研究生: |
秦啟光 Qin, Qi-Guang |
---|---|
論文名稱: |
「縣管校聘」背景下大陸鄉村教師流動場域邏輯之個案研究 A case study of the field logic behind rural teacher mobility under the “Xian Guan Xiao Pin” policy in Mainland China |
指導教授: |
甄曉蘭
Chen, Hsiao-Lan Sharon |
口試委員: |
張建成
Zhang, Jian-Chang 許殷宏 Xu, Yin-Hong 卯靜儒 Mao, Chin-Ju 沈姍姍 Shen, Shan-Shan 甄曉蘭 Chen, Hsiao-Lan Sharon |
口試日期: | 2022/06/07 |
學位類別: |
博士 Doctor |
系所名稱: |
教育學系 Department of Education |
論文出版年: | 2022 |
畢業學年度: | 110 |
語文別: | 中文 |
論文頁數: | 232 |
中文關鍵詞: | 中國大陸 、縣管校聘 、鄉村教師 、流動場域 、場域邏輯 、個案研究 |
英文關鍵詞: | Mainland China, Xian Guan Xiao Pin, Rural Teacher, Mobility Field, Field logic, Case Study |
研究方法: | 調查研究 、 個案研究法 、 觀察研究 、 文件分析法 、 深度訪談法 、 內容分析法 、 半結構式訪談法 、 田野調查法 |
DOI URL: | http://doi.org/10.6345/NTNU202200734 |
論文種類: | 學術論文 |
相關次數: | 點閱:131 下載:21 |
分享至: |
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報 |
本研究結合法國社會學家Bourdieu的場域理論,以中國大陸鄉村教師流動場域作為研究主題,通過對烏城縣個案的深度田野考察,揭示出大陸鄉村教師流動場域所遵循的邏輯。為了保證研究的效度,本研究將烏城個案進行了層次劃分,國家政策、教育行政系統、鄉村學校、城鄉校長和教師個體均被納入到烏城這個整體性個案的分析單位中,研究者採用觀察、訪談、文件分析等質性研究工具深入鄉村學校開展實地調查,收集了一手田野資料。此外,為能夠在縣域層面了解鄉村教師的流動意願及真實流動狀況,研究者對烏城縣全體鄉村教師發放了問卷。基於豐富的資料,本研究得出以下研究發現:
(一)在鄉村教師流動場域的建構過程中,國家通過流動政策實施了一種控制的邏輯,流動場域成為國家控制的一個單元。
(二)從烏城鄉村教師流動的實際狀況來看,「縣管校聘」政策實施之後,流動現況表現為三個方面:城區教師依舊難以流至鄉村、鄉村骨幹教師流失愈加嚴重、城鄉師資不均衡變得更加突出。
(三)在城市化大潮中,城鄉學校表現出了許多差異,在這個過程中鄉村學校逐步衰落,鄉村學校空間內確立起了以骨幹教師為主的流動主體。
(四)鄉村教師個體參與流動場域的實踐時,雖然遵循場域的規則,但其流動的驅動力受到家庭的決定性影響,從而,個體表現出以理性為特點的自主邏輯。
中國大陸鄉村教師流動場域邏輯存在兩種矛盾張力,使其不同於布式場域邏輯。進一步說明,中國田野中的場域發生了異變,「場域代理人」的作用、場域的共構作用推動了此種異變,而中西社會結構的差異為中國鄉村教師流動場域邏輯與布式場域邏輯不同提供了土壤,因此,研究者將布式場域稱之為等級場域,中國田野中的場域是一種差序場域。差序場域使個體在實踐中產生了對流動道德話語的排序,以自我為中心展開流動實踐,從而使一種新資本得以誕生。本研究將「同構資本」等同於Bourdieu場域中所謂的權力資本,而「異構資本」代表了個體實踐行動的動力來源,從個體實踐層面拓展了資本的邊界。
大陸鄉村教師流動長期存在一種政策預期和流動現實悖反的現象,即均衡政策導向下的個體集聚,場域視角更能解釋此種悖反現象。本研究指出,中西方社會差異下,現代性國家倡導的道德話語,難以被差序場域中的個體完全接受,這是造成鄉村教師流動場域中流動悖反現象的深層文化根源。本研究得出三個結論:
(一)以「縣管校聘」為代表的流動政策加劇了鄉村教師的向城流動。
(二)鄉村教師流動場域的邏輯呈現出兩種張力,使其不同於布式場域邏輯。
(三)鄉村教師的向城流動是現代化進程中中國文化傳統性的一種展示。
Based on Bourdieu’s Field Theory, this study focuses on the logic of the field where rural teacher mobility is viewed as a social space. It is aimed to explore the logic of this field through qualitative case study of Wu-Cheng County in Mainland China under the policy of “Xian Guan Xiao Pin”, which means teachers are employed by schools, but managed by local government. Research methods such as observation, in-depth interview and document analysis were applied for data collection. In order to capture teacher’s intention for switching schools and the teacher turnover rate, a questionnaire survey was conducted among all school administrators and teachers in Wu-Cheng rural schools. For validation process, the researcher collected and analyzed data from multiple sources, including the national policy, the education administrative system, the rural schools, views from principals and teachers of urban and rural schools. Based on the analysis of the aforementioned data, the findings of this study are as follows:
1. In the formation of the rural teacher mobility field, the State implements the mobility policy which embodied a logic of control. Therefore, the field becomes a controlled unit by the State, which is a mixture of status, discourse, operation of the mechanism and so on.
