小学“心灵对话”道德教学模式的研究
|
摘要
我国小学传统道德教学模式多采用说教式,禁锢了学生思想,而新课改后的小学道德教学虽然加强了与生活的联系,但是却在实践中出现了边缘化的倾向。因此,本文利用XX小学道德校本课程开发的有利时机,并结合大量的文献研究,提升构建出了一套新型小学道德教学模式,它不仅丰富了我国小学道德教学理论,而且也给小学道德教学实践提供了指导。该教学模式吸收了目前新课程改革所倡导的“心灵对话”理念,并将建构主义理论、主体间性理论以及心灵哲学理论运用到了其中,构建了该教学模式的内涵、功能、操作程序、实施条件,同时提出了实施的原则和策略等。该教学模式关注到了学生的内心世界,解放了教师的旧有教学观念,力求使师生在完全没有内在与外在压力和制约下彼此敞开心扉,进行平等的内心交流,从而达到伦理上的视界融合,使得双方德性共同成长与提高,并使之内化为心灵的一部分。
本研究的研究方法具体包括:文献研究、课堂观察和个案分析。其中,文献研究和课堂观察分别从理论和实施两方面对“心灵对话”道德教学模式进行研究。最后,用个案分析的方法进一步验证了该教学模式。
本研究的结果表明:该教学模式区别于以往的道德教学模式,它能充分挖掘学生心灵深处的道德情感,并以心灵对话为核心,给予了学生自由发言的机会,而且解决了课堂教学时间有限的难题。但是,“心灵对话”道德教学模式也同样存在着不足之处,此外对其评价机制和评价标准还有待进一步的研究。
Moral education in primary school in our country at present still has always been the weak areas of ethics research. traditional moral instruction mode limits the thoughts of the students. The new curriculum reform makes the primary moral teaching strengthen the relationship with the real life, but actually the moral teaching in reality has been marginalization tendency, and an increasing number of activities have also caused moral teaching to the activities of the other extreme. Therefore, the purpose of this study is based on the current primary moral teaching and brings up a set of effective primary moral teaching mode. The mode absorbs the concept of spiritual dialogue of the current curriculum reform and the theory of Constructivism, inter-subjectivity, philosophy of mind. Therefore, it construct the goal of mode, the sequence of the operation, and the implementation of conditions and so on. Simultaneously it proposes the strategy and practice of the principle. This mode pays more attention to the souls of the students, and also liberates the old teaching concepts of the teachers. What is more, the teachers and students can open their hearts to each other completely and carry on the equal the innermost feelings conversation in the absence of internal and external pressures and constraints, achieved the visibility fusion in ethics. At last the spiritual dialogue mode makes the bilateral morality character grow together and enhance, internalized as a part in a mind.
The study includes the following research methods: literature research, classroom observation and case analysis. The literature research which is based on theory and classroom observation which is based on practice study the spiritual dialogue model. Finally, the author testifies this mode using the cases analysis.
The results of this study show that the teaching model which is different from the past mode of instruction, tap the bottom moral emotion of students’heart. The core of this mode is the dialogue between the hearts and it gives the students a good opportunity to speak freely. At the same time, it solves the deficiencies of the limited time in classroom teaching. However, the "spiritual dialogue" moral teaching mode has the deficiency. In addition, its evaluation mechanism and evaluation criteria will research in the next step.
