摘要
如何在新型的学习文化中,真正促进学习者的化学学习与科学素养的发展是当今化学课程与教学改革研究的核心议题。对此,笔者选择的研究视角是:面向学习者的化学教学设计。面向学习者的化学教学设计意为聚焦学习者的学习与发展,在学习活动中强调学习者的主动性,基于当今关于人类学习研究的新成果以及教育系统发展的新观点,以化学科学为依托,突出学习者的整体和谐发展,将培养学习者科学素养和创新意识作为贯穿化学教学的核心要素,来设计化学教学过程。
全文分作六个部分。
第一部分是整个研究的学科背景。笔者分析了当今化学教育的现状与发展前景,概括出六个主题:化学在跨越边界中发展;理解化学是培养科学家和公民科学素养的需要;化学实验是化学学习与探究的基本方式;科学与人文——科学的意义与价值;现代信息技术融入化学课程与教学;化学教师在设计与研究中成长。这些主题也是我国化学课程与教学改革的着手点。笔者指出,在化学课程及教学内容设计上必须关注化学科学的发展历史及其在整个科学中的地位和跟其他科学之间的本质联系,突出化学实验作为理解化学的基本方式的重要性,要彻底改变以往只把化学实验当作工具而经常将其取而代之的状况,在化学教育中强调科学精神与人文精神的统一,利用信息技术优势促进学习者的化学学习,同时,化学教师要努力提高自己的专业素养,成为教学设计者和学习者。笔者对国内外化学教学设计的研究状况的调研发现:如果缺乏了先进的学习理论和教育教学的理论知识,化学教师往往就会依赖教科书和教学大纲,希望那些并不熟知其所身处的文化与境及其所面对的具有独特个性学生的课程开发者为其开处方。本部分研究确定了面向学习者化学教学设计研究的具体问题和研究思路。
第二部分对教学设计的发展历程进行了释读,厘清了长期以来在化学教学设计领域中混淆的概念:教育技术、教学媒体、教学设计的模式与由来、教学设计背后的理论支撑,等等。所有这些,都为研究面向学习者的化学教学设计呈现了
一幅清晰的技术背景,尤其是对历史上教学设计理论的反思,使笔者对面向学习
者化学教学设计理论基础的研究有了一个警醒和慎重的态度。
第三部分,研究了设计、教学设计、教学设计观等教学设计的基本问题,意
在确立笔者对教学设计的看法,指出本文的面向学习者化学教学设计强调的是教
学问题解决,意在提供设计的知识库、策略包和实践案例。在本部分中笔者运用
了叙事法,讲述了一名专家化学教师思考与设计教学的故事,并通过跟流行于化
学教师培训领域的专业教学设计模型进行比较,找到了教师设计教学跟专业人员
教授教学设计之间的差距,从而提出实现面向学习者的化学教学设计必须让教师
成为设计者,并指出专业人员要为化学教师成为设计者提供支撑,概括出教师作
为设计者的,面向学习者化学教学设计的“对话、辩证、发展”的互动式教学设
计的特征。
第四部分对面向学习者的化学教学设计的理论基础做了探讨。当代学习研究
的重要成果如建构主义和与境性说,以及科学教育中的人本建构主张对研究面向
学习者的化学教学设计提供了重要启示。一方面,化学教学要创设优化的学习环
境,在问题的真实情境脉络中支撑个体对化学意义的建构,评价学习者的科学理
解;另一方面,鼓励学习中的协商与互助,让所有的学生发出自己的声音,在协
商与互动中实现集体知识的增长和协作文化的弘扬,因此有必要创建学习者共同
体。在面向学习者的化学教学中,不可忘记化学科学的本质,必须注意追求科学
理解不可放弃批判;关注语言的协商,不可忽视经验世界;关注活动设计不可忽
视目标。在探讨了学习理论基础之后,笔者尝试研究了一个极富挑战性的问题,
即实现面向学习者的化学教学设计必须首先要有一个面向学习者的化学教学系
统。笔者根据系统要素运行状态中表现出的整体涌现性的功能区分出了由学习者
准备、动力、学习环境、学习活动和媒体传输五个子系统构成的化学教学系统的
运行结构,并对这样一种结构的特点进行了初步分析。最后,根据面向学习者化
学教学系统的特点以及学习理论的启示,笔者提出了面向学习者的化学教学设计
的原则。
第五部分是实践研究。笔者对前面各部分提出的观点进行了融合,详细探讨
了实现面向学习者化学教学设计的一种途径:化学教学中的学习者共同体,提出
了化学教学中学习者共同体设计的理论框架,该框架包含十个要素:目标、任务
/主题、学习活动、角色分工、中心/边缘和身份认同、资源、话语/对话、知识、
产品/过程、评价,并给出了关于各个要素的说明;然后通过四个案例,详细描
述和分析了学习者共同体在化学教学中的实践,提出了包括“问题、目标、工具
/资源和脚手架”四个要素在内的基于问题设计面向学习者化学学习环境的框架,
并对其中运用“主题型学习知识分类”设计共同体学习的知识,以及教师设计脚
手架作了较为深入的探讨;最后,对学习者共同体的有效实施提出了八条建议。
第六部分对全文研究从五个方面进行了总结和新
Learner-focused Chemistry Instructional Design
Researches on the reform of chemistry curriculum and instruction have paid increasing concern about the key issue: How to facilitate learners in their learning of chemistry and their development of science literacy in the emerging learning culture world-wide. The author tries to probe into this issue from the standpoint of learner -focused chemistry instructional design. By learner-focused chemistry instructional design the author means when we design chemistry instructional process: a) the level of learning and development of learners is in focus; b) students are active learners; c) design is based on the latest findings about how people learn and educational system development; d) design should accord with the chemistry logic and content; e) design emphasizes on learners' whole and harmonious development; and f) fostering learners science literacy and innovative consciousness is the core of chemical education.
There are six parts in this dissertation:
Part one is chemistry background of this dissertation. The author generalizes six topics of today's chemical education by analyzing the situation of today of chemical education status and development prospect. These topics are: chemistry is developing in a cross-boundary way; understanding chemistry is required for cultivating scientists and scientific literacy of citizen; chemical experimentation is a basic way of learning
and inquiring chemistry; the significance and value of science--science and
