对象,分析了我国教育量化研究可重复性的现状和问题。研究发现:可重复性是创新性研究的基本立场未得到充分认识;量化研究基础薄弱致使可重复性的确证存在困难;对复现失败的误解带来了对“可重复危机”的恐慌;传统思维惯性阻碍原始研究团队的持续跟进。最后,本文建议加强对重复性研究价值的认识, 建立重复性研究激励机制; 加强研究者量化研究方法训练,搭建开放科学平台促使“黑箱”变“白箱”;克服重复性研究“唯成功率”思想,打造稳定团体形成研究集群。

关键词: 可重复性, 量化研究, 重复性研究, 科学化, 南大核心

Abstract:

In this study, the principle of replication, replication of research and repeated research were discriminated theoretically. Then it discussed three types of repeated research (exact, direct and conceptual) and two functions (validation and extension) and elaborated the meaning and value of replication. Based on that, this study took the repeated quantitative research published in 37 educational CSSCI journals from 2015 to 2020 as samples to analyze the current situation and the problems of replication for the educational quantitative research in China. The study found that it is not fully recognized that replication is the basic position of innovative research; the undeveloped foundation of quantitative research leads to the difficulty in conducting repeated researches; the failure of replication is misunderstood, which leads to the panic of ‘replication crisis’; the traditional thinking inertia hinders the original research teams to continue their original research interest. Accordingly, the study presented the following suggestions: reinforce understanding of the value of repeated research, establish incentive mechanism of repeated research; strengthen training of researchers in quantitative research methods, build an open science platform to turn the ‘black box’ into the ‘white box; overcome the stereotype of “success rate only”, build a stable research team to follow up and form research clusters.

Key words: replication, quantitative research, repeated research, scientization, CSSCI