博士研究生教育作为我国学历教育的最高层次，不仅反映了最高的教育水平和科研水平，也影响着整个国家的知识创新能力和学术水准。当前，中国博士教育的规模已跃居世界首位，但是在数量获得蓬勃发展的同时，其质量也面临新的挑战。为了提高博士生的培养质量，博士生导师的学术指导已成为学者关注的焦点和政府工作的着力点。因此，“导师对博士生的学术指导”这一研究话域，不仅具有重要的时代意义，在未来也将成为历久弥新且经久不衰的课题。 目前，学术界有关导师对博士生学术指导的研究多侧重于对国外模式的介绍和借鉴，有限的经验研究在内容上关注的更多是表层现象，在方法上具有不适切性，亟需方法、理论和分析维度的突破。本研究扎根于国内博士生教育实践，关照本土文化的脉络，关注在行动中的博士生指导及其逻辑，聚焦学术指导的类型及其影响。为了更深入地“走进去”，本研究对博士生学术指导实践开展了为期三年多的跟踪研究，通过访谈法、观察法和实物收集法，获取大量的资料，借助 MAXQDA12.0软件进行编码，以情境分析和类属分析相结合的方式综合呈现学术指导的典型案例。这种基于社会历史文化背景对学术指导这一专业工作的动态过程进行深度描述、客观分析与类型建构，具有重要的理论意义和现实意义。 本研究对政策文本和教育年鉴等史料和数据进行梳理，将中国当代博士教育的发展分为“初步探索期”、“发展改进期”、“逐步完善期”、“急速扩张期”、“创新提质期”和“深化改革期”六个阶段。通过对各个阶段的上层制度设计和学术指导实践两个层面对历史脉络中的学术指导进行追溯。研究发现，有关学术指导的政策制度演进基本遵循探索、积累、反思和改革的循环上升通道，与之相伴的是学术指导实践愈来愈趋向规范化、制度化、理论化和体系化。 在对学术指导的过程和类型建构方面，经过持久的资料浸泡和漫长的理论探索，本研究借鉴了“分类”-“架构”组合概念的思维模式，用结构化的视角对实证资料进行探照。首先，本研究以“师生之间的连结关系和区隔程度”作为“分类”，通过 “聚焦师生角色”和“透视师门场域”来“打量师生距离”，由外而内、由表及里地聚焦学术指导中的师生角色区隔，划分出“强制依赖的斗争”的强分类关系（支配者-忍受者；放任者-自立者）和“自愿依恋的信任”的弱分类关系（示范者-追随者；支持者-合作者）；接着，本研究以“沟通脉络中的知识选择与控制”作为“架构”，从平台（“读书”、“论文”和“项目”）和路径（“制度规约”、“仪式秩序”和“指导符码”）两个层面对师生在学术指导中的知识控制进行阐释，划分出“强迫遵从的独断”的强架构与“自主选择的协商”的弱架构。最后，本研究以强弱分类与强弱架构为横轴和纵轴，构建出四个象限，对学术指导的行动进行类型学划分，并以本土隐喻的方式进行呈现，即“乱插手”的“训”导、“手把手”的“教”导、“搭把手”的“辅”导和“大撒手”的“罢”导。 导师对博士生的学术指导在“学术的传承”、“博士生的成长”、“指导的衔续”和“导师的收获”等方面产生重大而深远的影响，它不仅是知识的“点金术”，亦是学术“再生产”中不可或缺的重要环节，尤其是对于知识生产模式而言，不同的学术指导方式会使其走向“螺旋上升式”和“制衣工厂式”的迥异模式。 总之，本研究以知识社会学为探照灯，以“权力”和“控制”为索引，以“分类”和“架构”为组合，以“知识生产”和“文化烙印”为切入点，从历史发展、过程描述、类型界定与作用影响四个方面探讨导师与博士生在学术指导过程中的角色关系和知识生产，不仅增加了学界对学术指导的新理解，拓展了学术指导研究的深度与广度，从更深远的意义来看，对于以知识为核心的学术职业的构建与传承，都具有深刻的理论意义。

As the highest level of education in China, doctoral education affects the entire country’s knowledge innovation and academic standards. At present, the size of China’s doctoral education has leapt to the world’s first class. Along with the vigorous development of the quantity, its quality is facing new challenges. In order to improve the quality of doctoral training, doctoral academic supervision has become the focus of governmental issues. Therefore, the academic supervision on doctoral students, as a study field, not only has important significance in the current time, but also becomes a lasting and enduring subject in the future. At present, the academic research on doctoral academic supervision focuses on the introduction and reference of foreign models. The limited empirical research focuses mainly on the superficial phenomenon. Therefore, the breakthrough of the research method as well as the theoretical and analytical dimensions is greatly needed. This study takes roots in the domestic doctoral education practice by caring about the context of local culture, concerning about the doctoral supervision in the action and its own logic, as well as focusing on the types of academic supervision and its impact. In order to “walk in” further, this study has carried out a three-year follow-up study on the academic supervision practice. Through interviews, observation and document collection, this research have obtained a lot of data which is coded with MAXQDA12.0. After situational analysis and generic analysis, this study describes explicitly the typical cases of the doctoral academic supervision. The deep historical description, the objective analysis and the type construction are based on the historical background of social culture, which has important theoretical and practical significance. Taking the historical materials such as the policy documents, the data on education yearbooks and the memoirs, this study teased out the six stages of the development of contemporary Chinese doctoral education, which covers from “preliminary exploration” to “deepening the reform”. Through the analysis of the upper system design and the practical experience of various stages, it is found that the evolution of the policy system related to academic supervision basically follows the cycle of ascending channel of “exploration, accumulation, reflection and reform”, through which the academic supervision practice is becoming more and more standardized, theoretical and innovative. In the aspect of the type-construction of academic supervision, this paper draws on the theoretical model of “classification and framing”, and uses the structured perspective to analyze the empirical data. First of all, this study takes “the relationship and the separation between teachers and doctoral students” as a “classification”. Through the description of “the supervision field”, “the roles of teachers and students” and “the distance between teachers and students”, the “classification” is divided to two types: the mechanical linkage –“forced dependence (struggle)” and the organic linkage –“voluntary attachment (trust)”. Then, the study takes “the control of knowledge in the communication context” as a “framing”. Through the description of the “platform” (“reading”, “essay” and “project”), and the “path” (“institutional context”, “ritual order” and “guide code”), the “framing” is divided to two types: the strong framing of “dictatorship” and the weak framing of “negotiation”. Finally, with strong and weak classification and framing as horizontal and vertical axes, this study builds four quadrants, which represent four different types of academic supervision. Furthermore, this research metaphorically represents the four types in use of the image of “hand”, which are “lend a hand”, “hand by hand”, “give a hand” and “leave a hand”. The academic supervision on doctoral students has a significant and far-reaching impact on the aspects of academic inheritance, career development and cultural transmission. It is not only the “golden touch” of knowledge, but also the important part of the academic “reproduction”. Especially for the model of knowledge production, different academic supervision will make it into a “spiral model” or a “garment factory model” . In short, taking knowledge sociology as the searchlight, the “power” and “control” as the index, and the “knowledge production” and “culture branding” as the breakthrough point, this study discusses the supervisor- doctoral student relationship and knowledge production in the process of academic supervision. This study not only increased the new understanding of the academic supervision on doctoral students, but also expanded the depth and breadth of academic supervision research. From the more profound point of view, it also has a theoretical significance on the construction and inheritance of academic career.