本文選題：教師 + 師道　； 參考：《陜西師范大學(xué)》2012年博士論文

【摘要】：作為教師專業(yè)發(fā)展標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中唯一的制度標(biāo)準(zhǔn),教師倫理規(guī)范已引起學(xué)界的廣泛關(guān)注,已成為教師專業(yè)發(fā)展進(jìn)程中國(guó)內(nèi)外學(xué)者競(jìng)相研究的重點(diǎn)問(wèn)題之一。 對(duì)教師倫理規(guī)范的研究分為兩個(gè)維度：一個(gè)是制度倫理,就是制度蘊(yùn)涵的倫理價(jià)值和道德原則等。它是對(duì)教師制度建設(shè)的道德關(guān)注,也指制度的合道德性,就是對(duì)制度的倫理評(píng)價(jià),偏重于以特定的道德要求和倫理原則為依據(jù)的制度設(shè)立,以及人們對(duì)倫理評(píng)價(jià)的正當(dāng)性和合理性,從這兩個(gè)方面來(lái)考察制度倫理的內(nèi)容。制度倫理,從廣義上來(lái)講,是指對(duì)社會(huì)性組織的規(guī)范體系和運(yùn)行機(jī)制的倫理要求和反思,即對(duì)社會(huì)組織制度化、規(guī)范化的倫理的思考與建構(gòu)。而從狹義來(lái)看,則是指對(duì)社會(huì)性正式組織為主體的規(guī)范體系和運(yùn)行機(jī)制的內(nèi)在聯(lián)系的倫理思考和要求。另一個(gè)是倫理制度,也稱“倫理性的制度”,既包含制度的合乎倫理的道德性,又包含人們把一定的道德要求和社會(huì)倫理原則提升并規(guī)定為制度。它凝結(jié)了制度評(píng)價(jià)和道德實(shí)現(xiàn)兩個(gè)問(wèn)題,是人們從制度系統(tǒng)中汲取的道德觀念和倫理意識(shí)與制度倫理化和倫理制度化兩個(gè)方面雙向互動(dòng)的有機(jī)統(tǒng)一。本文將教師倫理規(guī)范的研究界定為第二種含義,即以教師倫理規(guī)范作為教師專業(yè)的制度性實(shí)在之本質(zhì)為出發(fā)點(diǎn),圍繞對(duì)教師倫理規(guī)范的“規(guī)范性”特征和建構(gòu)要求展開(kāi)研究。這就決定了本文的基本研究范圍和研究主題。 教育的對(duì)象是人,教育的目的在于引領(lǐng)人們追求美好的社會(huì)生活,所以整個(gè)教育過(guò)程自始至終都蘊(yùn)含著一定的價(jià)值取舍,其中教師是一個(gè)很重要的因素。積極的教師智慧使人朝向正直,如若不然,教師言行失范則可能導(dǎo)致害人害己的至深后果。何以建立一個(gè)良善的倫理規(guī)范以約束教師的合理道德價(jià)值,并實(shí)現(xiàn)教師典范作用就是本研究的基本目的。圍繞這一目的,本文憑借三個(gè)理論論據(jù)對(duì)教師倫理規(guī)范進(jìn)行探本溯源：一是“他山之石”,借助制度經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)中對(duì)制度研究的成果來(lái)探討教育制度中教師倫理規(guī)范的存在問(wèn)題。這是一種“移植”方式,提出作為“倫理制度”的教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范,本身就是制度的一種,并不是制度化了的(道德)倫理。這一路徑解決的是教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范在制度體系中的定位問(wèn)題。第二個(gè)理論論據(jù)是“一脈相承”,傳承中國(guó)古代“禮”的遺風(fēng),回顧其在我國(guó)規(guī)范發(fā)展過(guò)程中“禮”的制度性特征,以及“法”“禮”有別、引“禮”入“法”等優(yōu)秀文化傳統(tǒng),以此啟發(fā)現(xiàn)代教師制度體系建設(shè)的思路。這一路徑解決的是教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范的歸屬問(wèn)題。第三個(gè)理論論據(jù)是“正本清源”,通過(guò)與教育行政法律規(guī)范及其它行政制度的比較,辨析屬于道德立法的教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范不能由行政法規(guī)取代的制度屬性,厘清教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范的倫理制度特征。這一路徑解決的是教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范的本質(zhì)問(wèn)題。這一“本質(zhì)”與前面的“定位”和“歸屬”一起,合力解答了教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范究竟“是什么”這一基本問(wèn)題。回答了教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范的基本問(wèn)題之后,本文將圍繞與其緊密相關(guān)的問(wèn)題展開(kāi)研究,并得出如下結(jié)論： 首先,教師倫理規(guī)范是教師專業(yè)發(fā)展的必然。人性不僅需要法規(guī)的約束,更需要倫理制度的規(guī)約。當(dāng)前教師道德的滑坡、行為的失范、形象的褪色等問(wèn)題的出現(xiàn),引發(fā)教師群體對(duì)職業(yè)威望的思慮以及教師個(gè)體對(duì)自身職責(zé)的思考,反思的結(jié)果是：無(wú)論是追隨教師行業(yè)發(fā)展的腳蹤、探究教師角色變化的規(guī)律,還是追求自身精神價(jià)值,都會(huì)聚焦到教師專業(yè)倫理規(guī)范建設(shè)的問(wèn)題上來(lái)。 其次,教師倫理規(guī)范是教師內(nèi)在自律的道德法則。教師成為自身的法則建立者,這一點(diǎn)才是教師規(guī)范性的來(lái)源。教師倫理規(guī)范作為一種道德要求或命令,是由道德行為者自身,即教師自己提出來(lái)的,是出于自身的理性和情感,是一種內(nèi)在規(guī)范。這種道德要求需要教師理性的自我意識(shí)以及堅(jiān)定的職業(yè)信念提出并實(shí)施。教師對(duì)于自身行動(dòng)的自我意識(shí)反思的能力,賦予他們對(duì)自身的權(quán)威,正是這種權(quán)威給予道德要求以規(guī)范性。 最后,教師倫理規(guī)范是師道與師德合一的結(jié)果。教師倫理制度建設(shè)不能脫離教師的人格特點(diǎn),而作為倫理制度的制定與運(yùn)行同樣應(yīng)當(dāng)貫徹“人”的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。具體來(lái)說(shuō),教師倫理規(guī)范應(yīng)該既具有教師內(nèi)在的精神價(jià)值追求,也應(yīng)該賦予合理的外在形式。前者是重?fù)P師道,后者是蓄善為“德”,最終實(shí)現(xiàn)師道與師德合一,是教師倫理規(guī)范制度建設(shè)的根本路徑。因?yàn)椤皫煹馈笔且环N人格的、愿望的“自然”道德,是教師的精神價(jià)值的追求；而“師德”則是關(guān)于教師職業(yè)活動(dòng)與專業(yè)行為本身的規(guī)范,屬于教師“約定”的“義務(wù)”的道德,是教師的行為準(zhǔn)則。二者通達(dá)現(xiàn)代教師道德生活的兩條路徑——道德與規(guī)范、自然與約成,互相并行,相互給力,合而為一,有助于教師個(gè)體“秀外慧中”,促進(jìn)教師群體專業(yè)發(fā)展。
[Abstract]:As the only system standard in the standard of teacher's professional development, teachers' ethical standards have aroused extensive concern in the academic circles, and have become one of the key issues in the study of Chinese and foreign scholars in the course of teachers' professional development.
The study of teachers' ethical norms is divided into two dimensions: one is system ethics, that is, ethical values and moral principles implicative of the system. It is a moral concern for the construction of the system of teachers, and it also refers to the moral character of the system, the ethical evaluation of the system, and the establishment of a system based on the specific moral requirements and ethical principles. As well as the legitimacy and rationality of ethical evaluation, the content of institutional ethics is examined from these two aspects. In a broad sense, institutional ethics refers to the ethical requirements and Reflection on the normative and operational mechanisms of social organizations, namely, the thinking and construction of the institutionalized and standardized ethics of social organizations. It refers to the ethical thinking and requirements of the internal relations between the normative and operational mechanisms of the social formal organization, and the other is the ethical system, also called the "ethical system", which includes both ethical and ethical principles, and the promotion and regulation of certain moral demands and social ethics principles. There are two problems in the system evaluation and moral realization, which are the organic unity of people's moral concept and ethical consciousness derived from the system system and the two aspects of institutional ethics and ethical institutionalization. This paper defines the study of teachers' ethical norms as second meanings, that is, teachers' ethical norms as teachers' professional system. The essence of the degree of reality is the starting point for the study of the "normative" characteristics and construction requirements of teachers' ethical norms. This determines the scope of the basic research and the subject of the study.
