近年来，“教育内卷”在大学生群体中迅速流行，在教育圈也掀起一股讨论热潮，频繁出现于各社交媒体平台。“教育内卷”在其成为流行用语之前受关注不高，已有研究集中于以“内卷”概念描述部分教育领域“瓶颈期”的内卷现象及形成原因。随着“教育内卷”的流行，学者开始基于“内卷”理论对竞争性、内耗性的“教育内卷”及其造成的影响进行讨论。但目前相关研究缺乏学生群体视角的探索。大学生作为产生“教育内卷”共识的受教育者群体，从他们的视角研究“教育内卷”，是目前较为迫切和实际的问题。本研究重点关注大学生视角下的“教育内卷”，研究者运用访谈法对我国12所高校25位大学生群体进行“教育内卷”的相关访谈，基于扎根理论的质性研究方法对所收集的材料进行分析。通过扎根理论的三级编码分析，总结了学生视角下的“教育内卷”的理论框架，该框架主要由教育内卷形成原因、教育内卷概念、教育内卷影响三个部分构成。在“教育内卷”概念方面，传统学术意义上的“内卷”代表有增长而无发展的边际效益递减或某种内部不断精细化的固有发展模式，学生视角下的“教育内卷”与其有着较大差别，主要由过程中的非理性竞争以及结果上的非内涵发展构成。在“教育内卷”的形成原因方面，其主要由客观因素和主观因素构成。客观原因主要包括导向偏差和朋辈裹挟，导向偏差主要是社会评价导向偏差和家庭环境导向偏差，朋辈裹挟通过跟风影响以及被动选择两种方式影响他们进行“教育内卷”。主观因素主要是个体的自我异化，包括精神迷茫、过度自我和沉沦妥协。在“教育内卷”的影响方面，主要涉及心理健康和教育意义感，心理健康体现为对情绪健康的损害、个体价值感的降低，教育意义感则体现为大学意义感以及专业意义感的削弱。最后，在研究结论与讨论中对学生群体中“教育内卷”的流行进行了分析。尽管学生视角下的“教育内卷”非常流行，但其具有很强的个体倾向性，更多的是功利主义取向下的教育焦虑。在对这一概念本身进行探讨时，要辩证地看待我国教育发展的现状，理性分析当前我国教育是否“内卷化”。教育是育人的活动，而人的发展并非纯粹量的增长的线性发展模式，不能将边际效益递减简单套用于教育活动的评估，教育价值性被不应被工具性消解。
In recent years, "educational involution" has rapidly become popular among college students. It is a hotly debated term among college students. It has also set off lots of discussion in the education field, and has frequently appeared on various social media platforms. "Educational involution" received little attention before it became a popular term. Existing studies have focused on using the concept of "involution" to describe the phenomenon and causes of involution in the "bottleneck period" in some educational fields. With the popularity of "educational involution", scholars have begun to reorganize the concept of "educational involution" based on the theory of "Involution ", and discuss the competitive and mental internal friction of "educational involution" and its impact. However, the current related research lacks the exploration of the perspective of student groups. College students, as a group of educated people who have a consensus on "educational involution", researching "educational involution" from their perspective is a more urgent and practical problem at present.This research focuses on the "educational involution" from the perspective of college students. The researcher used the interview method to conduct interviews with 25 college students in 12 universities in China related to the "educational involution" to collect material for analysis. Through the three-level coding analysis of grounded theory, the theoretical framework of "educational involution" from the perspective of students is summarized.In terms of the concept of "educational involution", the"Involution Theory" in the traditional academic sense represents a diminishing marginal benefit with growth without development or an inherent development model with continuous internal refinement. "Educational involution" from the perspective of students is different, mainly composed of irrational competition in the process and non-connotative development in the result. Irrational competition is manifested in the disqualification of competition accompanied by competitive anxiety, and non-connotative development and irrational competition complement each other, which is reflected in the indifference of development motives and the inability to achieve qualitative development. In terms of the formation reasons of "educational involution", it is mainly composed of objective factors and subjective factors. The objective reasons mainly include orientation bias and peer coercion. The orientation bias include social evaluation orientation bias and family environment orientation bias. Peer coercion influences them to carry out "educational involution" through following the peer trend and passive selection. The subjective factor is mainly the individual's self-alienation, including mental confusion, excessive self conscious and sinking into compromise. In terms of the impact of "educational involution", it mainly involves mental health and educational significance. Mental health is reflected in the damage to emotional health and the reduction of individual sense of value. The sense of educational significance is reflected in the weakening of the sense of university and professional significance. Finally, the prevalence of "educational involution" in the student group is analyzed in the conclusion and discussion of the study. Although the "educational involution" from the perspective of students is very popular, it has a strong individual tendency and is more of an educational anxiety from a utilitarian orientation. When discussing the concept itself, it is necessary to analyze the current situation of educational development in our country, and rationally analyze whether the current education in our country is really "involutionized". Education is the activity of educating people, and the development of people is not a linear development model of purely quantitative growth. The diminishing marginal benefit cannot be simply applied to the evaluation of educational activities. No matter how education develops, education should still be the education that emphasizes people, respects people, and promotes people's all-round development.
