教師教育范式研究
發(fā)布時間：2018-09-11 17:14
【摘要】： 隨著后現(xiàn)代社會的到來,傳統(tǒng)教師教育已經(jīng)不能適應(yīng)時代發(fā)展的需要而面臨著范式的變革。教師教育范式何去何從是擺在我們面前的一個非�，F(xiàn)實和重要的任務(wù),對此我們必須做出選擇。 本文從庫恩范式入手,在解讀庫恩范式理論的基礎(chǔ)上,提出了教師教育范式的基本結(jié)構(gòu)與內(nèi)涵,指出實現(xiàn)教師教育范式轉(zhuǎn)變的根本原因是知識觀的變革。通過對知識觀的分析,認(rèn)為獨白知識觀所導(dǎo)致具有工具理性特點的教師教育范式,使教師教育出現(xiàn)了理論脫離實踐、科學(xué)背離倫理的危機。只有在對話知識觀基礎(chǔ)上建立起具有交往理性特點的教師教育范式,才能克服工具理性教師教育范式的危機,而且交往理性的教師教育范式已初露端倪。 本文作為一種理論研究,辯證邏輯的研究方法是必不可少的,但卻不是惟一的。邏輯方法只能保證思維形式的正確,卻不能保證思維內(nèi)容的正確性與合理性。任何理論的前提假設(shè)還必須借助于哲學(xué)的審思。因此,本研究還使用了批判性研究方法。 本文主要內(nèi)容有四章。第一章在解讀庫恩范式的基礎(chǔ)上對教師教育范式的結(jié)構(gòu)與內(nèi)涵進(jìn)行了分析與研究;第二章對獨白知識觀和對話知識觀進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)地探討,并對獨白知識觀形成的工具理性和對話知識觀形成的交往理性進(jìn)行了闡明;第三章對工具理性的教師教育范式從哲學(xué)層面、社會學(xué)層面和實踐操作層面進(jìn)行了分析,并闡述了工具理性所導(dǎo)致的危機:第四章在與第三章同樣視角下分析了對話知識觀影響下交往理性的教師教育范式的主要內(nèi)容,認(rèn)為只有交往理性的教師教育范式才能夠克服工具理性造成的教師教育的危機。 本文得出的主要結(jié)論是: 首先,庫恩提出的范式不僅只是一個概念,而是一個包含著形而上學(xué)范式、社會學(xué)范式和人工范式等三個層面有機統(tǒng)一的系統(tǒng)理論。實現(xiàn)范式轉(zhuǎn)變的根本因素是科學(xué)共同體知識觀的改變。教師教育范式也是一個包含著這三個層面的系統(tǒng)理論。教師教育的人文性和實踐性決定了教師教育范式在內(nèi)涵上不同于庫恩的自然科學(xué)范式。它不只是一個理論范式,而且是理論研究與實踐操作融為一體的范式。教師教育共同體知識觀的改變是實現(xiàn)教師教育范式轉(zhuǎn)變的根本因素。 其次,根據(jù)認(rèn)識主體與認(rèn)識對象之間的關(guān)系,將知識觀分為獨白知識觀和對話知識觀。獨白知識觀建立在主客體關(guān)系基礎(chǔ)上,將一切認(rèn)識對象視為客體,認(rèn)識對象是認(rèn)識主體為滿足自身需要和欲望的工具,獨白知識觀只能將主觀和客觀的統(tǒng)一或者符合視為衡量知識的標(biāo)準(zhǔn),知識是終極的真理;在主客關(guān)系中,只有獨白,沒有對話。對話知識觀建立在主體間關(guān)系之上,將認(rèn)識對象視為主體。主體雙方之間是一種“互為主體”的平等交流、相互理解的交往對話關(guān)系。知識的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)是開放的,是認(rèn)識者與認(rèn)識對象通過交往對話形成的“共識”。 再次,傳統(tǒng)教師教育范式是建立在獨白知識觀基礎(chǔ)上的具有濃厚工具理性特點的范式。其工具理性特點主要表現(xiàn)為:在專家共同體的信念中,將教師教育類比為職業(yè)技術(shù)或醫(yī)學(xué)、法律等科學(xué);教師是教學(xué)的“熟練技師”;在具體的教師培養(yǎng)過程中,教育專家作為主體可以按照預(yù)定目標(biāo)、計劃和標(biāo)準(zhǔn),將學(xué)習(xí)者改造成符合自己需要的、能夠有效傳遞知識的“標(biāo)準(zhǔn)工具”。學(xué)習(xí)者是被動的、被塑造和被利用的客體,沒有自己的聲音和權(quán)利;受工具理性的支配,研究者以實證主義的定量化、形式化作為教師教育研究的方法;科學(xué)知識的霸權(quán)地位剝奪了本土知識的合法性,造成了研究者對我國教師教育發(fā)展歷史、尊師重教的民族傳統(tǒng)、基本國情以及獨特的教師教育資源等的“集體遺忘”,也造成了研究者多元思想的祛魅。工具理性給教師教育帶來了巨大危機:一是理論與實踐的分離,二是科學(xué)與倫理的背離。教師教育范式的危機導(dǎo)致教師教育面臨著范式的轉(zhuǎn)變。 最后,建立在對話知識觀基礎(chǔ)上的交往理性教師教育范式已經(jīng)初露端倪。其交往理性特點已經(jīng)在共同體的信念層面、理論研究層面和實踐層面顯露出來,主要表現(xiàn)為:教師教育共同體是由教師教育的所有參與者(包括教師教育研究者、教師教育實踐者、作為對象的準(zhǔn)教師和教師以及教師教育的政策制定者等)組成的交往共同體。通過共同體成員之間的對話與交流、溝通與合作,克服了由專家共同體獨自所造成的教育、教學(xué)理論與實踐脫節(jié)的問題。在交往共同體的信念中,教師教育具有人文社會科學(xué)和實踐的性質(zhì);教師是具有自主性的主體,是文化的建構(gòu)者,是能夠?qū)ψ陨斫虒W(xué)實踐進(jìn)行反思的研究者,是教學(xué)專業(yè)發(fā)展的主人,教師自身的教學(xué)實踐知識得到重視;教師培養(yǎng)的理念也發(fā)生轉(zhuǎn)變,教師自主“成長”的觀念代替“培養(yǎng)”和“培訓(xùn)”而成為核心理念;教學(xué)概念恢復(fù)了它的本真含義,教即是學(xué),教學(xué)就是對話學(xué)習(xí)過程,對話學(xué)習(xí)克服了傳統(tǒng)的教的獨自;研究方法不再只是實證研究,還注重以理解為核心的質(zhì)的研究方法。作為教師教育發(fā)展賴以生存土壤的本土知識的重要性開始為人們所重視,交往理性教師教育范式還克服了科學(xué)與倫理的背離,當(dāng)今的教師教育已經(jīng)反映出了這一范式轉(zhuǎn)變的趨勢。只有對話的知識觀能以其自身的合理性擔(dān)當(dāng)起范式重建的重任。