本研究的研究方法具体包括:文献研究、课堂观察和个案分析。其中,文献研究和课堂观察分别从理论和实施两方面对“心灵对话”道德教学模式进行研究。最后,用个案分析的方法进一步验证了该教学模式。
本研究的结果表明:该教学模式区别于以往的道德教学模式,它能充分挖掘学生心灵深处的道德情感,并以心灵对话为核心,给予了学生自由发言的机会,而且解决了课堂教学时间有限的难题。但是,“心灵对话”道德教学模式也同样存在着不足之处,此外对其评价机制和评价标准还有待进一步的研究。
Moral education in primary school in our country at present still has always been the weak areas of ethics research. traditional moral instruction mode limits the thoughts of the students. The new curriculum reform makes the primary moral teaching strengthen the relationship with the real life, but actually the moral teaching in reality has been marginalization tendency, and an increasing number of activities have also caused moral teaching to the activities of the other extreme. Therefore, the purpose of this study is based on the current primary moral teaching and brings up a set of effective primary moral teaching mode. The mode absorbs the concept of spiritual dialogue of the current curriculum reform and the theory of Constructivism, inter-subjectivity, philosophy of mind. Therefore, it construct the goal of mode, the sequence of the operation, and the implementation of conditions and so on. Simultaneously it proposes the strategy and practice of the principle. This mode pays more attention to the souls of the students, and also liberates the old teaching concepts of the teachers. What is more, the teachers and students can open their hearts to each other completely and carry on the equal the innermost feelings conversation in the absence of internal and external pressures and constraints, achieved the visibility fusion in ethics. At last the spiritual dialogue mode makes the bilateral morality character grow together and enhance, internalized as a part in a mind.
The study includes the following research methods: literature research, classroom observation and case analysis. The literature research which is based on theory and classroom observation which is based on practice study the spiritual dialogue model. Finally, the author testifies this mode using the cases analysis.
The results of this study show that the teaching model which is different from the past mode of instruction, tap the bottom moral emotion of students’heart. The core of this mode is the dialogue between the hearts and it gives the students a good opportunity to speak freely. At the same time, it solves the deficiencies of the limited time in classroom teaching. However, the "spiritual dialogue" moral teaching mode has the deficiency. In addition, its evaluation mechanism and evaluation criteria will research in the next step.
引文
①王丽荣.中日德育途径方法的异同比较[J].外国中小学教育,2005,(7):37.
②王玖枝.关于品德教学模式的探索[J],山西高等学校社会科学学报,2002,(11):31.
①朱沛雨.让学生道德在体验中升华——兼谈体验性道德教学模式[J],内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版),2005,(6):24.
②李进.“学生参与式”德育教学模式初探[J],山西广播电视大学学报,2007,(3):17.
③刘楚魁.对思想品德课动态教学模式的再探索[J],内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版),2003,(4):20.
④黄秋明,王正.发展性德育教学模式研究[J],职业技术教育(教科版)2003,(13):25.
①胡厚德.德育学原理[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997.47-48.
①胡厚德.德育学原理[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997.48-51.
①转引自戚万学、杜时忠编著.现代德育论[M].济南:山东教育出版社,1997.201.
①张世英.哲学导论[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2002.284.
②雅斯贝尔斯.邹进译.什么是教育[M].北京:三联书店,1991.3.
③John R. Searle, The Rediscovery of the Mind, The MIT Press, 1992,p. xi.
①任晓明,李旭燕.当代美国心灵哲学研究述评[J].哲学动态.2006,(5):31.
②[美]威廉·布莱尔·古尔德.弗兰克尔:意义与人生[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社, 2000.5.
③转引自王建刚.狂欢诗学——巴赫金文学思想研究[M].上海:学林出版社,2001.271.
①(德)雅斯贝尔斯著,邹进译.什么是教育[M].上海:三联书店,1991.11—12.
②张天宝.论新型师生关系的建构[J],中国教育报,2000,(10):21.
①万俊人.重叙美德的故事[J].读书,2001,(6):24.
①林崇德.教师素质的构成及其培养途径[J].中国教育学刊,1995,(6):5-9.
②马云鹏.课程与教学论[M].中央广播电视大学,2005.261.
①夏伟东.道德本质论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1991.149.
②马丁·布贝尔.品格教育[A].王承绪等编译.现代西方教育论著选[C].北京:人民教育出版社,2001.326.
①保罗·弗莱雷.顾建新等译.被压迫者教育学[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.103.