2. After the implementation of “Xian Guan Xiao Pin” policy, the migration of rural teacher in Wu-Cheng features three main characters: First, the policy did not fulfill the intended goal to encourage urban teacher to relocate to rural school. Secondly, attrition of the outstanding staffs in rural school become more serious than before. Finally, the imbalance of teachers’ allocation between urban and rural schools become more prominent.
3. As the State urbanized as a result, the discrepancy between urban and rural schools even increased more in this county. During the process, the outstanding staffs of the rural schools become the key subject of the movers.
4. The practice of rural teachers in the field followed the rules of the field, however, the determined driving force behind their mobility intention were mainly from family, especially involves parenting. Thus, the individual choices revealed the independent logic characterized by rationality different from the logic of State control.
The rural teacher mobility field in China has a contradicted logic resulted from the tension between personal choice and government control, which make it different from Bourdieu’s perspective on the logic of field. And the changes of the field logic are caused by the effects of “Field Agents” as well as the co-construction from divergent fields, such as family, working environment, and etc. Further, the difference between Chinese and Western social structure provide a context to foster such changes. Therefore, the researcher refers to Bourdieusien field as “Hierarchical Field” and the field in China as “Prioritized Field”. In Prioritized Field, the individuals are self-interested in their mobility. Subsequently, a new concept of capital was identified by this study. The researcher referred the power capital in Bourdieusien field as “Homologous capital”, while the new concept of capital in China, viewed from perspective of agency, referred as “Heterologous capital” that represents the driving forces of individual self-interested practice.
There is a long-stand contradiction between policy goals and mobility reality in the field. That is, the rural teachers tends to move toward city while the policy aims to bridge the educational equality between urban and rural. This study points out that referring to the perspective of the field (also understanding the logic of the field) can better explain the above mentioned contradiction. Basically, the moral discourse advocated by modern State is difficult to be fully accepted by individuals in Prioritized Field. And the social differences between China and the West is deep rooted in this contradiction of the rural teacher mobility field. At last, this study concludes that:
