教师情感素养是教师专业素养的重要方面。发展教师情感素养是当下教育研究和实践情感转向的必然。其不仅有利于教师自身的专业发展和职业幸福感水平提升，更重要的是对学生认知、情感、动机、行为的发展具有积极正向影响。教师情感素养评估可以帮助我们更好把握教师情感素养发展现状，了解教师情感素养发展弱势，为促进教师情感素养提升提供依据。本研究即以探讨教师情感素养的评估工具为主要目标，旨在开发信效度良好的情感素养评估工具，应用并促进当前中小学教师情感素养水平的提升。

首先，本研究通过理论和实践的双向探讨，基于教师与学生、与家长以及与同事领导等交往情境，构建了教师情感素养的四维测量结构，包括情感品质、情感识别、情感表达与沟通、情感调节这几方面。其中情感品质主要指教师对学生的关爱、责任、公正、宽容、同情、同理、耐心等品质；情感识别主要指教师对学生情绪情感状态及变化的识别；情感表达与沟通主要指教师在挑战性交往情境下通过有效的情感表达和沟通以促进问题的有效解决；情感调节主要指在挑战性交往情境下教师对自身消极情绪情感状态的调节。

不同于常见的自陈式量表测量形式，本研究选择开发和使用情境判断测验对教师情感素养水平进行评估。情境判断测验是一种要求被试基于情境事件进行反应方案选择和判断的一种测验形式。一套完整的情境判断测验题目包括题干、反应选项、指导语以及计分键几部分。本研究建立在对31位北京市优秀小学教师访谈的基础上，同时辅以文献资料，提取并编辑形成若干典型情境题干；建立在80余名职前教师、新手教师和有经验教师撰写的情境反应方案基础上，提取并编辑形成每个情境对应的6-11个反应选项。通过多轮专家教师问卷咨询或是访谈咨询，对情境题干和反应方案等进行多次筛选、修改和完善，最终形成了情境判断测验初始问卷。基于对北京市200余名小学教师的预试数据结果，对初始问卷进一步修改和完善，形成正式版的教师情感素养情境判断测验，包括4个测量维度，19个情境题目和76个反应选项，其中情感品质、情感识别、情感表达与沟通维度分别对应有5道题，情感调节维度对应有4道题，每个题目对应4个反应选项。使用正式版的情境判断测验问卷，对1000余名北京市小学教师进行测评。通过比例共识计分以及混合计分两种评分方式，对测验的信效度进行多方面验证，结果表明本研究编制的情境判断测验呈现出较好的信效度水平。

使用正式版情境判断测验对北京市小学教师情感素养发展现状进行调查分析，发现总体上北京市小学教师情感素养水平中等偏上，在情感品质方面表现最好，其次是情感调节，而在情感识别、情感表达与沟通方面表现相对较弱，低于总体均值。相比男教师、非班主任教师，女教师、班主任教师的情感素养明显较好，尤其是在情感品质、情感表达与沟通方面。相比普通教师、没有荣誉称号的老师，担任领导职务、有荣誉称号的老师的情感素养水平更高，尤其在情感品质、情感识别、情感表达与沟通方面。不过不同教龄、职称、学历教师的情感素养水平相差不大，仅在“情感调节”维度上显示出显著差异，年轻教师、较高学历教师表现更好。

Teacher's affective competence is an important aspect of teacher's professional competence. It is necessary to develop teachers' affective competence in current educational research and practice. It is not only conducive to teachers' own professional development and the improvement of professional well-being, but more importantly, it has a positive impact on the development of students' cognition, emotion, motivation and behavior. The evaluation of teachers' affective competence can help us better grasp the development status of teachers' affective competence, understand the weakness of teachers' affective competence, and provide evidence to promote the level of teachers' affective competence. This study aims to develop a reliable and valid assessment tool of teachers' affective competence, and to apply and promote the improvement of current primary and secondary school teachers' affective competence.

Firstly, through a two-way exploration of theory and practice, this study constructs a four-dimensional measurement structure of teachers' affective competence, including affective quality, affective recognition, affective expression and communication, and affective regulation, based on the interaction between teachers and students, parents, and colleagues and leaders. Affective quality mainly refers to the teachers’ care, responsibility, justice, tolerance, sympathy, empathy, patience and so on. Affective recognition mainly refers to teachers' recognition of students' emotional states and changes. Affective expression and communication mainly refers to the teachers' effective affective expression and communication in challenging communication situations to promote the effective solution of problems. Affective regulation mainly refers to teachers' regulation of their negative emotional states in challenging communication situations.

Different from the self-report scale, the situational judgment test was developed and used in this study to assess teachers' affective competence. Situational judgment test is a form of test that requires subjects to choose and judge response based on situational events. A complete set of situational judgment test items includes stems, response options, instructions and scoring keys. Based on the interviews with 31 excellent primary school teachers in Beijing and some literature, some typical situational stems are extracted and edited. Based on the situational response options written by more than 80 pre-service teachers, novice teachers and experienced teachers, 6-11 response options corresponding to each situation were extracted and edited. After several rounds of expert consultation, the study screened, modified and improved the situational stems and response options, and finally formed the initial situational judgment test. Based on the pre-test data of more than 200 primary school teachers in Beijing, the initial test was further modified and improved, and formed the formal version of Situational Judgment Test of teachers’ affective competence, which is consisted of 4 measurement dimensions, 19 situational stems and 76 response options, among which the affective quality, affective recognition, affective expression and communication dimensions correspond to 5 items respectively, the affective regulation dimension corresponds to 4 items, and each item corresponds to 4 response options. More than 1,000 primary school teachers in Beijing were tested with the formal version of Situational Judgment Test. Proportional consensus scoring and mixed scoring are used to verify the reliability and validity of the test. The results show that the test has good reliability and validity

Based on the survey data of the formal version of Situational Judgment Test, this study reveals the current characteristics and main problems of affective competence development of primary school teachers in Beijing. The results show that on the whole, the affective competence level of primary school teachers in Beijing was above the average, and they performed well in affective quality, followed by affective regulation, and relatively weak in affective recognition and affective expression and communication, which is lower than the overall average. In addition, compared with male teachers and non-head teachers, female teachers and head teachers have better affective competence, especially in affective quality, affective expression and communication. Comparing with the teachers without administrative positions or honorary titles，the teachers who have administrative positions or honorary titles have higher affective competence level, especially in the aspects of affective quality, affective recognition, affective expression and communication. However, there is no significant difference in the level of affective competence of teachers with different teaching years, professional titles and educational background. Only there is significant difference in the level of “affective regulation” of teachers, the teachers who are younger or have higher educational background perform better.