The object of education is people. The purpose of education is to lead people to pursue a good social life. So the whole process of education contains a certain value choice from the beginning to the end. The teacher is a very important factor. The positive teacher wisdom makes the person toward integrity, if not, the teacher's anomie may lead to the harm of others. The basic purpose of this study is to establish a good ethical standard to constrain the reasonable moral values of teachers and to realize the exemplary role of teachers. In this paper, the author traced the source of teachers' ethical norms with three theoretical arguments: one is "his mountain stone" and the institutional study of institutional economics. This is a kind of "transplant" way of teacher professional ethics, which is a kind of system, not institutionalized (moral) ethics. This path solves the orientation of teachers' professional ethics in the system system. The second theoretical arguments are "one continuous line", inheriting the legacy of the ancient Chinese "Rites", reviewing the institutional characteristics of the "Rites" in the course of the standard development of China, as well as the distinction between "law" and "Rites", and introducing "Rites" into the "law" and other excellent cultural traditions, in order to enlighten the construction of modern teachers system. The third theory argument is "the original origin". Through the comparison with the legal norms of educational administration and other administrative systems, the paper identifies the institutional attributes of teachers' professional ethics which belong to the moral legislation which can not be replaced by the administrative regulations and clarify the ethical system of the professional ethics of teachers. This path solves the essential problem of teachers' professional ethics. This "essence", together with the preceding "orientation" and "belonging", answers the basic question of what is the "what" of the teacher's professional ethics. After answering the basic questions of the teacher's professional ethics, this article will be closely related to it. The problem is studied and the following conclusions are drawn.
First, teachers' ethical norms are the inevitable development of teachers' professional development. Human nature needs not only the restriction of laws and regulations, but also the regulations of the ethical system. The emergence of the current problems of the decline of teachers' morality, the anomie of behavior, the discoloration of the image, and the reflection of teachers' individual to their own responsibilities, and the results of reflection. It is: whether to follow the footsteps of the development of the teacher industry, to explore the law of the change of the teacher's role, or to pursue its own spiritual value, will focus on the problem of the construction of teachers' professional ethics.
Secondly, teachers' ethical norms are the moral principles of teachers' internal self-discipline. Teachers are the founders of their own laws. This is the source of teachers' standardization. As a moral requirement or order, teachers' ethical norms are made by the moral actors themselves, that is, teachers themselves. This moral requirement requires teachers' rational self consciousness and firm professional beliefs to put forward and implement them. Teachers' ability to reflect on self consciousness of their own actions, and give them authority for themselves, is precisely the authority that gives moral requirements to standard.
Finally, the ethical norms of teachers are the result of the combination of teacher ethics and teacher ethics. The construction of teachers' ethical system should not be divorced from the personality characteristics of teachers, but as the formulation and operation of the ethical system, the standard of "human" should be carried out as well. In particular, the ethical norms of teachers should not only have the spiritual values in the teachers, but also should be given a reasonable value. The former is to carry forward the teacher's road, the latter is to save the good and the "Virtue", the ultimate realization of the combination of the teacher's ethics and the teacher ethics, which is the basic path for the construction of the teacher's ethical standard system. The behavior of industry norms, belongs to the teachers "engagement" "moral obligation", is the teacher's code of conduct. Two access to modern teachers and moral life of the two paths: morality and norms about nature and, in parallel, are awesome, help teachers be made one, individual "pretty and intelligent". To promote teachers professional development.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：陜西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號(hào)】：G451.1