1. The policy of “Xian Guan Xiao Pin” intensifies rural teacher’s migration toward city.
2. The logic of the rural teacher mobility field has two kinds of tensions, which makes it different from Bourdiuesien field logic.
3. The rural teacher’s migration towards city reflects a traditional Chinese cultural value manifested in the process modernization.
壹、中文文獻
中共中央國務院(2020年2月5日)。關於抓好「三農」領域重點工作,確保如期實現全面小康的意見。http://www.moa.gov.cn/ztzl/jj2020zyyhwj/2020zyyhwj/
202002/t20200205_6336614.htm
中國社會科學院語言研究所(2020)。新華字典(雙色本)。商務印書館。
孔祥淵(2014)。「混日子」:生活在別處——一項關於部分農村教師工作狀態的質性研究。上海教育科研,9,30-33。
方徵、謝辰(2016)。「縣管校聘」教師流動政策的實施困境與改進。教育發展研究,8,72-76。
王彥才(2014)。中小學教師流動:問題及對策——基於海南省中小學教師流動現狀的調查分析。教師教育研究,2,28-32。
王靜(2009)。經濟學基礎。科學出版社。
王營(2020年8月12日)。「縣管校聘」的好經不能念歪了。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=743160068022734848
王艷玲、李慧琴(2017)。鄉村教師流動及流失意願的實證分析——基於雲南的調查。華東師範大學學報(教育科學版),3,134-141。
王艷玲、蘇萍、苟順明(2017)。特崗教師流動及流失意願的影響因素分析——基於雲南的調查。教師教育研究,5,7-13。
付建軍(2011)。美國農村教師隊伍建設的現狀、路徑和啟示。當代教育科學,11,35-37。
代蕊華、郭志慜(2020)。什麼樣的學校教師流失率更高?教師教育研究,5,46-53。
申荷永(1999)。充滿動力的生活空間。湖北教育出版社。
石亞兵(2017)。鄉村教師流動的文化動力及其變遷——基於「集體意識」理論的社會學分析。全球教育展望,11,55-66。
任敏(2020年10月28日)。鄉村教師「縣管校聘」非大張旗鼓搞聘任。北京日報客戶端。https://news.sina.com.cn/c/2020-10-28/doc-iiznctkc8178370.shtml
安田三郎(1971)。社會流動研究。東京大學出版社。
安曉敏、曹學敏(2017)。誰更願意留在農村學校任教——基於農村教師流動意願的調查分析。湖南師範大學教育科學學報,4,12-15。
成伯清(2009)。從嫉妒到怨恨——論中國社會情緒的一個側面。探索與爭鳴,10,49-52。
朱秀紅、劉善槐(2019)。鄉村青年教師的流動意願與穩定政策研究——基於個人-環境匹配理論的分析視角。教育發展研究,20,37-46。
吳志華、於蘭蘭、蘇偉麗(2011)。農村的流失:問題及解決之策。教育理論與實踐,10,3-5。
吳單(2020年10月27日)。鄉村教師縣管校聘弊大於利,應暫緩全國推行?教育部答復。南方都市報。https://m.sohu.com/a/427704717_161795?scm=1002.51
0048.1e8036e.10164-0
吳銀銀(2021)。「距城遠近」會影響農村小規模學校發展嗎——基於兩所小學的敘事分析。教育發展研究,8,54-60。
呂建(2020年10月30日b)。「縣管校聘」需解決好怎樣管,如何聘的問題。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=771761245844934656
呂建(2020年12月4日a)。縣管校聘改革要處理好幾對關係。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=784445612023091200
李志輝、王緯虹(2018)。鄉村教師離職意向影響因素實證研究——基於重慶市2505名鄉村教師調查數據的分析。教師教育研究,6,58-66。
中松義郎(1990)。人際關係方程式——用公式開拓你的人生〔李相哲、郭美蘭譯〕。灕江出版社。(原著出版年:1985)
李茂森(2019)。「縣管校聘」實施方案研究與再思考——基於浙、皖、粵、魯、閩等5省「縣管校聘」改革實施意見的內容分析。教育發展研究,2,67-72。
李茂森(2020)。中國城鄉教師交流政策的梳理與反思。當代教育論壇, 5,113-121。
李茂森、曹丹丹(2020)。我國「縣管校聘」研究的進展與反思。湖州師範學院學報,7,42-46。
李書磊(1999)。村落中的「國家」:文化變遷中的鄉村學校。浙江人民出版社。
李國強、邵光華(2019)。縣管校聘背景下教師交流現狀分析與對策。教學與管理,12,8-11。
李國強、袁舒雯、林耀(2019)。「縣管校聘」跨校交流教師歸屬感問題研究。教育發展研究,2,78-83。
李朝輝、李海瑛(2010)。中日中小學教師交流制度的比較及啟示。當代教師教育,9,42-48。
李森、汪建華(2017)。我國鄉村教育發展的歷史脈絡與現代啟示。西南大學學報(社會科學版),1,61-69。
