「縣管校聘」背景下大陸鄉村教師流動場域邏輯之個案研究

Abstract

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.