humanity; modern information technology has been being integrated into chemistry curriculum and instruction; chemistry teachers grow up through design and research. All of these are also main respects of the implementation of the reform of chemistry curriculum and instruction of our country. With regard to the content design of chemistry curriculum and instruction, the author points out that designers must concern about the history of chemistry, its locality in the whole science system and its substantial connections with other science subjects; we must give prominence to the importance of chemical experimentation as a basic way of understanding chemistry and put an end to the situation that chemical experimentation is often neglected regarded as a tool in traditional chemistry instruction; we must pay attention to the
unity of scientific and humanistic spirits in chemical education, and take the advantage of IT to facilitate learner's chemistry learning; chemistry teachers must improve their professional qualities and should become instructional designers and learners. Through summarizing national and international studies about chemical instructional design, the author finds that in the absence of learning theories and pedagogical content knowledge, chemistry teachers often rely on text books and syllabus, therefore forced to rely on the prescriptions of "absentee curriculum developers", who know nothing about the socio-cultural context where chemistry teachers are situated and the particular students in each chemistry teacher's classroom. Then the author identifies concrete research problems and the research way in this part.
In part two, the author tries to interpret the history of instructional design and clarify some basic concepts confused in the field of chemistry instructional design for many years. These concepts include educational/instructional technology, instructional media, instructional design models and their source, the foundations of instructional design, all of which show a clear technological background for learner-focused chemistry instructional design, the reflection on instructional design theories in particular lead to the deliberate studies on theoretical foundations of learner-focused chemistry instructional design.
In part three, the dissertation proposes its viewpoint on instructional design by exploring design, instructional design, and several views of instructional design. The dissertation states that learner-focused chemistry instructional design implies that a knowledge bas
引文
(AAAS) American Association for the Advancement of Science(2000) . Design for science literacy. NY: Oxford University Press, Inc.
Association for teacher-librarianship (1999) . Resource-based Unit: Chemical as drugs. Canada.
Bandiera, M., et al.(1999) . Research in Science Education in Europe. Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
Barab.S. A. & Duffy, T.M. (2000) . From practice field to community of practice . In. D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land. Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environment, 25-55. NJ: LEA.
Beilby, A.E.(1974) . Instructional development in the public schools: Whose job? Educational Technology, 14(1) ,11-16.
Bela H. Banathy(1993a ). Comprehensive systems design in education: Designing educational around the learning experience level. Educational Technology, January, 33-35.
Bela H. Banathy(1993b). Comprehensive systems design in education: Envisioning the image. Educational Technology, August, 33-35.