李銀河、陳俊傑(1993)。個人本位、家本位與生育觀念。二十一世紀雙月刊,2,148-157。
杜屏、張雅楠、葉菊艷(2018)。推拉理論視野下的教師輪崗交流意願分析——基於北京市某區縣的調查。教育發展研究,4,37-44。
汪丞(2005)。中日中小學教師流動之比較及啟示。比較教育研究,11,65-69。
汪丞、方彤(2005)。日本教師「定期流動制」對我國區域內師資均衡發展的啟示。中國教育學刊,4,59-62。
沈洪成(2014)。教育下鄉:一個鄉鎮的教育治理實踐。社會學研究,2,90-115。
沈洪成(2018)。教育治理的社會邏輯:木豐中學「控輟保學」的個案研究。社會科學文獻出版社。
周其仁(2013)。城鄉中國(上)。中信出版社。
周鈞(2015)。農村學校教師流動及流失問題研究現狀與發展趨勢。教師教育研究,1,60-67。
周險峰、譚長富等(2013)。教師流動問題研究。華中科技大學出版社。
林佳、吳惠強、汪方昶(2020)。國家級試點P縣「縣管校聘」各方態度研究。上海教育科研,9,12-17。
邵學倫(2002)。關於中小學教師流動問題的思索。山東教育科研,8,13-14。
南湖市中小學教師中、高級職稱評審量化評分辦法(2020年9月16日)公佈。南湖市教育局網站文件。
姜英敏(2012)。韓國基礎教育教師職業吸引力保障制度分析。比較教育研究,8,25-29。
胡正平(2020年12月4日)。縣管校聘改革要處理好幾對關係。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=784445612023091200
胡俊升、符永川、高生軍(2015)。空心村•空殼校•進城潮——陝北六縣農村教育調查研判。高等教育出版社。
胡華(2020年10月29日)。「縣管校聘」需謹防「縣管不如現管」。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=771406184446955520
范文卿(2020)。縣管校聘教師流動政策的實施困境與破解路徑。教學與管理,1,9-11。
范囯鋒、王浩文、藍雷宇(2015)。 中小學教師流動意願及其影響因素研究——基於湖北、江西、河南3省12縣的調查。教育與經濟,2,62-66。
孫艷霞(2006)。教育政策道德性研究〔未出版之博士學位論文〕。東北師範大學。
席梅紅(2016)。論鄉村教師流失的合理性——基於公平的理論視角。上海教育科研,2,10-13。
殷智紅、葉敏(2011)。管理心理學。北京郵電大學出版社。
浙江省鄉村教育研究中心(2019)。關於破解「鄉村弱」、辦好浙江鄉村教育的調查報告〔未出版之内部資料〕。浙江省鄉村教育研究中心,湖州師範學院。
烏城縣人民政府辦公室(2017)。關於推進烏城縣中小學教師「縣管校聘」工作的實施意見〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2016)。南湖市烏城縣2015-2016學年初學校基本情況〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2017)。南湖市烏城縣2016-2017學年初學校基本情況〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2018)。關於做好2018年中小學教師專業技術資格評審工作的通知〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2018a)。南湖市烏城縣2017-2018學年初學校基本情況〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2019)。進一步推進烏城縣中小學教師「縣管校聘」管理改革工作的實施方案〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2019a)。南湖市烏城縣2018-2019學年初學校基本情況〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2020)。關於進一步完善烏城縣學校(幼兒園)崗位設置管理辦法的通知〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2020a)。南湖市烏城縣2019-2020學年初學校基本情況〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
烏城縣教育局(2021)。南湖市烏城縣2020-2021學年初學校基本情況〔未出版之内部資料〕。烏城縣教育局,烏城縣政府。
馬文起(2008)。中部地區農村教師流動的現狀分析與對策研究。河南職業技術師範學院學報(職業教育版),1,78-80。
國家統計局(2022年4月29日)。2021年農民工監測調查報告。中華人民共和國中央人民政府網站。http://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2022-04/29/content_5688043.
htm
國務院辦公廳(2015)。鄉村教師支持計劃(2015-2020年)。人民出版社。
張德、曲慶、王雪莉(2007)。人力資源管理。中國發展出版社。
張曉文、張旭(2017)。從頒佈到落實:32份《鄉村教師支持計劃》文本分析。現代教育管理,2,69-78。
教育部(2022年2月9日)。2022年工作要點。中華人民共和國教育部網站。http://www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_sjzl/moe_164/202202/t20220208_597666.html
教育部、財政部、人社部(2014年8月13日)。關於推進縣(區)域內義務教育學校校長教師交流輪崗的意見。中華人民共和國教育部網站。http://www.moe.