②戴维·伯姆.王松涛译.论对话[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.“译丛总序”4.
③戴维·伯姆.王松涛译.论对话[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.3
④滕守尧.文化的边缘[M].北京:作家出版社,1997.282.
①内尔·诺丁斯.于天龙译.学会关心——教育的另一种模式[M].北京:教育科学版社,2003.33.
②李镇西.对话:平等中的引导[J].人民教育,2004.3-4.
③内尔·诺丁斯.于天龙译.学会关心——教育的另一种模式[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2003.33.
④巴赫金.白春仁等译.诗学与访谈[M].石家庄:河北教育出版社,1998.77.
⑤滕守尧.文化的边缘[M].北京:作家出版社,1997.369.
①转引自陈华兴.教化和教化哲学[J].复旦学报,1994,(6):19.
②中国教育报[N],1999-9-9(2).
①刘丙元.试析学校道德教育实践中的积习之弊[J].当代教育科学,2005,(19):18-21.
[1]王丽荣.中日德育途径方法的异同比较[J].外国中小学教育,2005,(7):37.
[2]王玖枝.关于品德教学模式的探索[J],山西高等学校社会科学学报,2002,(11):31.
[3]朱沛雨.让学生道德在体验中升华——兼谈体验性道德教学模式[J],内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版),2005,(6):24.
[4]李进.“学生参与式”德育教学模式初探[J],山西广播电视大学学报,2007,(3):17.
[5]刘楚魁.对思想品德课动态教学模式的再探索[J],内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版),2003,(4):20.
[6]黄秋明,王正.发展性德育教学模式研究[J],职业技术教育(教科版)2003,(13):25.
[7][8]胡厚德.德育学原理[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997.47-48、48-51.
[9]转引自戚万学、杜时忠编著.现代德育论[M].济南:山东教育出版社,1997.201.
[10]张世英.哲学导论[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2002.284.
[11][17](德)雅斯贝尔斯.邹进译.什么是教育[M].北京:三联书店,1991.3、11—12.
[12]John R. Searle, The Rediscovery of the Mind, The MIT Press, 1992,p. xi.
[13]任晓明,李旭燕.当代美国心灵哲学研究述评[J].哲学动态.2006,(5):31.
[14](美)威廉·布莱尔·古尔德.弗兰克尔:意义与人生[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社, 2000.5.
[15]转引自王建刚.狂欢诗学——巴赫金文学思想研究[M].上海:学林出版社,2001.271.
[16]张天宝.论新型师生关系的建构[J],中国教育报,2000,(10):21.
[18]夏伟东.道德本质论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1991.149.
[19]马丁·布贝尔.品格教育[A].王承绪等编译.现代西方教育论著选[C].北京:人民教育出版社,2001.326.
[20]保罗·弗莱雷.顾建新等译.被压迫者教育学[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.103.
[21]戴维·伯姆.王松涛译.论对话[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.“译丛总序”4、3.
[22][27]滕守尧.文化的边缘[M].北京:作家出版社,1997.282、369.
[23]内尔·诺丁斯.于天龙译.学会关心——教育的另一种模式[M].北京:教育科学版社,2003.33.
[24]李镇西.对话:平等中的引导[J].人民教育,2004.3-4.
[25]内尔·诺丁斯.于天龙译.学会关心——教育的另一种模式[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2003.33.
[26]巴赫金.白春仁等译.诗学与访谈[M].石家庄:河北教育出版社,1998.77.
[28]转引自陈华兴.教化和教化哲学[J].复旦学报,1994,(6):19.
[29]中国教育报[N],1999-9-9(2).
[30]万俊人.重叙美德的故事[J].读书,2001,(6):24.
[31]林崇德.教师素质的构成及其培养途径[J].中国教育学刊,1995,(6):5-9.
[32]马云鹏.课程与教学论[M].中央广播电视大学,2005.261.
[33]刘丙元.试析学校道德教育实践中的积习之弊[J].当代教育科学,2005,(19):18-21.
