教师是知识社会的“助产士”，教师问题是教育论域中的永恒话题。而“好教师”概念关涉教师发展、教师质量、教师素质、教师角色、教师评价等多个议题，更是直指教师队伍建设的目标核心。对于教师自身来说，其对于“好教师”的概念理解与哲学定位，也在很大程度上决定了教师将如何实践自身作为教育者的专业责任。通过对已有研究的分析，我们可以较为清晰地看到近年来“好教师”概念界定的两大特征：一是变化脉络上，呈现出从粗略化到精细化、从符号化到生活化、从抽象化到情境化的发展趋势；二是价值倾向上，由肇始期较为浓厚的工具性色彩，转变为对教师自我成长与专业发展的关注。然而，无论是在教育实践还是学术研究中，“好教师”之“好”的概念内涵往往都是自上而下制定的。占据统治地位的主流话语不公平地赋予了某一种“好教师”概念以特权，“单一”代替了“多元”，“他者”凌驾于“主体”——“好教师”成为一个被风干的、凝固的静止概念，而失去了鲜活的生命力。在这种情况下，教师也被束缚在严丝合缝的“好教师”评价体制之中，对运用专业自主权去挖掘不同的可能、拓宽发展的边界失去了信心。因此，教育研究亟需深入教师的内心世界，从主体视角理解“好教师”对于教师而言究竟意味着什么。

作为质的研究，本研究以叙事为范式，在预访谈基础上最终选取三名小学教师作为叙事者。以情境社会学为理论基础，聚焦于教师专业生活，本研究旨在通过情境分析法与类属分析法，呈现叙事者对“好教师”的意蕴阐释，归纳叙事者“好教师”观念的建构类型，进而分析观念得以如此形塑的情境机制及其背后的建构逻辑。

研究发现：（1）不同的叙事者对于“好教师”的素养结构存在某些共识性理解，认为知识能力、专业伦理是“好教师”必要但不充分的基础性素养，而情感素养、主体幸福是可持续更新的发展性素养。（2）教师主体叙事下的“好教师”观念建构包括“让权型”“权宜型”“妥协型”三类。不同的建构类型体现出叙事者在“好教师”观念建构过程中个体自主与体制规训的强弱关系，以及行动倾向与情感能量的积极程度。（3）群体与个人、权威与慈爱、听话与自主、利益与良心、儿童与团体、礼节与原则等“善与善”交织的两难空间强化了叙事者“好教师”观念建构的复杂性，为我们解释教师个体如何在与外部的互动中理解“好教师”提供了一种分析透镜。（4）叙事者“好教师”观念建构的情境机制体现出辩证的知行张力，受个体性因素“自我图像”、制度性因素“教育体制”“社会风向”、情境性因素“主观规范”“组织文化”等要素影响所形塑的“好教师”浅层观念最终都将经由教师的“行为实践”得到撼动或强化，才能转化为具有实质操作意义的“好教师”深层观念，继而反作用于既有结构与外在规范。而行政逻辑与教育逻辑的博弈、市场逻辑与网络逻辑的冲击、现实逻辑与价值逻辑的调适则作为一条内隐线索，串联起了建构过程中不同主客体的互动链条。

研究表明，相较于外在规范的无限性、整全性要求，教师主体的“好教师”观念更具灵活性，通过学习自觉、反思意识等附属性素养为理解“好教师”提供了一个相对弹性的延展空间。但同时，教师主体的“好教师”观念又表现出一定的不平衡性，存在一种底线基准与崇高理想的割裂、常人视角与专业视角的二分。再者，“好教师”观念建构是一个复杂的系统性过程，它来自于既有的文化脚本与个体的教育实践，是内外因素在教师观念系统中交互作用的共同结果——正是在情境中“结构-能动”的往返过程中，通过持续性的行动实践以及对此的深入反思，个性化的“好教师”观念才得以真正形成。除此之外，基于对情境的分析，研究亦证实，叙事者的“好教师”观念与其行动之间存在着“貌合神离”的问题。对此，教师可以通过反思的“自成目的性”以及将教师自身作为“中间角色”等方式，尝试开辟一条从“两难空间”到“第三种空间”的突围路径。

最后，为了超越“无我论”与“唯我论”的局限，在“好教师”之“好”的崇高理想与底线基准之间寻求一种平衡，我们的教育需要从制度性反思、主体的内省、关系性对话三个方面对“好教师”的概念内涵予以回应，以期弱化外在规范与内部观念的对立，回归“好教师”的本真性。