gov.cn/srcsite/A10/s7151/201408/t20140815_174493.html
梁好(2020年10月30日)。「縣管校聘」改革需有序推進。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=771759867529531392
陶行知著(1926)。中國鄉村教育之根本改造。中國陶行知研究會編(1986)。陶行知教育思想、理論和實踐。安徽教育出版社。
陶軍明(2007)。欠發達地區農村中小學教師流失的政策學分析:基於中部地區 P 縣的調查〔未出版之碩士學位論文〕。南京師範大學。
喻謨烈(1927)。鄉村教育。商務印書館。
曾曉東(2012)。中國中小學教師發展報告(2012)。社會科學文獻出版社。
費孝通(1993)。鄉土中國與鄉土重建。風雲時代出版公司。
費孝通(1998)。鄉土中國 生育制度。北京大學出版社。
費孝通(1999)。評晏陽初「開發民力、建設鄉村」。費孝通文集。群言出版社。
項亞光(2008)。當今美國學校教師流動的新動向——基於國家教育統計中心學校教師調查的分析。外國中小學教育,5,33-36。
馮幫、陳文博(2017)。鄉村教師面臨的現實困境與出路——對「會寧縣教師集體出走」事件的反思。教育與教學研究,1,83-90。
黃東有(2013)。長三角農村教師職業再選擇問題研究。上海教育科研,3,44-46。
黃庭康(1971)。批判教育社會學九講。社會科學文獻出版社。
黃鴻文(2011)。抗拒乎?拒絕乎?偏差乎?學生文化研究中抗拒概念之誤用與澄清。教育研究集刊,3,123-154。
黃闖(2020)。新時代鄉村教師鄉城流動的動因與治理策略。教育評論,6,109-113。
楊治(1985)。產業經濟學導論。中國人民大學出版社。
楊柳(2016)。教育生態學視閾下農村中小學教師流失問題的探索。廣西社會科學,8,208-212。
楊茂慶、董潔(2020)。美國鄉村教師隊伍建設的現實困境與應對政策。河北師範大學學報(教育科學版),2,80-86。
葉菊艷(2014)。從「學校人」到「專業人」:教師流動與教育變革實現的源動力。全球教育展望,2,82-94。
詹懷盈(2020年10月29)。實施「縣管校聘」改革要不忘初心。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=771425071477559296
趙忠平、秦玉友(2016)。誰更想離開?——機會成本與義務教育教師流動意向的實證研究。教育與經濟,1,53-62。
趙明仁(2019)。如何解決鄉村教師「留不住」的問題。湖南師範大學教育科學學報,6,55-59。
趙垣可、劉善槐(2019)。新中國70年農村教師政策的演變與審思——基於1949-2019年農村教師政策文本的分析。西南大學學報(社會科學版),5,14-23。
趙新亮(2019)。我國鄉村教師隊伍建設的實踐困境與對策研究——基於全國23個省優秀教師的實證調查。現代教育管理,11,81-87。
趙質宸(1933)。鄉村教育概論。京城印書局。
劉生全(2006)。論教育場域。北京大學教育評論,1,78-91。
劉佳(2017)。「鄉村教師支持計劃」實施方案研究——基於31省(區、市)「鄉村教師支持計劃」實施辦法的內容分析。教師教育研究,3,100-107。
劉昕鵬(2017)。「縣管校聘」背景下教師專業人員身份的困境與再確認。當代教育科學,8,19-23。
劉麗群(2019)。鄉村教師如何「下得去」和「留得住」:美國經驗和中國啟示。教師教育研究,1,120-127。
歐陽修俊(2021)。中國鄉村教師研究回顧與新時代發展取向。教師教育學報,1,46-57。
蔡春虹、張俊豪(2019)。憑什麽流動:鄉村教師流動資本變遷研究。民族教育研究,4,107-115。
鄭國鐸(2002)。企業激勵論。經濟管理出版社。
鄭樂平(2003)。超越現代主義和後現代主義——論新的社會理論空間之建構。上海教育出版社。
操太聖、盧乃桂(2018)。「縣管校聘」模式下的輪崗教師管理審思。教育研究,2,58-63。
薛正斌(2012)。教育社會學視野下的教師流動。甘肅人民出版社。
謝延龍(2016)。教師流動論。南京師範大學出版社。
謝晉宇(2001)。雇員流動管理。南開大學出版社。
謝華、段兆兵(2011)。農村小學教師流失與補充機制研究。教育理論與實踐,10,6-8。
謝麗麗(2016)。教師「逃離」:農村教育的困境——從G縣鄉村教師考員警説起。教師教育研究,4,71-76。
韓淑萍(2009)。我國教育均衡背景下教師流動問題的研究述評。教育導刊,1,10-14。
羅志華(2007)。城鄉教師流動現狀的思考。當代教育論壇,3,108-107。
羅義安(2020年11月3日)。「縣管」不能過度干預「現管」。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=773197526047133696
羅夢園、張抗抗(2020)。ERG理論視域下鄉村教師流動問題審視。教師教育學報,6,103-109。
譚光鼎(2010)。教育社會學。學富文化。
龐麗娟、韓小雨(2006)。我國農村義務教育教師隊伍建設:問題及其破解。教育研究,9,47-53。
龐麗娟、韓小雨(2009)。當前我國義務教育發展中的新問題。教育發展研究,17,1-5。
鐘樂江(2020年11月2日)。推進「縣管校聘」須以均衡為前提。蒲公英評論網。http://pgy.jyb.cn/rp/rp_detail.html?docid=771761840672739328
顧明遠、檀傳寶(2004)。中國教育發展報告:變革中的教師與教師教育。北京師範大學出版社。
龔繼紅、鐘漲寶、餘建佐(2011)。農村教師社會流動意願的特徵及影響因素分析——以湖北省隨州市爲例。中國農村觀察,1,73-83。
Corbin, J. M. & Strauss, A. L.(2015)。質性研究的基礎:形成紮根理論的程式和方法〔朱光明譯,第3版〕。重慶大學出版社。(原著出版年:2008)
Foucault, M.(2021)。知識考古學〔董樹寶譯〕。生活·讀書·新知三聯書店。(原著出版年:1969)
Fraenkel, J.R., Wallen, N. E., Hyun, H. H.(2013)。教育研究法:研究設計實務〔楊孟麗、謝水南譯,第8版〕。心理出版社。(原著出版年:2011)
Ivan, Illich.(2008)。我們為什麼必須廢除學校〔張人傑譯〕。國外教育社會學基本文選。華東師範大學出版社。(原著出版年:1971)
Neuman, W. L.(2014)。當代社會研究法:質化與量化取向〔王佳煌、潘中道、蘇文賢、江吟梓譯,第7版〕。學富文化。(原著出版年:2011)
Schultz, Theodore.(1990)。論人力資本投資〔吳珠華譯〕。北京經濟學院出版社。(原著出版年:1960)
Yin, R.(2014)。案例研究方法的應用〔周海濤、夏歡歡譯譯,第3版〕。重慶大學出版社。(原著出版年:2012)
Yin, R.(2017)。案例研究:設計與方法〔周海濤、史少傑譯譯,第5版〕。重慶大學出版社。(原著出版年:2014)
貳、英文文獻
Adams, B. L., & Woods, A. (2015). A model for recruiting and retaining teachers in Alaska's rural K–12 schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(2), 250-262.
Adamson, F., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2012). Funding disparities and the inequitable distribution of teachers: Evaluating sources and solutions. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 20(37), 1-46.
