| 2,105 | 34 | 589 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
论证式议题教学旨在培养学生思考和解决真实生活中复杂问题的意愿与能力，凸显了学科知识、社会生活与儿童经验之间的联系。论证式议题教学中教师基于社会或科学真实情境创设议题，以大问题、大观念设计和组织单元教学，以师生间和生生间高质量的论证对话为主要课堂活动，是培养中小学生高阶思维、核心素养和终身发展能力的有效路径之一。具体而言，教师基于教材内容和教学目标设置议题，为论证活动选择“说服性”或“协商性”目标，组织多种形式的课堂论证活动，为学生提供议题背景资料或引导学生自主搜集资料，并基于论证式对话和论证式写作开展表现性评价和过程评价。开展论证式议题教学给中小学教师带来了不小的挑战，研究者需要为教师提供有针对性的职前培训和持续的专业发展支持，并鼓励教师围绕论证式议题教学开展校本研修。
Abstract：Argumentative issue-driven pedagogy aims to develop students' skills and inclinations to deliberate on and solve complex problems in authentic life situations, thus emphasizing the relationship among subject content knowledge, contemporary life and student experiences. In this pedagogy, teachers design issues based on authentic social or scientific problems, organize their teaching around big problem or concepts, and design classroom activities using high-quality teacher-student and student-student argumentative dialogues. The pedagogy constitutes an effective path toward developing students' higher-order thinking, core competencies, and life-long learning skills. More specifically, teachers select either persuasive or deliberative argumentative goals based on textbook content and instructional objectives, enact classroom argumentative activities of various formats, provide students with issue-related background reading materials or engage students in self-directed information searching, and conduct formative assessment and performance assessment based on argumentative dialogues and essays. The implementation of argumentative issue-drive pedagogy poses some formidable challenges to elementary and secondary school teachers; therefore, researchers should provide targeted pre-service and sustained in-service professional development for teachers. In addition, teachers are encouraged to engage in school-based teaching research around this pedagogy.
[1] 沈雪春.议题式教学简论[M].陕西：陕西师范大学出版社，2018:111-130.
[2] 王天平.论对话教学低效性的病理与纠偏[J].课程·教材·教法，2012(11):10-15.
[3] Halpern,D.F.Teaching Critical Thinking for Transfer Across Domains — Dispositions,Skills,Structure Training,and Metacognitive Monitoring [J].American Psychologist,1998(4):449-455.
[4][11] Howe,C.& Abedin,M.Classroom Dialogue:A Systematic Review across Four Decades of Research [J].Cambridge Journal of Education,2013(3):325-356.
[5] Iordanou,K.& Kuhn,D.Contemplating the Opposition:Does a Personal Touch Matter?[J].Discourse Processes,2020(4):343-359.
[6] Sadler,T.D.& Zeidler,D.L.The Morality of Socioscientific Issues:Construal and Resolution of Genetic Engineering Dilemmas [J].Science Education,2004(1):4-27.
[7] 鲁志鲲，申继亮.结构不良问题解决及其教学涵义[J].中国教育学刊，2004(1):47-50.
[8] 朱京.非形式逻辑的兴起与发展[J].哲学动态，2003(10):37-40.
[9] Rapanta,C.,Garcia-Mila,M.& Gilabert,S.What Is Meant by Argumentative Competence?An Integrative Review of Methods of Analysis and Assessment in Education [J].Review of Educational Research,2013(4):483-520.
[10][19] Asterhan,C.S.C.& Schwarz,B.B.Argumentation for Learning:Well-trodden Paths and Unexplored Territories [J].Educational Psychologist,2016(2):164-187.
[12] Iordanou,K.,Kuhn,D.,Matos,F.,et al.Learning by Arguing [J].Learning and Instruction,2019,63:101207.
[13] Shi,Y.Enhancing Evidence-based Argumentation in a China's Mainland Middle School [J].Contemporary Educational Psychology,2019,59:101809.
[14] Clark,A.-M.,Anderson,R.C.,Kuo,L.-J.,et al.Collaborative Reasoning:Expanding Ways for Children to Talk and Think in School [J].Educational Psychology Review,2003(2):181-198.
[15] 肖思汉.论科学素养的“日常实践”转向[J].全球教育展望，2017(11):12-20.
[16] 刘德华，杭然.美国“议题中心教学”的百年演变[J].比较教育研究，2020(1):3-10.
[17] Iordanou,K.,Constantinou,C.P.Supporting Use of Evidence in Argumentation through Practice in Argumentation and Reflection in the Context of SOCRATES Learning Environment [J].Science Education,2015(2):282-311.
[18] Hofer,B.K.& Pintrich,P.R.The Development of Epistemological Theories:Beliefs about Knowledge and Knowing and Their Relation to Learning [J].Review of Educational Research,1997(1):88-140.
[20] Felton,M.,Garcia-Mila,M.,Villarroel,C.,et al.Arguing Collaboratively:Argumentative Discourse Types and Their Potential for Knowledge Building [J].British Journal of Educational Psychology,2015(3):372-386.
[21] Wegerif,R.,Mercer,N.& Dawes,L.From Social Interaction to Individual Reasoning:An Empirical Investigation of a Possible Socio-cultural Model of Cognitive Development [J].Learning and Instruction,1999(6):493-516.
[22] 马淑风，杨向东.促进高阶思维发展的合作推理式学习[J].教育发展研究，2021(24):64-73.
[23] 朱伟强，崔允漷.基于标准的课程设计：开发表现性评价[J].全球教育展望，2007(10):43-48.
[24] Stiggins,R.J.Student Centered Classroom Assessment (2nd ed.) [M].Upper Saddle River,NJ:Prentice Hall,1997:77.
[25] Kuhn,D.& Park,S.H.Epistemological Understanding and the Development of Intellectual values [J].International Journal of Educational Research,2005,43:111-124.
[26] Stanovich,K.E.,West,R.F.& Toplak,M.E.Myside Bias,Rational Thinking,and Intelligence [J].Current Directions in Psychological Science,2013(4):259-264.
[27] Reznitskaya,A.,Glina,M.,Carolan,B.,et al.Examining Transfer Effects from Dialogic Discussions to New Tasks and Contexts [J].Contemporary Educational Psychology,2012(4):288-306.
[28] Sandoval,W.A.& Millwood,K.A.The Quality of Students' Use of Evidence in Written Scientific Explanations [J].Cognition and Instruction,2005(1):23-55.
[29] 崔允漷，张紫红，郭洪瑞.溯源与解读：学科实践即学习方式变革的新方向[J].教育研究，2021(12):55-63.
[30] 吴刚平，余闻婧.论教师的研究意识[J].中国教育学刊，2010(12):60-63.
[31] 范敏，刘义兵.斯腾豪斯的“教师成为研究者”思想[J].全球教育展望，2017(8):83-94.
[32] 乔雪峰，黎万红.校本教研中课程资源的开发利用：实践共同体的视角[J].全球教育展望，2016(11):32-42.
[33] 吴立宝，栗肖飞.中小学校本教研的困境、成因与突破路径[J].课程·教材·教法，2019(6):125-130.
基本信息:
中图分类号:G632.4
引用信息:
[1]石雨晨.论证式议题教学及其应用[J].全球教育展望,2022,51(05):68-78.
基金信息:
国家社会科学基金“十三五”规划2020年度教育学青年课题“议题教学应用于德育课堂有效性的实证研究”(项目编号：CEA200257)的研究成果
2022-04-01
2022
2022-07-01
2022
1
2022-05-10
2022-05-10