[34]檀传宝.学校道德教育原理[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2000.
[35]Colin J. Marsh: Key concepts for understanding curriculum London;New York;Falmer Press, 1992.
[36]Louis A. Castenell,Jr. and William F. Pinar: Understanding curriculum as racial text: representations of identity and difference in education, Albany;State University of New York Press ,1993.
[37] Herman G. van de Werfhorst, Gerbert Kraaykamp,Four Field-Related Educational Resources and Their Impact on Labor,Consumption, and Sociopolitical Orientation, Sociology of Education,2001.
[38] Patton, M.Q. Qualitative Education and Research Methods.2nd Ed. Newbury Park: Sage, 1990.
[39]Carr W,Kemmis S. Becoming Critical:Education, knowledge and Action Research, The Falme Press,1982.
②王玖枝.关于品德教学模式的探索[J],山西高等学校社会科学学报,2002,(11):31.
①朱沛雨.让学生道德在体验中升华——兼谈体验性道德教学模式[J],内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版),2005,(6):24.
②李进.“学生参与式”德育教学模式初探[J],山西广播电视大学学报,2007,(3):17.
③刘楚魁.对思想品德课动态教学模式的再探索[J],内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版),2003,(4):20.
④黄秋明,王正.发展性德育教学模式研究[J],职业技术教育(教科版)2003,(13):25.
①胡厚德.德育学原理[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997.47-48.
①胡厚德.德育学原理[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997.48-51.
①转引自戚万学、杜时忠编著.现代德育论[M].济南:山东教育出版社,1997.201.
①张世英.哲学导论[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2002.284.
②雅斯贝尔斯.邹进译.什么是教育[M].北京:三联书店,1991.3.
③John R. Searle, The Rediscovery of the Mind, The MIT Press, 1992,p. xi.
①任晓明,李旭燕.当代美国心灵哲学研究述评[J].哲学动态.2006,(5):31.
②[美]威廉·布莱尔·古尔德.弗兰克尔:意义与人生[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社, 2000.5.
③转引自王建刚.狂欢诗学——巴赫金文学思想研究[M].上海:学林出版社,2001.271.
①(德)雅斯贝尔斯著,邹进译.什么是教育[M].上海:三联书店,1991.11—12.
②张天宝.论新型师生关系的建构[J],中国教育报,2000,(10):21.
①万俊人.重叙美德的故事[J].读书,2001,(6):24.
①林崇德.教师素质的构成及其培养途径[J].中国教育学刊,1995,(6):5-9.
②马云鹏.课程与教学论[M].中央广播电视大学,2005.261.
①夏伟东.道德本质论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1991.149.
②马丁·布贝尔.品格教育[A].王承绪等编译.现代西方教育论著选[C].北京:人民教育出版社,2001.326.
①保罗·弗莱雷.顾建新等译.被压迫者教育学[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.103.
②戴维·伯姆.王松涛译.论对话[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.“译丛总序”4.
③戴维·伯姆.王松涛译.论对话[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.3
④滕守尧.文化的边缘[M].北京:作家出版社,1997.282.
①内尔·诺丁斯.于天龙译.学会关心——教育的另一种模式[M].北京:教育科学版社,2003.33.
②李镇西.对话:平等中的引导[J].人民教育,2004.3-4.
③内尔·诺丁斯.于天龙译.学会关心——教育的另一种模式[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2003.33.
④巴赫金.白春仁等译.诗学与访谈[M].石家庄:河北教育出版社,1998.77.
⑤滕守尧.文化的边缘[M].北京:作家出版社,1997.369.
①转引自陈华兴.教化和教化哲学[J].复旦学报,1994,(6):19.
②中国教育报[N],1999-9-9(2).
①刘丙元.试析学校道德教育实践中的积习之弊[J].当代教育科学,2005,(19):18-21.