Allen, R., Burgess, S., & Mayo, J. (2018). The teacher labour market, teacher turnover and disadvantaged schools: new evidence for England. Education Economics, 26(1), 4-23.
Apple, M. W. (1982). Education and power. London:RKP.
Barnes, G., Crowe, E., & Schaefer, B. (2007). The cost of teacher turnover in five school districts: A pilot study. National Commission on Teaching and America's Future.
Blau, P. M., & Duncan, O. D. (1967). The American occupational structure. The Free Press.
Borman, G. D., & Dowling, N. M. (2008). Teacher attrition and retention: A meta-analytic and narrative review of the research. Review of educational research, 78(3), 367-409.
Bourdieu, P. (1977). Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Harvard University Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1986). The forms of capital. In J. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education (pp.241–258). Greenwood Press.
Bourdieu, P. (1988). Homo academicus. Stanford University Press.
Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. University of Chicago Press.
Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in capitalist America. Basic Books.
Boyd, D., Grossman, P., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2008). Who leaves? Teacher attrition and student achievement (No. w14022). National Bureau of Economic Research.
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2005a). The draw of home: How teachers’ preferences for proximity disadvantage urban schools. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 24(1), 113–132.
Boyd, D., Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2005b). Explaining the short careers of high-achieving teachers in schools with low-performing students. American economic review, 95(2), 166-171.
BSA Bourdieu Study Group(Ed.) (2012). ‘Bourdieusian’ or ‘Bourdieuian’. https://bsabourdieu.wordpress.com/2012/11/08/bourdieusien-or-bourdieuien/
Cannata, M. (2010). Understanding the teacher job search process: Espoused preferences and preferences in use. Teachers College Record, 112(12), 2889-2934.
Carreño, A. M. S. (2002). Key Topics in education, volume III: the teaching profession in Europe; Profile, trends and concerns. Report 2: Teacher supply and demand at general lower secondary level. Revista Española de Educación Comparada, 8, 297-298.
Carver-Thomas, D., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2017). Teacher Turnover: Why It Matters and What We Can Do about It. Learning Policy Institute.
Chang, L. C. & Sheu, T. M. (2013). Effective investment strategies on mathematics performance in rural areas. Quality & Quantity, 47, 2999-3017.
Chester, M. D., & Beaudin, B. Q. (1996). Efficacy beliefs of newly hired teachers in urban schools. American Educational Research Journal, 33(1), 233-257.
Chetty, R., Friedman, J. N., & Rockoff, J. E. (2014). Measuring the impacts of teachers II: Teacher value-added and student outcomes in adulthood. American economic review, 104(9), 2633-79.
Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. (2005). Who teaches whom? Race and the distribution of novice teachers. Economics of Education review, 24(4), 377-392.
Cook, L. H., & Boe, E. E. (1995). Who is teaching students with disabilities?. Teaching Exceptional Children, 28(1), 70-72.
Cowen, J. M., Butler, J. S., Fowles, J., Streams, M. E., & Toma, E. F. (2012). Teacher retention in Appalachian schools: Evidence from Kentucky. Economics of Education Review, 31(4), 431-441.