Bela H. Banathy(1998) . Designing educational as a social system Educational Technology, 38(6) ,51-55.
Bell, P. & Winn, W.( 2000) . Distributed Cognitions, by nature and by design . In David H. Jonassen & Susan M. Land. Theoretical Foundations of learning Environments, 123-145. NJ: LEA .
Bentley, M.L. (1998) . Constructivism as a referent for reform science education . In M . Larochelle, et al. Constructivism and Education, 233-249. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Bielaczyc,K. & Collins, A.(1999) . Learning Communities in classroom: a reconceptualization of educational practice. In Charles M. Reigeluth (Ed.). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory( V.2) , 269-292. NJ: LEA.
Brush, T. & Saye, J. (2000) . Implementation and evaluation of a student-centered learning unit: A case study. ETR&D, 48(3) , 79-100.
Choi, J. & Hannafin, M. (1995) . Situated cognition and learning environments: Roles, structures,
and implications for design . ETR&D, 43(2) , 53-69 .
Cobb, P.(1996) . Constructivism and learning (2nd, ed). ,转引自; Leslie P. Steffe and Jerry Gale (1995) . Constructivism in Education, 41-56, 433-440. NJ: LEA.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1992) . The Jasoer experiment: An exploration of issues in learning and instructional design . ETR&D, 40(1) , 65-80.
Cognition and Technology Group at Vanderbilt (1993) . Anchored instruction and situated cognition revisited . Educational Technology, 33(3) , 52-70 .
Crawford, B. A., et al.(1999) . Elements of a Community of Learning in A middle School Science Classroom. Science Education, No.6, 701-722.
Dick,W. & Carey,L.(1996) . The systematic design of instruction. 4Ed. NY: HarperCollins College Publishers Inc.
Dick,W. (1996) . The Dick and Carey model: Will it survive the decade? ETR&D, 44(30) , 55-63.
Dijkstra,S.(2002) . Cnstrutivism, Curriculum, and Instructional Design载《首届建构主义与课程 教学改革国际研讨会论文》,上海:华东师大。
Disocoll, M. P. (2000) . Psychology of learning for Instruction(2nd Ed.). Needham Heights, Massachusetts: ALLyn & Bacon, A person Education Company.
Duffy, T.M. & Cunningham, D.J. (2001) : Constructivism: Implications for the Design and Delivery of Instruction, In David H.Jonassen (Ed.): Handbook of Rearch for Educational Communications and Technology, Http://www.aect.org./intranet/publications, 21/11/2001, updated.
Duffy,T.M., et al.(1993) . Designing environments for constructive learning. Germany Berlin: Springer-Verlag Berlin Heideberg .
Earle,S. R. (1994) . Instructional Design and the classroom teacher: looking back and moving ahead. Educational Technology, 34(3) : 6-10.
Editor(2000) . Editorial. Science Education, No.9,491-505.
Gagne, R.M. & Briggs,L.J.(1974) . Principles of instructional design. NY: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
Gergen, KJ. (1995) . Constructionism and educational process. In Leslie P. Steffe & Jerry Gale (1995) . Contract ivism in Educat ion, 17-39. NJ: LEA.
Gustafson, K.L.(1993) . Instructional design fundamentals: clouds on the horizon. Educational Technology, 33(2) , 27-32.
Gustafson, K.L., & Branch, R.M.(1997) . Revisioning models of instructional development. ETR&D, 45(3) , 73-89.
Hannafm, M., Land, S. M., & Oliver, K. (1999) . Open learning environments: Foundations, methods and models. In C. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional Design Theories and Models: A new paradigm of instructional theory(V.2) , 115-140. NJ: LEA.
Hardy, M.D. & Taylor, P.C.(1997) . Von Glasersfeld's radical constructivism: A critical review. Science & Education, 6(1-2) , 135-150.
Hardy, M.D. & Taylor, P.C.(1997) . Von Glasersfeld's radical constructivism: A critical review. Science & Education, 6(1-2) , 135-150.
Hibbard, K.M. (2000) . Performance-based learning and assessment in middle school science. NY: Richard H. Adin Freelance Editorial Services.
Hill, J.R. & Hannfm, M.J.(2001) .Teaching and learning in digital environments: the resurgence of resource-based learning. ET.R&D,49(3) ,37-52.