[Abstract]:With the arrival of the post-modern society, the traditional teacher education has been unable to meet the needs of the development of the times and is facing the paradigm change.
Starting with Kuhn's paradigm and on the basis of interpreting Kuhn's paradigm theory, this paper puts forward the basic structure and connotation of teacher education paradigm, and points out that the fundamental reason for the transformation of teacher education paradigm is the change of knowledge view. Only by establishing a teacher education paradigm with communicative rationality on the basis of dialogical knowledge view can we overcome the crisis of instrumental rationality teacher education paradigm, and the communicative rationality teacher education paradigm has emerged.
As a theoretical study, the research method of dialectical logic is indispensable, but it is not the only one. The logical method can only guarantee the correct form of thinking, but can not guarantee the correctness and rationality of the content of thinking. Study the method.
The first chapter analyzes and studies the structure and connotation of the teacher education paradigm on the basis of the interpretation of Kuhn's paradigm; the second chapter discusses the monologue view of knowledge and the dialogue view of knowledge in detail, and expounds the instrumental rationality formed by the monologue view of knowledge and the communicative rationality formed by the dialogue view of knowledge. The third chapter analyzes the teacher education paradigm of instrumental rationality from the philosophical level, the sociological level and the practical operation level, and expounds the crisis caused by instrumental rationality: The fourth chapter analyzes the main content of the teacher education paradigm of communicative rationality under the influence of the view of dialogue knowledge from the same perspective as the third chapter, and holds that only communication exists. The rational paradigm of teacher education can overcome the crisis of teacher education caused by instrumental rationality.
The main conclusions of this paper are:
Firstly, the paradigm proposed by Kuhn is not only a concept, but also a systematic theory which contains three levels: metaphysical paradigm, sociological paradigm and artificial paradigm. The humanism and practicality of teacher education determine that the paradigm of teacher education is different from Kuhn's paradigm of Natural Science in its connotation. It is not only a theoretical paradigm, but also a paradigm integrating theoretical research and practical operation. The change of the knowledge view of teacher education community is the fundamental factor to realize the transformation of teacher education paradigm.
