工作、职业和使命:教师的工作取向是研究性面试中的话语性工作

IF 2.3 3区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Oxford Review of Education Pub Date : 2023-02-03 DOI:10.1080/03054985.2023.2172389
Yew-Jin Lee
{"title":"工作、职业和使命:教师的工作取向是研究性面试中的话语性工作","authors":"Yew-Jin Lee","doi":"10.1080/03054985.2023.2172389","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Three categories of work orientation – job, career and calling – have been widely used to characterise how people perceive and behave towards their work. While this typology has been generative, this paper adopts a different perspective (based on Discursive Psychology) by prioritising what and how teachers talk about their work on their own terms during research interviewing. Even though the sample of primary and secondary school teachers from Singapore drew on aspects of these work categories, these teachers were also flexibly managing moral accountability and identities for specific interactional purposes. Specifically, the three work orientations were discursively enlisted to validate, justify, censure and so forth during research interviews. We argue that social-science categories are not just ‘ready-made’ items to be transplanted from the world of research but are indubitably participants’ categories as part of their available rhetorical toolkit. The findings warrant a greater examination than what is currently being done methodologically to understand the world of teachers’ work through research interviews.","PeriodicalId":47910,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Review of Education","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Job, career and calling: A teacher’s work orientation is/as discursive work during research interviewing\",\"authors\":\"Yew-Jin Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/03054985.2023.2172389\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Three categories of work orientation – job, career and calling – have been widely used to characterise how people perceive and behave towards their work. While this typology has been generative, this paper adopts a different perspective (based on Discursive Psychology) by prioritising what and how teachers talk about their work on their own terms during research interviewing. Even though the sample of primary and secondary school teachers from Singapore drew on aspects of these work categories, these teachers were also flexibly managing moral accountability and identities for specific interactional purposes. Specifically, the three work orientations were discursively enlisted to validate, justify, censure and so forth during research interviews. We argue that social-science categories are not just ‘ready-made’ items to be transplanted from the world of research but are indubitably participants’ categories as part of their available rhetorical toolkit. The findings warrant a greater examination than what is currently being done methodologically to understand the world of teachers’ work through research interviews.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47910,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Oxford Review of Education\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Oxford Review of Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2023.2172389\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Review of Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/03054985.2023.2172389","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要三类工作取向——工作、职业和职业——已被广泛用于描述人们对工作的看法和行为。虽然这种类型学是生成性的,但本文采用了一种不同的视角(基于话语心理学),优先考虑教师在研究面试中用自己的方式谈论自己的工作。尽管来自新加坡的中小学教师样本借鉴了这些工作类别的各个方面,但这些教师也在为特定的互动目的灵活管理道德责任和身份。具体来说,在研究访谈中,三种工作取向被随意地用来验证、证明、谴责等等。我们认为,社会科学类别不仅仅是从研究世界移植来的“现成”项目,而且无疑是参与者的类别,是他们可用修辞工具包的一部分。与目前通过研究访谈了解教师工作世界的方法相比,这些发现值得进行更深入的研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Job, career and calling: A teacher’s work orientation is/as discursive work during research interviewing
ABSTRACT Three categories of work orientation – job, career and calling – have been widely used to characterise how people perceive and behave towards their work. While this typology has been generative, this paper adopts a different perspective (based on Discursive Psychology) by prioritising what and how teachers talk about their work on their own terms during research interviewing. Even though the sample of primary and secondary school teachers from Singapore drew on aspects of these work categories, these teachers were also flexibly managing moral accountability and identities for specific interactional purposes. Specifically, the three work orientations were discursively enlisted to validate, justify, censure and so forth during research interviews. We argue that social-science categories are not just ‘ready-made’ items to be transplanted from the world of research but are indubitably participants’ categories as part of their available rhetorical toolkit. The findings warrant a greater examination than what is currently being done methodologically to understand the world of teachers’ work through research interviews.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Oxford Review of Education
Oxford Review of Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The Oxford Review of Education is a well established journal with an extensive international readership. It is committed to deploying the resources of a wide range of academic disciplines in the service of educational scholarship, and the Editors welcome articles reporting significant new research as well as contributions of a more analytic or reflective nature. The membership of the editorial board reflects these emphases, which have remained characteristic of the Review since its foundation. The Review seeks to preserve the highest standards of professional scholarship in education, while also seeking to publish articles which will be of interest and utility to a wider public, including policy makers.
期刊最新文献
Colour-evasive racial ideologies underpinning the hidden curriculum of a majority-minority occupational therapy school in London, England: an analysis of minoritised undergraduate students’ experiences Typologising the corporatisation of parent roles in the ‘modern’ governance of Multi-Academy Trusts (MATs) in subordinated communities Environment in the views of preschool children: an investigation of children’s drawings and narratives in Turkey Understanding the salary gap between academic faculty and top administrators: a New Public Management perspective Complicated shadows: a discussion of positionality within educational research
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1