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 潘效蘭;紀(jì)律、法律和道德倫理規(guī)范的比較分析[J];安徽電力職工大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào);2002年02期

2 談儒強(qiáng);;探尋師道走向 確立師德坐標(biāo)[J];合肥師范學(xué)院學(xué)報(bào);2011年05期

3 袁祖社;;文化的倫理本質(zhì)與現(xiàn)代德性生活的價(jià)值真理——公共生活中“誠(chéng)”與“真”品質(zhì)的回歸[J];北京大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2011年04期

4 秦越存;麥金太爾的實(shí)踐觀及其意義[J];北方論叢;2005年04期

5 王曉輝;;《關(guān)于歐洲高等教育倫理價(jià)值和原則的布加勒斯特宣言》的解讀與思考[J];比較教育研究;2010年08期

6 李·Ｓ·舒爾曼,王幼真,劉捷;理論、實(shí)踐與教育的專業(yè)化[J];比較教育研究;1999年03期

7 李永華;;公德還是私德?——關(guān)于師德含義的思考[J];教育與教學(xué)研究;2011年12期

8 卞開(kāi)悅;;規(guī)范倫理與美德倫理理論范型淺析[J];成功(教育);2008年06期

9 劉云林;教育倫理規(guī)范形式合理性探析[J];道德與文明;2003年01期

10 方德志;;論亞里士多德“自然”德性倫理學(xué)對(duì)德性倫理學(xué)復(fù)興的啟示[J];道德與文明;2010年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 記者 李江濤;[N];新華每日電訊;2011年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 熊建輝;教師專業(yè)標(biāo)準(zhǔn)研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2008年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 寧團(tuán)紅;論蘇霍姆林斯基的教育倫理思想[D];上海師范大學(xué);2003年

，

本文編號(hào)：1926684