Dalton, D.R., Johnson, J. L., & Daily, C. M. (1999). On the use of “Intent to...” variables in organizational research. Human Relations, 52, 1337-1350.
Darling-Hammond, L., Burns, D., Campbell, C., Goodwin, A. L., Hammerness, K., Low, E. L., McIntyre, A., Sato, M., & Zeichner, K. (2017). Empowered Educators: How Leading Nations Design Systems for Teaching Quality. Jossey-Bass.
Engel, M., & Cannata, M. (2015). Localism and teacher labor markets: How geography and decision making may contribute to inequality. Peabody Journal of Education, 90(1), 84-92.
Feng, L., & Sass, T. R. (2017). Teacher quality and teacher mobility. Education Finance and Policy, 12(3), 396-418.
Flemmen, M. (2013). Putting Bourdieu to work for class analysis: reflections on some recent contributions. The British journal of sociology, 64(2), 325-343.
Goldhaber, D., & Hansen, M. (2009). National board certification and teachers' career paths: Does NBPTS certification influence how long teachers remain in the profession and where they teach?. Education Finance and Policy, 4(3), 229-262.
Grissmer, D., & Kirby,S. (1997). Teacher turnover and teacher quality. Teachers College Record, 99(1), 45-56.
Guarino, C. M., Santibanez, L., & Daley, G. A. (2006). Teacher recruitment and retention: A review of the recent empirical literature. Review of educational research, 76(2), 173-208.
Guin, K. (2004). Chronic teacher turnover in urban elementary schools. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12(42), 1-30.
Hammer, P. C., Hughes, G., McClure, C., Reeves, C., & Salgado, D. (2005). Rural Teacher Recruitment and Retention Practices: A Review of the Research Literature, National Survey of Rural Superintendents, and Case Studies of Programs in Virginia. Appalachia Educational Laboratory at Edvantia (NJ1).
Han, L. (2013). Is centralized teacher deployment more equitable? Evidence from rural China. China Economic Review, 24, 65-76.
Hanushek, E. A., Kain, J. F., & Rivkin, S. G. (2004). Why public schools lose teachers. Journal of human resources, 39(2), 326-354.
Hanushek, E. A., Rivkin, S. G., & Schiman, J. C. (2016). Dynamic effects of teacher turnover on the quality of instruction. Economics of Education Review, 55, 132-148.
Horvat, E. (2001). Understanding equity and access in higher education: The potential contribution of Pierre Bourdieu. In Smart, J. C. and Tierney, W(Eds.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research(Vol.17,195–238). Agathon.
Hughes, A. L., Matt, J. J., & O'Reilly, F. L. (2015). Principal Support Is Imperative to the Retention of Teachers in Hard-to-Staff Schools. Journal of Education and Training Studies, 3(1), 129-134.
Im Youn-Kee(임연기). (2007). Issues and tasks of rural education in Korea. Journal of Educational Administration(교육행정학연구), 25(4), 565-584.
Ingersoll, R. M. & Merrill, L. (2010). Who’s Teaching Our Children?. Educational Leadership, 67(8), 14–20.
Ingersoll, R. M. & Smith, T. M. (2003). The wrong solution to the teacher shortage. Educational Leadership, 60(8), 30-33
Ingersoll, R. M. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organizational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499-534.
Ingersoll, R., Merrill, L., & May, H. (2012). Retaining Teachers. Educational Leadership, 69(8), 30–34.
Jackson, K. M. (2012). Influence matters: The link between principal and teacher influence over school policy and teacher turnover. Journal of School Leadership, 22(5), 875-901.
Jean-Marie, G. A. E. T. A. N. E., & Moore, G. (2004). The highly qualified teacher: Implications and recommendations for rural school districts. Teacher Education and Practice, 17(2), 146-161.
Jimerson, L. (2003). The Competitive Disadvantage: Teacher Compensation in Rural America. Rural School and Community Trust.
Kang, N. H., & Hong, M. (2008). Achieving excellence in teacher workforce and equity in learning opportunities in South Korea. Educational Researcher, 37(4), 200-207.
Kaplan, Abraham. (1964). The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. Chandler.
Keigher, A. (2010). Teacher attrition and mobility: Results from the 2008–09 teacher follow-up survey (NCES 2010-353). United States Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics.
Kersaint, G., Lewis, J., Potter, R., & Meisels, G. (2007). Why teachers leave: Factors that influence retention and resignation. Teaching and teacher education, 23(6), 775-794.
Lankford, H., & Wyckoff, J. (2010). Teacher labor markets: An overview. Economics of Education, 235-242.