James, M. et al.(2000) . Chemical Connections(3nd.Ed.). Milton, Australia: John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Jonassen, D. H. (1997) . Instructional design models for well-structured and ill-structured problem-solving learning outcomes. ETR&D, 45(1) ,65-94.
Jonassen, D.(1999) . Designing Constructivist Learning Environments. In Charles M. Reigeluth (Ed.). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory(V.2) , 215-239. NJ: LEA.
Jonassen, D.H. & Land, S.M. (2000) . Theoretical foundations of learning environment. NJ: LEA.
Jonassen, D.H. & Murphy, L. (1999) . Activity Theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environment. ETR&D, 47(1) , 61-79.
Jonassen, D.H. (2000) . Revising Activity Theory as Framework for Designing Student-centered Learning Environments. In. D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land, Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, 89-121. NJ: LEA .
Jonassen, D.H. et al.(1997) . Certainty, Determinism, and Predictability in theories of instructional design: Lessons from Science. Educational Technology. 37(1) , 27-34.
Jonassen, D.H.(1991) . Evaluating constructivist learning . Educational Technology, 31(5) , 28-33.
Jonassen, D.H., Tessmer, M., & Hannum, W.H. (1999) . Task Analysis Methods for Instructional Design. NJ: LEA .
Jonassen,D.H.(1999) . Constructivisit learning environments. In Charles M. Reigeluth (Ed.). Instructional Design Theories and Models: A new paradigm of instructional theory: A new paradigm of instructional theory(V.2) , 215-239. NJ: LEA .
Kemp, J. E.(1985) . The instructional design process. NY: Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc.
Lagowski, J. J.(2000) . lessons for 21 st Century J. Chem. Edu., 77(7) , 818-823.
Lagowski, J. J.(2002) . The role of the laboratory in chemical education,载《化学教育》,12期, 4-12页。
Lagowski, J.J. (1998) . Chemical Education: Past, Present, and Future. J.Chem. Edu., 75(4) , 425-436.
Land, S.M. & Hannafin, M. J. (2000) . Student-centered learning environments . In D. H. Jonassen & S. M. Land. Theoretical Foundations of Learning Environments, 3-23. NJ: LEA.
Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1991) . Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Leinhardt,G.(1990) . Capturing craft knowledge in teaching. Educational Researcher, 19(2) ,18-25.
Merril, M.D.(1997) . Instructional Transaction Theory: An Instructional Design Model Based on Knowledge Objects. In Robert D. Tennyson Franz Schott, Norbert M. Seel, Sanne Dijkstra (Ed.). Instructional design: international perspective(V.1) , 381-394. NY: LEA.
Merril, M.D., & Jones, M.K.(1990a). Limitations of first generation instructional design. Educational Technology, 30(1) ,7-11.
Merril, M.D., & Jones, M.K.(1990b). Second generation instructional design(ID2) . Educational Technology, 30(2) ,7-14.
Merril,M.D.(1999) . Instructional Transaction Theory(ITT): An Instructional Design Model Based on Knowledge Objects. In Charles M. Reigeluth (Ed.). Instructional-Design Theories and Models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (V.2) , 397-424. NJ: LEA.
Merrill, M.D.,et al.(1996) . Reclaiming Instructional Design. Educational Technology, 36(5) , 5-7.
Mintzes, J.J.; Wandersee, J. H.; Novak, J. D. (2000) . Assessing Science Understanding: A Human Constructivist view. California: Academic Press.
Moallem, M. (1998) . An expert teacher's thinking and teaching and instructional design models and principles: an ethnographic study . ETR&D, 46(2) , 37-64.
Moallem, M. & Earle, R.S. (1998) . Instructional design models and teacher thinking: toward a new conceptual model for research and development. Educational Technology, 38(2) , 5-22.
Nelson, L.M.(1999) . Collaborative problem solving . In Charles M. Reigeluth(Ed.). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory : A new paradigm of instructional theory^ V.2) ,241-267. NJ: LEA.
Newby, T. J.; Stepich, D.A.; Lehman,J.D.; Russell, J.D.(1996) . Instructional technology for teaching and learning: designing instruction, integrating computers, and using media. NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Perkins, D. & Unger, C.(1999) . Teaching and learning for understanding. In Charles M. Reigeluth (Ed.). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory:
A new paradigm of instructional theory(V.2) , 91-114. NJ: LEA
Posner,R.(1985) . The history and use of the concepts "verbal" and "nonverbal", "interaction" and "communication", "audience" urid "public", "medium", "mass medium" and "multi-media" [Nonverbal signs in public communication]. http://angli02. kgw.tu-berlin.de/semiotik/english/ZFS/Zfs85-3-e.htm
Reigeluth, C.M. & J.Moor (1999) . Cognitive education and the cognitive domain. In Charles M. Reigeluth (Ed.). Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory( V.2) , 51-68. NJ: LEA.