[1]王丽荣.中日德育途径方法的异同比较[J].外国中小学教育,2005,(7):37.
[2]王玖枝.关于品德教学模式的探索[J],山西高等学校社会科学学报,2002,(11):31.
[3]朱沛雨.让学生道德在体验中升华——兼谈体验性道德教学模式[J],内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版),2005,(6):24.
[4]李进.“学生参与式”德育教学模式初探[J],山西广播电视大学学报,2007,(3):17.
[5]刘楚魁.对思想品德课动态教学模式的再探索[J],内蒙古师范大学学报(教育科学版),2003,(4):20.
[6]黄秋明,王正.发展性德育教学模式研究[J],职业技术教育(教科版)2003,(13):25.
[7][8]胡厚德.德育学原理[M].北京:北京师范大学出版社,1997.47-48、48-51.
[9]转引自戚万学、杜时忠编著.现代德育论[M].济南:山东教育出版社,1997.201.
[10]张世英.哲学导论[M].北京:北京大学出版社,2002.284.
[11][17](德)雅斯贝尔斯.邹进译.什么是教育[M].北京:三联书店,1991.3、11—12.
[12]John R. Searle, The Rediscovery of the Mind, The MIT Press, 1992,p. xi.
[13]任晓明,李旭燕.当代美国心灵哲学研究述评[J].哲学动态.2006,(5):31.
[14](美)威廉·布莱尔·古尔德.弗兰克尔:意义与人生[M].北京:中国轻工业出版社, 2000.5.
[15]转引自王建刚.狂欢诗学——巴赫金文学思想研究[M].上海:学林出版社,2001.271.
[16]张天宝.论新型师生关系的建构[J],中国教育报,2000,(10):21.
[18]夏伟东.道德本质论[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,1991.149.
[19]马丁·布贝尔.品格教育[A].王承绪等编译.现代西方教育论著选[C].北京:人民教育出版社,2001.326.
[20]保罗·弗莱雷.顾建新等译.被压迫者教育学[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2001.103.
[21]戴维·伯姆.王松涛译.论对话[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2004.“译丛总序”4、3.
[22][27]滕守尧.文化的边缘[M].北京:作家出版社,1997.282、369.
[23]内尔·诺丁斯.于天龙译.学会关心——教育的另一种模式[M].北京:教育科学版社,2003.33.
[24]李镇西.对话:平等中的引导[J].人民教育,2004.3-4.
[25]内尔·诺丁斯.于天龙译.学会关心——教育的另一种模式[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2003.33.
[26]巴赫金.白春仁等译.诗学与访谈[M].石家庄:河北教育出版社,1998.77.
[28]转引自陈华兴.教化和教化哲学[J].复旦学报,1994,(6):19.
[29]中国教育报[N],1999-9-9(2).
[30]万俊人.重叙美德的故事[J].读书,2001,(6):24.
[31]林崇德.教师素质的构成及其培养途径[J].中国教育学刊,1995,(6):5-9.
[32]马云鹏.课程与教学论[M].中央广播电视大学,2005.261.
[33]刘丙元.试析学校道德教育实践中的积习之弊[J].当代教育科学,2005,(19):18-21.
[34]檀传宝.学校道德教育原理[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2000.
[35]Colin J. Marsh: Key concepts for understanding curriculum London;New York;Falmer Press, 1992.
[36]Louis A. Castenell,Jr. and William F. Pinar: Understanding curriculum as racial text: representations of identity and difference in education, Albany;State University of New York Press ,1993.
[37] Herman G. van de Werfhorst, Gerbert Kraaykamp,Four Field-Related Educational Resources and Their Impact on Labor,Consumption, and Sociopolitical Orientation, Sociology of Education,2001.
[38] Patton, M.Q. Qualitative Education and Research Methods.2nd Ed. Newbury Park: Sage, 1990.
[39]Carr W,Kemmis S. Becoming Critical:Education, knowledge and Action Research, The Falme Press,1982.