大学物理 ›› 2026, Vol. 45 ›› Issue (5): 53-.doi: 10.16854/j.cnki.1000-0712.250508

• 教学改革 • 上一篇    下一篇

高等教育物理学科教师发展研究

曹德让*,徐洁,陈栋,王汝林   

  1. 青岛大学 物理科学学院 应用物理国家级实验教学示范中心,山东 青岛266071
  • 收稿日期:2025-09-12 修回日期:2025-10-01 出版日期:2026-07-06 发布日期:2026-08-06
  • 作者简介:曹德让(1988—),男,陕西大荔人,副教授,博士,主要从事物理教学和实验凝聚态物理研究工作.
  • 基金资助:
    中国高等教育学会高等教育科学研究规划课题重点项目(22LK0301);山东省高等教育学会高等教育研究专项课题(本科重点课题2022-10);青岛大学本科教学改革研究项目(JG2022012);青岛大学第三批专创融合课程立项建设项目(ZCRH2022038);青岛大学创新创业教育教学研究与改革项目(CXCYJG202318)资助

Professional development of physics faculty in higher education

CAO De-rang, XU Jie, CHEN Dong, WANG Ru-lin   

  1. China National Demonstration Center for Experimental Applied Physics Education, College of Physics, Qingdao University, Qingdao 266071, China
  • Received:2025-09-12 Revised:2025-10-01 Online:2026-07-06 Published:2026-08-06

摘要: 本研究围绕高校物理教师高质量发展,基于问卷与多维交叉,构建“画像—痛点—教研关系—满意—政策”框架.样本以博士、中高职称、45岁以下教师为主.结果显示:制度与政策为首要约束(严格口径37.5%,宽口径含个人叠加63.2%);课程—科研相近且互促显著提升满意度(满意44.4%,不满意3.7%),而“不同且独立/耽误科研”显著降低满意;在投入与类型上,“教研相当”(30.2%/14.0%)与“教研并重型”(31.6%/17.7%)更优.建议实施多轨岗位+动态评价、学期—假期节律化与科研封闭时段、课程—项目互嵌与跨校资源共享,并配套导师制与成长缓冲.



关键词: 高校物理教师, 教师发展, 教学—科研关系, 满意度, 职业发展

Abstract: Focusing on the high-quality development of university physics faculty, this study analyzes questionnaires with multi-dimensional cross-tabulations and proposes an integrated framework linking profile → pain points → teaching–research relationship → satisfaction → policy. The sample is dominated by PhD holders, mid-/senior ranks, and ages less than 45. Findings show institutional/policy constraints are the primary bottleneck (strict definition 37.5%; broad definition including personal–institutional overlap 63.2%). Alignment and mutual reinforcement between courses and research markedly raise satisfaction (satisfied 44.4%, dissatisfied 3.7%), whereas “different & independent/teaching crowds out research” configurations depress it. In terms of effort allocation and role type, “balanced investment” performs better (satisfied 30.2%, dissatisfied 14.0%), as does the “teaching–research combined” track (31.6%, 17.7%). We recommend multi-track roles with dynamic evaluation, semester–vacation rhythm management with protected research time, organized course–project embedding with cross-institutional resource sharing, and targeted mentorship with buffered onboarding. The results provide actionable evidence for governance reforms and individual career planning in physics faculties.

Key words: university physics faculty, faculty development, teaching–research relationship, job satisfaction, career development