Reigeluth,C.M.(Ed.)(1983) . Instructional-design theories and models: An overview of their current status. NJ: LEA.
Reigeluth,C.M, Banathy.B.H., Olson,J.R.(1993) . Comprehensive Systems Design: A new Educational Technology. Germany: Spring-verlag Berlin Heidelberg.
Reiser, R.A.(1994) . Examining the planning practices of teachers: Reflections on three years of research. Educational Technology, 34(3) , 25-34.
Reiser, R.A.(2001a). A history of instructional design and technology: part I: A history of Instructional media. ETR&D, 49(1) , 53-64.
Reiser, R. A. (2001b). A history of instructional design and technology: Part II: A history of instructional design. ETR&D ,49(2) ,57-67.
Roblyer, M.D. & Edawards, J. (2000) . Integrating Educational Technology into Teaching. 2nd. Ed. NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.
Rowland,G.(1993) . Design and Instructional Design. ETR&D, 41(1) ,79-91.
Savery, J. & Duffy, T. M.(1995) . Problem based learning: An instructional model and its constructivist framework . Educational Technology, 35(5) , 31-38.
Seel, N.M. & Winn W.D.(1997) , Research on Media and Learning: Distribution Cognition and Semiotics. In Robert D. Tennyson; Franz Schott; Norbert M. Seel; Sanne Dijkstra (Ed.). Instructional design: international perspectives (V.1) , 293-326. NJ: LEA.
Seels, B.B. & Richey, R.C.(1994) . Instructional technology: The definition and domains of the field. Washington, DC: AECT.
Shiland, T. W. (1999) . Constructivism: The Implication for Laboratory Work . J.Chem. Edu.,. 76(1) , 107-108.
Smith, P.L. & Ragan, T. J.( 1999) . Instructional Design( 2nd Ed.). NY: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Tennyson ,R. D., & Schott, F. (1997) . Instructional Design Theory, Research, and Models. In Robert D. Tennyson; Franz Schott; Norbert M. Seel; Sanne Dijkstra (Ed.). Intructional dsign: international perspectives(V.1) , 1-16. NJ: LEA.
Tennyson, R.D.(1997). A System Dynamics Approach to Instructional Systems Development. In Robert D. Tennyson; Franz Schott; Norbert M. Seel; Sanne Dijkstra (Ed.). Instructional design: international perspectives(V. 1), 413-426. NJ: LEA.
Tennyson, R.D. & Breuer, K.(1997). Psychological Foundations for Instructional Design Theory. In Robert D. Tennyson; Franz Schott; Norbert M. Seel; Sanne Dijkstra.(Ed.). Intructional dsign: international perspectives(V. 1), 113-131. NJ: LEA.
Tessmer, M & Wedman, J.F.(1990). A layers-of-necessity instructional development model. ErR&D, 38(2),77-85.
Trowbridge, L.W., et al.(2000). Teaching secondary school science: strategies for developing scientific literacy. NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Wenger, E(1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. NY: Cambridge University Press.
Williams, M.(1996). Learner-control and instructional technologies. In D.H. Jonassen(Ed.). Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology, Http://www. aect.org./intranet/publications, 21/11/2001, updated。
Willis,J.(1995). A recursive, reflective instructional design model based on constmctivist-interpretist theory. Educational Technology, 35(6), 5-23.
Winn,W.(1997). Advantage of a theory-based curriculum in instructional technology. Educational Technology, 37(1),34-41.