Lankford, H., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2002). Teacher sorting and the plight of urban schools: A descriptive analysis. Educational evaluation and policy analysis, 24(1), 37-62.
Lee,E.S. (1966). A theory of migration. Demography, 3(1), 47-57.
Lempert, L. B. (2011). Asking questions of the data: Memo writing in the grounded theory tradition.In A.Bryant&K.Charmaz(Eds.), The Sage handbook of grounded theory (pp.245-264). Sage.
Lewin, K. Fieid. (1951). Theory in Social Science. Harper & Brother Publishers.
Liu, M., Murphy, R., Tao, R., & An, X. (2009). Education management and performance after rural education finance reform: Evidence from Western China. International Journal of Educational Development, 29(5), 463-473.
Loeb, S. Darling-Hammond, L. & Luczak,J. (2005). How teaching conditions predict teacher turnover in California schools. Peabody Journal of Education, 80(3), 44-70.
Luekens, M. T., Lyter, D. M., & Fox, E. E. (2002). Teacher attrition and mobility:Results from the Teacher Follow-up Survey. United States Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics.
Luschei, T. F., & Chudgar, A. (2017). Teacher distribution in developing countries: Teachers of marginalized students in India, Mexico, and Tanzania. Palgrave Macmillan.
Luthans, F., & Youssef-Morgan, C. M. (2017). Psychological Capital: An Evidence-Based Positive Approach. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 4, 339-366.
Luthans, F., Avolio, B. J., Avey, J. B., & Norman, S. M. (2007). Positive Psychological capital: measurement and relationsihp with performance and satisfaction. Personnel Psychology, 60, 541-572.
Macdonald, D. (1999). Teacher attrition: A review of literature. Teaching and teacher education, 15(8), 835-848.
Maier, A., & Youngs, P. (2009). Teacher preparation programs and teacher labor markets: How social capital may help explain teachers’ career choices. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(4), 393–407.
Merton, R. K. (1968). Social theory and social structure. Glencoe, IL: Free.
Murnane, R. J., & Olsen, R. J. (1990). The effects of salaries and opportunity costs on length of stay in teaching: Evidence from North Carolina. Journal of human resources, 25(1), 106-124.
Parsons, T. (1961). The school class as a social system: Some of its functions in American society. In A.H. Halsey, J. Floud, & C. A. Anderson(Eds.), Education, economy, and society: A reader in the sociology of education (pp.434-455). Free Press.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3th ed.). Sage.
Ravenstein, E. G. (1985). The laws of migration. Journal of the Statistical Society of London, 48(2), 167-235.
Reininger, M. (2012). Hometown disadvantage? It depends on where you’re from:Teachers’ location preferences and the implications for staffing schools. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 34(2), 127–145.
Robinson, B., & Yi, W. (2008). The role and status of non-governmental (‘daike’) teachers in China's rural education. International Journal of Educational Development, 28(1), 35-54.
Rockoff, J. E. (2004). The impact of individual teachers on student achievement: Evidence from panel data. American economic review, 94(2), 247-252.
Ronfeldt, M., & McQueen, K. (2017). Does new teacher induction really improve retention?. Journal of Teacher Education, 68(4), 394-410.
Ronfeldt, M., Loeb, S., & Wyckoff, J. (2013). How teacher turnover harms student achievement. American educational research journal, 50(1), 4-36.
Rude, H., & Miller, K. J. (2018). Policy challenges and opportunities for rural special education. Rural Special Education Quarterly, 37(1), 21-29.
Swanson, P. B. (2011). Georgia's grow-your-own teacher programs attract the right stuff. The High School Journal, 94(3), 119-133.
Swartz, D. (1997). Culture and Power: The Sociology of Pierre Bourdieu. The University of Chicago Press.
Torres, A. C. (2016). Is this work sustainable? Teacher turnover and perceptions of workload in charter management organizations. Urban Education, 51(8), 891-914.
U.S.Department of Education. (2011). Our Future, Our Teachers: The Obama Administration’s Plan for Teacher Education Reform and Improvement. U.S.Department of Education.
Wei, Y., & Zhou, S. (2019). Are better teachers more likely to move? Examining teacher mobility in rural China. The Asia-Pacific Education Researcher, 28(2), 171-179.
Wei, Y., Zhou, S., & Liu, Y. (2020). The draw of home: How does teacher’s initial job placement relate to teacher mobility in rural China?. PloS one, 15(1), 1–14.
Willis, P. (1977). Learning to labor: How working class kids get working class jobs. Columbia University Press.
Yardley, L. (2009). Demonstrating validity in qualitative psychology . In J. A. Smith(Ed.), Qualitative psychology: A practical guide to research methods (pp.235-251). Sage.