| 1,536 | 1 | 1036 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
跨学科主题学习在新一轮课改中被赋予了重要地位,并在广大中小学如火如荼地开展。但在实际教学中面临诸多挑战,包括关系处理(如10%跨学科课时与90%学科课时的平衡、新旧综合学习的边界、主体学科与相关学科的交互等)、实施困境(如主题选择盲目、实施关联缺乏、内容设计浅表、学习评价缺失)等方面。对此,本研究指出需从未来学校发展趋势出发重新认识跨学科主题学习的内涵;还需转变教师思维方式,从惯性思维转向创新思维,从简单思维转向复杂思维,从点状割裂思维转向整体融通思维,从结果思维转向过程思维;而且要以学校为单位顶层设计跨学科主题学习的实践图谱,明确不同类型和层次跨学科主题学习之“跨”的方式,形成整体性的实施框架;最后,还应聚焦评价盲区,针对跨学科主题学习中的不同主体设置不同评价维度,形成全面的跨学科主题学习评价体系。
Abstract:In the new round of curriculum reform, interdisciplinary thematic learning has received a prominent status, and a wide range primary and secondary schools are actively engaged in its implementation. However, teachers are facing numerous challenges in their practice, including the management of various relationships(e.g., balancing the assignment of 10% of instructional time to interdisciplinary teaching and 90% to disciplinary teaching, setting up the boundary between old and new integrated learning, and managing the interaction between main subjects and related subjects), as well as difficulties in the implementation process(e.g., blind selection of themes, lack of connection in fragmented implementation, superficial content design, and lack of learning assessment). In response to these issues, it is necessary to re-conceptualize the connotation of interdisciplinary thematic learning from the perspective of the development trends of future schools. Additionally, teachers need to shift their thinking from inertial to innovative, from simple to complex, from fragmented to integrated, and from results-oriented to process-oriented. Moreover, schools should design a holistic practical framework for interdisciplinary thematic learning, clarifying different types and levels of “crossing” approaches to form a systematic implementation framework. Finally, emphasis should be placed on the blind spots in assessments. Different evaluation dimensions should be formed for different objects to establish a comprehensive evaluation system for interdisciplinary thematic learning.
[1][30] 伍红林,田莉莉.跨学科主题学习:溯源、内涵与实施建议[J].全球教育展望,2023(3):35-47.
[2] 吴刚平.跨学科主题学习的意义与设计思路[J].课程·教材·教法,2022(9):53-55.
[3][10] 刘登珲,牛文琪.跨学科主题学习的迷思与澄清[J].教育发展研究,2023(23):75-84.
[4][14] 安桂清,张良.跨学科主题学习的内涵、定位与实施[J].全球教育展望,2024(5):3-12.
[5][13] 杜文彬.新课标视阈下跨学科主题学习的设计与实现[J].电化教育研究,2024(4):81-87.
[6] 胡兰,窦桂梅.跨学科学习中学习主题的意蕴与确定路径[J].语文建设,2024(6):10-13.
[7] 朱慧.小学美术跨学科主题学习的现状、要义与实施建议[J].教学与管理,2024(2):58-61.
[8][9][12] 伍红林,余乐妍.小学跨学科主题学习的实施现状与困境突破[J].教育视界,2024(2):4-11.
[11] 安桂清.基于课程标准的跨学科主题学习:内涵阐释与实施要点[J].中国教育学刊,2024(7):15-21.
[15] 郭华.跨学科主题学习的课程论意义[J].四川师范大学学报(社会科学版),2024(5):112-119.
[16] Mezzacappa,D.High School 2.0:Can Philadelphia's School of the Future Live Up to Its Name?[J].Education Next,2010(2):34-41.
[17] Leiringer,R.& Cardellino,P.Schools for the Twenty-first Century:School Design and Educational Transformation [J].British Educational Research Journal,2011(6):915-934.
[18] 李哲,孙帙,李娟,等.“学习创新工程”:日本面向2020年的未来学校设计[J].中国信息技术教育,2014(19):100-103.
[19] 王素,曹培杰,康建朝,等.中国未来学校白皮书[R].北京:中国教育科学研究院未来学校实验室,2016:10—11.
[20][21] 中华人民共和国教育部学校规划建设发展中心.未来学校研究与实验计划[EB/OL].https:/www.csdp.edu.cn/onepage74.html,2025-05-03/2025-05-12.
[22] 孙元涛.“未来学校”研究的共识、分歧与潜在风险[J].南京师范大学学报(社会科学版),2022(5):5-14.
[23] 朱园园,戴孟,卜玉华.中小学教师眼中的未来学校是什么样?——基于江浙沪四所学校的未来工作坊调研[J].电化教育研究,2024(6):81-88.
[24] 顾明远.教师思维是属于教师高层次的能力[J].连云港教育学院学报,1994(4):3-4.
[25] 邓友超.重视基础教育课程改革中的教师思维失衡问题[J].教育发展研究,2006(8):22-26.
[26] [法]埃德加·莫兰.复杂思想:自觉的科学[M].陈一壮,译.北京:北京大学出版社,2001:185.
[27][31] 伍红林,田莉莉.跨学科主题学习的“跨”“学”“评”“行”[J].湖南师范大学教育科学学报,2023(5):16-21.
[28] 中华人民共和国教育部办公厅.基础教育课程教学改革深化行动方案[EB/OL].http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A26/jcj_kcjcgh/202306/t20230601_1062380.html,2023-05-26/2025-05-12.
[29] 中华人民共和国教育部.教育部关于加强中小学地方课程和校本课程建设与管理的意见[EB/OL].http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A26/s8001/202305/t20230526_1061442.html,2023-05-17/2025-05-12.
基本信息:
中图分类号:G632.4
引用信息:
[1]伍红林,詹佳晨.跨学科主题学习实践变革中的常见问题及其突破[J].全球教育展望,2025,54(08):33-44.
基金信息:
国家社会科学基金“十四五”规划2021年度教育学重大课题“未来学校组织形态与制度重构的理论与实践研究”(项目编号:VFA210006)的阶段性成果