[美]罗杰·G·牛顿著,武际可译(2001):《何为科学真理——月亮在无人看它时是否在那儿》,上海:上海科技教育出版社。
[美]R.布里斯罗著(1998):《化学的今天和明天——化学是一门中心的、实用的和创造性的科学》。北京:科学出版社。
[美]戴维·H·乔纳森主编,郑太年,任友群译(2002):《学习环境的理论基础》,上海:华东师范大学出版社。
[美]国家研究理事会(1999):《国家科学教育标准》,北京:科协技术文献出版社。
[英]R.J.约翰斯顿著,蔡云龙,江涛译(2000):《哲学与人文地理学》,北京:商务印书馆。
K·J·吉尔根(2002):“社会建构和教育实践”,载《教育中建构主义》(中译本),上海:华东师范大学出版社,14-31页。
Mintzes,J.J.;Wandersee,J.H.;Novak,J.D.著,黄台珠等译(2001):《促进理解之科学教学——人本建构取向观点》,台北:心理出版社股份有限公司。
Robert Heinich 等著,李文瑞等译(2002):《教学媒体与学习科技》,台北:双叶书廊有限公司。
安嘉翔,乔立恭(1998):“教学设计中的几个新概念”,载《电化教育研究》第6期,6-11页。
巴纳锡(1992):“教学系统的设计”,载加涅主编:《教育技术学基础},103—133页,北京:教育科学出版。
毕华林等主编(1998):《化学教学原理与方法》,青岛:青岛海洋大学出版社。
布鲁纳著,邵瑞珍译(1982):《教育过程》,北京:文化教育出版社。
布鲁纳著,宋文理译(2001):《教育的文化——文化心理学的观点》,台北:远流出版公司。
陈耀亭等(1991):《中学化学教材教法》,北京:北京师范大学出版社。
陈玉琨(2003):“创造适合学生的教育”,载《文汇报》2003年3月31日第9版。
单丁(1998):《课程流派研究》,济南:山东教育出版社。
董树歧,连凤羽,曲行文编(1984):《化学教学手册》,长春:吉林人民出版社。
杜威著,姜文闵译(1991):《我们怎样思维·经验与教育》,北京:人民教育出版社。
高文(2001a):“面向素质教育、基于信息技术的课程与教学改革”,载钟启泉等主编:《基础教育课程改革纲要(试行)解读》,上海:华东师范大学出版社,21页。
高文(2001b):《教学设计研究——荷兰土温蒂大学Sanne Dijkstra 教授访谈录》,载《全球教育展望》,第1期,7—13页。
高文(2001c):“教育以人为本”,载《全球教育展望》,2001年第9期,1-6页。
高文(2002):《教学模式论》,上海:上海教育出版社。
高传善(2001):“计算机网络与因特网”,载上海《支部生活》编辑部,上海三联书店编《科学技术的现在与未来·信息科技》,上海:上海三联书店。
高鸿宾主编(2002):《有机化学》,北京:高等教育出版社。
戈登·罗伦德著,高文编译(1997):“设计与教学设计”,载《外国教育资料》,第2期,18-23页。
古练权,马林(1998):《生物有机化学》,北京:高等教育出版社。
古练权主编(2002):《生物化学》,北京:高等教育出版社。
何克抗(1998):“从信息时代的教育与培训看教学设计理论的新发展(上)”,载《中国电化教育》,第10期。
华东师大一附中跨学科课程研究所(2001):《研究型-跨学科课程设计》,上海:华东师大一附中印。
化学课程标准研制组(2002):《全日制义务教育化学课程标准(实验稿)解读》,武汉:湖北教育出版社。
加涅,布里格斯,韦杰著,皮连生等译(1999):《教学设计原理》,上海:华东师范大学出版。
卡林·诺尔-塞蒂纳著,王善博等译(2001):《制造知识——建构主义与科学的与境性》,北京:东方出版社。
赖泽(1992):“教育技术学的历史”,载加涅主编《教育技术学基础》中译本,14—47页,北京:教育科学出版社。
乐国安(1999):《从行为研究到社会改造——斯金纳的新行为主义》,武汉:湖北教育出版社。
李醒民(2001):《科学的精神与价值》,石家庄:河北教育出版社。
刘知新主编(1990):《化学教学论》,北京:高等教育出版社。
刘知新主编(1995):《化学教学论》,北京:高等教育出版社。
欧内斯特·伯克曼(1992):“影响应用的因素” 载加涅编《教育技术学基础》中译本525-553页,北京:教育科学出版社。
潘永祥 李慎(1996):《自然科学发展史纲要》,北京:首都师范大学出版社。
裴新宁(2001):“‘学习者共同体’的教学设计与研究”,载《全球教育展望》,第3期10-15页。