Secondly, according to the relationship between cognitive subject and cognitive object, knowledge view is divided into monologue knowledge view and dialogue knowledge view. Unity or conformity is regarded as the criterion to measure knowledge, and knowledge is the ultimate truth; in the relationship between subject and object, there is only monologue and no dialogue. The standard is open. It is a consensus formed by the interaction between the cognitive object and the cognitive object.
Thirdly, the traditional paradigm of teacher education is a paradigm with strong instrumental rationality based on the monologue view of knowledge. Its instrumental rationality is mainly manifested as follows: in the belief of the expert community, teachers'education is analogized to vocational technology or medicine, law and other sciences; teachers are "skilled technicians" in teaching; and in the specific training of teachers. In the process of cultivation, educational experts, as the main body, can transform learners into "standard tools" which meet their own needs and can effectively transfer knowledge according to the predetermined goals, plans and standards. The hegemonic status of scientific knowledge deprives the legitimacy of indigenous knowledge, which leads to the "collective forgetting" of the history of teacher education, the national tradition of respecting teachers and emphasizing education, the basic national conditions and the unique resources of teacher education, and also leads to the pluralism of researchers. The disenchantment of ideas and instrumental rationality have brought about great crises to teacher education: the separation of theory and practice, and the deviation of science and ethics.
Finally, the communicative rational teacher education paradigm based on the dialogical knowledge view has emerged. Its communicative rational characteristics have been revealed at the level of belief, theory and practice in the community. The main manifestation is that the teacher education community is composed of all participants in teacher education (including teacher education researchers, teaching). A communicative community consisting of practitioners of teacher education, prospective teachers, teachers, and policy makers of teacher education. Through dialogue and communication, communication and cooperation among members of the community, the problem of disconnection between education, teaching theory and practice caused by the community of experts alone is overcome. Teacher education has the nature of Humanities and Social Sciences and practice; teachers are the subject of autonomy, the builder of culture, the researcher who can reflect on their own teaching practice, the master of teaching professional development, the teacher's own teaching practical knowledge has been paid attention to; the concept of teacher training has also changed, and the teacher "becomes" independently. The concept of "long" replaces "training" and "training" and becomes the core concept; the concept of teaching restores its true meaning, teaching is learning, teaching is the process of dialogue learning, dialogue learning overcomes the independence of traditional teaching; research methods are no longer just empirical research, but also focus on understanding as the core of the qualitative research methods. The importance of indigenous knowledge in the soil on which education depends for survival has begun to be valued by people. The paradigm of communicative rational teacher education has also overcome the deviation between science and ethics. Today's teacher education has reflected the trend of this paradigm shift. Only the concept of knowledge through dialogue can play the important role of paradigm reconstruction with its own rationality.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：陜西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2008
【分類號】：G451
本文編號：2237331
[Abstract]:With the arrival of the post-modern society, the traditional teacher education has been unable to meet the needs of the development of the times and is facing the paradigm change.
Starting with Kuhn's paradigm and on the basis of interpreting Kuhn's paradigm theory, this paper puts forward the basic structure and connotation of teacher education paradigm, and points out that the fundamental reason for the transformation of teacher education paradigm is the change of knowledge view. Only by establishing a teacher education paradigm with communicative rationality on the basis of dialogical knowledge view can we overcome the crisis of instrumental rationality teacher education paradigm, and the communicative rationality teacher education paradigm has emerged.
As a theoretical study, the research method of dialectical logic is indispensable, but it is not the only one. The logical method can only guarantee the correct form of thinking, but can not guarantee the correctness and rationality of the content of thinking. Study the method.
The first chapter analyzes and studies the structure and connotation of the teacher education paradigm on the basis of the interpretation of Kuhn's paradigm; the second chapter discusses the monologue view of knowledge and the dialogue view of knowledge in detail, and expounds the instrumental rationality formed by the monologue view of knowledge and the communicative rationality formed by the dialogue view of knowledge. The third chapter analyzes the teacher education paradigm of instrumental rationality from the philosophical level, the sociological level and the practical operation level, and expounds the crisis caused by instrumental rationality: The fourth chapter analyzes the main content of the teacher education paradigm of communicative rationality under the influence of the view of dialogue knowledge from the same perspective as the third chapter, and holds that only communication exists. The rational paradigm of teacher education can overcome the crisis of teacher education caused by instrumental rationality.