Teachers are the “midwives” of the knowledge society and the important subjects in the field of education. The issue of teachers is an eternal topic in the field of education. Related to teacher development, teacher quality, teacher literacy, teacher role, teacher evaluation and other issues, the concept of “good teacher” is the core goal of teacher team construction. For teachers themselves, their understanding and philosophical positioning of the concept of " good teacher" also largely determine how teachers practice their professional responsibilities as educators. Through the analysis of the existing research, we can clearly see two major characteristics of the definition of " good teacher " in recent years : firstly, it shows a trend from rough to fine, from symbolization to life, from abstraction to contextualization ; secondly, it has changed from a strong instrumental color in the initial period to a focus on teachers’ self-growth and professional development. However, whether in educational practice or academic research, the concept of “good” in “good teacher” is often formulated from top to bottom. The dominant mainstream discourse unfairly endows a certain concept of “good teacher” with privilege, “single” replaces “pluralism”, “object” overrides “subject” —— “good teacher” becomes a dry and solidified static concept, and loses its fresh vitality. In this case, teachers are also bound in the tight “good teacher” evaluation system, and lose confidence in using professional autonomy to explore different possibilities and broaden the boundaries of development. Therefore, educational research urgently needs to go deep into the inner world of teachers and understand what “good teacher” means to them from the ontological perspective.

As a qualitative research, this study takes narrative as the paradigm, and finally selects three primary school teachers as narrators on the basis of pre-interview. Based on the theory of situational sociology, focusing on the dilemma space in teachers’ professional life, this study regards teachers’ discourse as a kind of “social practice”, aiming to present the narrator’s interpretation of the meaning of “good teacher” and summarize the construction types through situational analysis and generic analysis. Besides, this study analyzes the situational mechanism and the construction logic behind the narrators’ concepts of “good teacher”.

The study found that : (1) Different narrators have some consensus about the literacy structure of “good teachers” : knowledge ability and professional ethics are necessary but insufficient basic literacy; emotional literacy and subjective happiness are sustainable and updated developmental literacy. (2) Narrators’ construction of the concept of “good teacher” includes three categories : “empowerment” “expediency” and “compromise”. Different types reflect the extent of relationship between individual autonomy and institutional discipline, as well as the positive degree of action tendency and emotional energy in the process of construction. (3) The interweaving dilemmas such as group versus individual, authority versus affection, obedience versus autonomy, interest versus conscience, individual versus group, etiquette versus principle, strengthen the complexity of the narrator's concept construction of "good teacher", and help us explain how teachers understand "good teacher" in the interaction with the external.(4) The situational mechanism of the narrator's concepts of "good teacher" reflects the dialectical tension of conception and action. The shallow concepts of "good teacher" shaped by "self-image",  "education system", "social wind direction", "subjective norms" and "organizational culture" will eventually be shaken or strengthened by teachers' "behavioral practices", then be transformed into the deep concepts of "good teacher" with substantial operational significance. Also, the confrontation between administrative logic and educational logic, the impact of market logic and network logic, as well as the adjustment of realistic logic and value logic, are implicit clues to connect the interactive chains of different subjects and objects in the process of construction.

The study reflects that teachers’ concepts of “good teachers” are more flexible compared to external norms, and it provides an extra extension space by understanding “good teachers” as those with learning consciousness, reflective consciousness and other subsidiary qualities. However, at the same time, teachers concepts of “good teachers” shows a certain imbalance. There is a separation between the bottom line benchmark and the lofty ideal, and a dichotomy between the ordinary perspective and the professional perspective. In addition, the construction of the concepts of “good teacher” is a complex systematic process, which comes from the interaction of existing cultural scripts and individual educational practice. It is in the process of “structure-activism” that the personalized concepts of “good teacher” can be truly formed after the dynamic changes of resistance, adjustment and integration through continuous action practice and in-depth reflection. Apart from the above, based on the analysis of situations, the study also found that the narrator's concepts of "good teacher" are inconsistent with their practical actions on the whole. Faced with this derailment, teachers can strive to break through the dilemma by reflecting and taking themselves as “intermediate roles”.

Finally, in order to transcend the limitations of "non-self" and "solipsism", weaken the opposition between external norms and internal concepts, then return to the authenticity of “good teachers”, we need to respond to the conceptual connotation of "good teacher" from three aspects: institutional reflection, subject introspection and relational dialogue.