裴新宁,刘启东,明莉(2002):“从‘化学与药物’案例看研究性学习的教学设计”,载《山东师范大学学报自然科学版》,第3期,45-49页。
裴新宁,郑太年主编(2003):《在探究中体验科学》,广州:广东教育出版社(即出)。
彭纪南(1998):“科学精神与人文精神的融汇——走向21世纪的科学”,载《自然辩证法研究》,第3期,63-66页。
皮连生(1997):《学与教的心理学》,上海:华东师范大学出版社。
皮连生(1999):“当代心理科学与学校教育相结合的典范(代中译本序)”,载加涅著,皮连生等译:《学习的条件和教学论》,上海:华东师范大学出版社。
乔立恭,安嘉翔(1998):《教育技术学概论》,北京:科学出版社。
屈直(2001):“化学的特点与化学教学”,载《中学化学教学参考》,8~9合期,15-16页。
任友群(2002):《现代教育技术的建构主义应用》,上海:华东师范大学。
盛群力,李志强编著(1998):《现代教学设计论》,杭州:浙江教育出版社。
施良方,崔允漷(1999):《教学理论》,上海:华东师范大学出版社。
孙可平(1998):《现代教学设计纲要》,陕西人民教育出版社。
汤浅光朝(1984):《解说科学文化史年表》。北京:科学普及出版社。
唐有祺(2000)“在《化学教育》创刊40周年上的题词”,载《化学教育》第3期,7页。
沃茨奇,托马(2002):“课堂中的话语与学习:一种社会文化观”,载莱斯利·P·斯特弗,杰里·盖尔主编,高文等译《教育中的建构主义》,上海:华东师范大学出版社,125-143页。
乌美娜主编(1994):《教学设计》,北京:高等教育出版社。
吴俊明主编(2002):《化学教学设计及案例》,北京:人民教育出版社。
熊梅(2001):《当代综合课程的新范式:综合性学习的理论和实践》,北京:教育科学出版社。
徐斌艳(2002):“激进建构主义与科学教育”,载《全球教育展望》,第11期,20—24页。
徐承波,吴俊明主编(1998):《化学教学设计与实践》,北京:民主与建设出版社。
徐继敏(1987):《科学美学思想史》,长沙:湖南人民出版社。
许国志主编(2000):《系统科学》,上海:上海科技教育出版社。
杨,巴拉布,加勒特(2002):“行动者作为探测者:从感知—行动系统看学习的生态心理观”,载乔纳森主编,郑太年,任友群译:《学习环境的理论基础》,135-157页,上海:华东师范大学出版社。
杨开诚(2002):“网络时代的教学设计理论发展应关注的几个问题”,http://www.pujiao.com.cn/etc,2002-2-5。
杨开诚,李文光,胡学农(2002.):“现代教学设计的理论体系初探”,载《中国电化教育》,第2期,12-18页。
杨雄里(1999):《脑科学的现代进展》,上海:上海科技教育出版社。
尹鸿藻,毕华林主编(2000):《学习能力学》,青岛:青岛海洋大学出版社。
袁翰青,应礼文(1989):《化学重要史实》,北京:人民教育出版社。
约翰·D·布兰斯福特等编著,程可拉等译(2002):《人是如何学习的——大脑、心理、经验及学校》,上海:华东师范大学出版社。
张爱卿(2000):《放射智慧之光——布鲁纳的认知与教育心理学》,湖北教育出版社。
张桂春(2002):《激进建构主义教学思想研究》,博士论文,上海:华东师范大学。
张嘉同编著(2000):《化学:人文精神的韵味》,长沙:湖南师范大学出版社。
张祖忻(1994):《美国教育技术的理论及其演变》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
张祖忻等(1992):《教学设计——基本原理与方法》,上海:上海外语教育出版社。
中国自然辩证法研究会化学化工专业组编(1986):《化学哲学基础》,北京:科学出版社。
中华人民共和国国家教育委员会(电化教育司)编译(1990):《教学媒体与教学设计》,北
京:高等教育出版社。
钟启泉(2002a):“课程改革与学校文化”,华东师大学术报告,2002年9月18日。
钟启泉(2002b):《学科教学论基础》,上海:华东师范大学出版社。
钟启泉,黄志诚(1993):《美国教学论流派》,西安:陕西人民教育出版社。
钟启泉编译(1992):《现代教学论发展》,北京:教育科学出版社
钟启泉主编(2002):《教育方法概论》,上海:华东师范大学出版社。
周润琦,陈石根,李致陨编著(1994):《生物化学基础》,北京:化学工业出版社。
朱嘉泰,李俊(2002):《化学教学艺术论》,南宁:广西教育出版社。