儿童的幸福和他们的学业成就:教育中“权衡”的危险话语

IF 1.3 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Tania Clarke
{"title":"儿童的幸福和他们的学业成就:教育中“权衡”的危险话语","authors":"Tania Clarke","doi":"10.1177/1477878520980197","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Research conducted in England over the last decade has documented sustained, significant decreases in children’s wellbeing. While recent changes to curriculum policy promoting children’s wellbeing have been introduced, a notable feature of the discourse surrounding the promotion of children’s wellbeing is that wellbeing is regarded as opposed to, or in tension with, children’s academic achievement. Recently, Gabriel Heller-Sahlgren proposed that there is an inevitable ‘trade-off’ between children’s ‘wellbeing’ and their academic achievement. Using PISA 2012 data, Heller-Sahlgren argues that pupil happiness and high achievement do not go hand in hand; implying policymakers have a decision to make about which they uphold as the priority. In this article, I discuss the theoretical assumptions underpinning transnational comparisons of children’s wellbeing and review evidence from psychology and education to ascertain whether a trade-off is empirically supported. I argue that far from being incompatible, children’s wellbeing and achievement are positively associated. However, this relationship is not straightforward and requires careful disentangling of the hedonic and eudaimonic components of wellbeing. I underline four main gaps in current knowledge of the wellbeing-achievement relationship to date: the need for (1) multidimensional conceptualisation and measurement of wellbeing, (2) exploration of mediating mechanisms/constructs explaining the wellbeing-achievement relationship, (3) objective operationalisation of achievement, and (4) investigation of developmental differences. To conclude, I argue that when making policy recommendations researchers should avoid ‘all or nothing’ thinking which lures governments into false dichotomies.","PeriodicalId":46679,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Research in Education","volume":"18 1","pages":"263 - 294"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1477878520980197","citationCount":"32","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Children’s wellbeing and their academic achievement: The dangerous discourse of ‘trade-offs’ in education\",\"authors\":\"Tania Clarke\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/1477878520980197\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Research conducted in England over the last decade has documented sustained, significant decreases in children’s wellbeing. While recent changes to curriculum policy promoting children’s wellbeing have been introduced, a notable feature of the discourse surrounding the promotion of children’s wellbeing is that wellbeing is regarded as opposed to, or in tension with, children’s academic achievement. Recently, Gabriel Heller-Sahlgren proposed that there is an inevitable ‘trade-off’ between children’s ‘wellbeing’ and their academic achievement. Using PISA 2012 data, Heller-Sahlgren argues that pupil happiness and high achievement do not go hand in hand; implying policymakers have a decision to make about which they uphold as the priority. In this article, I discuss the theoretical assumptions underpinning transnational comparisons of children’s wellbeing and review evidence from psychology and education to ascertain whether a trade-off is empirically supported. I argue that far from being incompatible, children’s wellbeing and achievement are positively associated. However, this relationship is not straightforward and requires careful disentangling of the hedonic and eudaimonic components of wellbeing. I underline four main gaps in current knowledge of the wellbeing-achievement relationship to date: the need for (1) multidimensional conceptualisation and measurement of wellbeing, (2) exploration of mediating mechanisms/constructs explaining the wellbeing-achievement relationship, (3) objective operationalisation of achievement, and (4) investigation of developmental differences. To conclude, I argue that when making policy recommendations researchers should avoid ‘all or nothing’ thinking which lures governments into false dichotomies.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46679,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theory and Research in Education\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"263 - 294\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1477878520980197\",\"citationCount\":\"32\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theory and Research in Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878520980197\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Research in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878520980197","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 32

摘要

过去十年在英国进行的研究表明,儿童的幸福感持续显著下降。虽然最近已经引入了促进儿童福祉的课程政策变化,但围绕促进儿童福祉的论述的一个显着特征是,福祉被视为与儿童的学业成就相反,或与之相冲突。最近,加布里埃尔·海勒-萨格伦提出,在孩子的“幸福”和他们的学业成就之间存在着一种不可避免的“权衡”。利用2012年国际学生评估项目的数据,Heller-Sahlgren认为,学生的幸福感和高成就并不是齐头并进的;这意味着政策制定者要做出决定,他们认为这是优先事项。在这篇文章中,我讨论了支持儿童幸福跨国比较的理论假设,并回顾了心理学和教育学的证据,以确定这种权衡是否得到实证支持。我认为,儿童的幸福和成就绝不是不相容的,而是呈正相关的。然而,这种关系并不是直截了当的,需要仔细地解开幸福的享乐和幸福成分。我强调了迄今为止关于幸福与成就关系的现有知识中的四个主要空白:需要(1)幸福的多维概念化和测量,(2)探索解释幸福与成就关系的中介机制/结构,(3)成就的客观运作,以及(4)对发展差异的调查。总而言之,我认为,在提出政策建议时,研究人员应该避免“要么全有,要么全无”的思维,这种思维会诱使政府陷入错误的二分法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Children’s wellbeing and their academic achievement: The dangerous discourse of ‘trade-offs’ in education
Research conducted in England over the last decade has documented sustained, significant decreases in children’s wellbeing. While recent changes to curriculum policy promoting children’s wellbeing have been introduced, a notable feature of the discourse surrounding the promotion of children’s wellbeing is that wellbeing is regarded as opposed to, or in tension with, children’s academic achievement. Recently, Gabriel Heller-Sahlgren proposed that there is an inevitable ‘trade-off’ between children’s ‘wellbeing’ and their academic achievement. Using PISA 2012 data, Heller-Sahlgren argues that pupil happiness and high achievement do not go hand in hand; implying policymakers have a decision to make about which they uphold as the priority. In this article, I discuss the theoretical assumptions underpinning transnational comparisons of children’s wellbeing and review evidence from psychology and education to ascertain whether a trade-off is empirically supported. I argue that far from being incompatible, children’s wellbeing and achievement are positively associated. However, this relationship is not straightforward and requires careful disentangling of the hedonic and eudaimonic components of wellbeing. I underline four main gaps in current knowledge of the wellbeing-achievement relationship to date: the need for (1) multidimensional conceptualisation and measurement of wellbeing, (2) exploration of mediating mechanisms/constructs explaining the wellbeing-achievement relationship, (3) objective operationalisation of achievement, and (4) investigation of developmental differences. To conclude, I argue that when making policy recommendations researchers should avoid ‘all or nothing’ thinking which lures governments into false dichotomies.
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
Theory and Research in Education
Theory and Research in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
2.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
22
期刊介绍: Theory and Research in Education, formerly known as The School Field, is an international peer reviewed journal that publishes theoretical, empirical and conjectural papers contributing to the development of educational theory, policy and practice.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信