The main conclusions of this paper are:
Firstly, the paradigm proposed by Kuhn is not only a concept, but also a systematic theory which contains three levels: metaphysical paradigm, sociological paradigm and artificial paradigm. The humanism and practicality of teacher education determine that the paradigm of teacher education is different from Kuhn's paradigm of Natural Science in its connotation. It is not only a theoretical paradigm, but also a paradigm integrating theoretical research and practical operation. The change of the knowledge view of teacher education community is the fundamental factor to realize the transformation of teacher education paradigm.
Secondly, according to the relationship between cognitive subject and cognitive object, knowledge view is divided into monologue knowledge view and dialogue knowledge view. Unity or conformity is regarded as the criterion to measure knowledge, and knowledge is the ultimate truth; in the relationship between subject and object, there is only monologue and no dialogue. The standard is open. It is a consensus formed by the interaction between the cognitive object and the cognitive object.
Thirdly, the traditional paradigm of teacher education is a paradigm with strong instrumental rationality based on the monologue view of knowledge. Its instrumental rationality is mainly manifested as follows: in the belief of the expert community, teachers'education is analogized to vocational technology or medicine, law and other sciences; teachers are "skilled technicians" in teaching; and in the specific training of teachers. In the process of cultivation, educational experts, as the main body, can transform learners into "standard tools" which meet their own needs and can effectively transfer knowledge according to the predetermined goals, plans and standards. The hegemonic status of scientific knowledge deprives the legitimacy of indigenous knowledge, which leads to the "collective forgetting" of the history of teacher education, the national tradition of respecting teachers and emphasizing education, the basic national conditions and the unique resources of teacher education, and also leads to the pluralism of researchers. The disenchantment of ideas and instrumental rationality have brought about great crises to teacher education: the separation of theory and practice, and the deviation of science and ethics.
Finally, the communicative rational teacher education paradigm based on the dialogical knowledge view has emerged. Its communicative rational characteristics have been revealed at the level of belief, theory and practice in the community. The main manifestation is that the teacher education community is composed of all participants in teacher education (including teacher education researchers, teaching). A communicative community consisting of practitioners of teacher education, prospective teachers, teachers, and policy makers of teacher education. Through dialogue and communication, communication and cooperation among members of the community, the problem of disconnection between education, teaching theory and practice caused by the community of experts alone is overcome. Teacher education has the nature of Humanities and Social Sciences and practice; teachers are the subject of autonomy, the builder of culture, the researcher who can reflect on their own teaching practice, the master of teaching professional development, the teacher's own teaching practical knowledge has been paid attention to; the concept of teacher training has also changed, and the teacher "becomes" independently. The concept of "long" replaces "training" and "training" and becomes the core concept; the concept of teaching restores its true meaning, teaching is learning, teaching is the process of dialogue learning, dialogue learning overcomes the independence of traditional teaching; research methods are no longer just empirical research, but also focus on understanding as the core of the qualitative research methods. The importance of indigenous knowledge in the soil on which education depends for survival has begun to be valued by people. The paradigm of communicative rational teacher education has also overcome the deviation between science and ethics. Today's teacher education has reflected the trend of this paradigm shift. Only the concept of knowledge through dialogue can play the important role of paradigm reconstruction with its own rationality.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：陜西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2008
【分類號】：G451
【引證文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前4條
1 蔣馨嵐;傳統(tǒng)與超越：師范生免費教育制度的價值研究[D];華中科技大學(xué);2011年
2 黎志華;教師教育評價研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2011年
3 羅華莉;中國古代公共園林故事性研究[D];北京林業(yè)大學(xué);2011年
4 徐紅;新政策背景下專家型教師素質(zhì)與行為標(biāo)準(zhǔn)研究[D];華中師范大學(xué);2012年
相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前6條
1 林克松;初中教師校本學(xué)習(xí)環(huán)境研究[D];西南大學(xué);2011年
2 陳國民;論學(xué)校對話管理模式及其實現(xiàn)[D];華東師范大學(xué);2011年
3 王毅磊;我國教師教育大學(xué)化的發(fā)展路徑研究[D];黑龍江大學(xué);2011年
4 賀德坤;現(xiàn)代景觀設(shè)計范式研究[D];重慶大學(xué);2010年
5 郭剛軍;生命化教學(xué)視野下的教學(xué)資源開發(fā)利用研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年
6 汪洋;高琛校長教育思想研究[D];沈陽師范大學(xué);2012年
，本文編號：2237331
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/jiaoyulunwen/jgkg/2237331.html
最近更新
教材專著
