| 1,278 | 17 | 433 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
本文从小学《道德与法治》教材的“生活转向”出发，在上海市某小学四年级开展论证式议题教学实验研究，与5个班级的道德与法治教师基于教材内容合作开发议题，并围绕议题开展对话教学、学生论辩、议论文写作、同伴互评等教学活动。参与学生的问卷和访谈数据表明，学生对道德与法治课的兴趣程度较上学期有显著提升，绝大部分学生非常愿意继续参与此类课程；学生高度认可大量增加的课堂互动，并表示很喜欢探讨没有标准答案的开放式问题；学生从贴近生活和贴近社会两大维度解释了自己对议题的兴趣和难易程度的感知；学生认为阅读背景材料有帮助，但多数学生不擅长在论证中使用支持反方立场的论据；更多学生喜欢口头辩论，对书面论证和写作任务存在排斥心理，且难以在写作中从多角度说理。本文对在道德与法治课堂中开展论证式议题教学以培养学生高阶思维和社会参与能力的研究和实践具有参考价值。
Abstract：Situated in the “back to life” turn in the Morality and Law textbooks of elementary education, we conducted a quasi-experimental study employing an argumentative issue-driven pedagogy in fourth-grade classrooms in an elementary school in Shanghai. Teachers and researchers collaborated in designing issues for discussion and in enacting classroom activities involving dialogic teaching, student argumentation, essay writing, and peer assessment. Results of survey and interview showed that there was a significant increase in students' interest in this course as compared to that of the previous semester, and that the large majority of students wished to continue with the course. Students highly valued the increased classroom interaction and expressed strong interests in discussing problems without standard solutions. In explaining their rank order of issues based on interest and difficulty level, students considered the relatedness of the issues to their life and to society. Students found the background reading materials useful but struggled to employ in argumentation information supporting the opposing side. Students preferred oral argumentation to written argumentation and essay writing, and struggled with constructing two-sided arguments in essay writing. This study holds significance for implementing argumentative issue-driven pedagogy in the Morality and Law classrooms to promote higher-order thinking and social participatory skills.
[1] 高德胜，章乐，唐燕.接上童气：小学《道德与法治》统编教材研究[M].北京：人民教育出版社，2019:7-76.
[2] 高德胜.追求更有道德意蕴的核心素养[J].西北师大学报(社会科学版),2021(1):95-107.
[3] 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.
[4] 鲁洁.德育课程的生活论转向——小学德育课程在观念上的变革[J].华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2005(3):9-16.
[5] 鲁洁.道德教育的根本作为：引导生活的建构[J].教育研究，2010(6):3-8.
[6] 高德胜.“接童气”与儿童经验的生长——论小学道德与法治教材对儿童经验的处理[J].课程·教材·教法，2018(8):11-20.
[7] 章乐.小学德育课程实效性的提升策略——兼论统编小学《道德与法治》四年级教材的特点[J].课程·教材·教法，2019(10):24-29.
[8] 高德胜.以学习活动为核心建构小学《道德与法治》教材[J].中国教育学刊，2018(1):1-8.
[9] 沈晓敏.对话教学研究[M].北京：北京师范大学出版社，2014:1-52.
[10] 彭韬，彭正梅.德国学校德育中的道德反思能力培养研究——以柏林“道德课”为例[J].全球教育展望，2021(2):24-38.
[11] 沈晓敏.在对话和协商中提升道德判断和行为抉择能力[J].全球教育展望，2006(8):42-46.
[12] Wells,G.& Arauz,R.Dialogue in the Classroom [J].The Journal of the Learning Sciences,2006(3):379-428.
[13] Scott,P.H.,Mortimer,E.F.,& Aguiar,O.G.The Tension Between Authoritative and Dialogic Discourse:A Fundamental Characteristic of Meaning Making Interactions in High School Science Lessons [J].Science Education,2006(4):605-631.
[14] Howe,C.,Hennessy,S.,Mercer,N.,et al.Teacher-student Dialogue During Classroom Teaching:Does It Really Impact on Student Outcomes?[J].Journal of the Learning Sciences,2019(4-5):462-512.
[15][32] Howe,C.& Abedin,M.Classroom Dialogue:A Systematic Review Across Four Decades of Research [J].Cambridge Journal of Education,2013(3):325-356.
[16] Shi,Y.Enhancing Evidence-based Argumentation in a China's Mainland Middle School [J].Contemporary Educational Psychology,2019(4):101809.
[17] Chinn,C.,Anderson,R.,& Waggoner,M.Patterns of Discourse in Two Kinds of Literature Discussion [J].Reading Research Quarterly,2001(4):378-411.
[18] Sandoval,W.& Millwood,K.The Quality of Students' Use of Evidence in Written Scientific Explanations [J].Cognition and Instruction,2005(1):23-55.
[19] [美]劳伦斯·科尔伯格.道德发展心理学：道德阶段的本质与确证[M].郭本禹，等，译.上海：华东师范大学出版社，2004:161-194.
[20] Alexander,R.Developing Dialogic Teaching:Genesis,Process,Trial [J].Research Papers in Education,2018(5):561-598.
[21] Kuhn,D.,Hemberger,L.,& Khait,V.Argue with Me:Argument as a Path to Developing Students' Thinking and Writing (2nd ed.)[M].New York,NY:Routledge,2016.
[22] Asterhan,C.& Schwarz,B.Argumentation for Learning:Well-trodden Paths and Unexplored Territories [J].Educational Psychologist,2016(2):164-187.
[23] Sandoval,W.& Bell,P.Design-based Research Methods for Studying Learning in Context:Introduction [J].Educational Psychologist,2004(4):199-201.
[24] Collins,A.,Joseph,D.,& Bielaczyc,K.Design Research:Theoretical and Methodological Issues [J].Journal of the Learning Sciences,2004(1):15-42.
[25][30] Hemberger,L.,Kuhn,D.,Matos,F.,et al.A Dialogic Path to Evidence-based Argumentive Writing [J].Journal of the Learning Sciences,2017(4):199-201.
[26][40] Inhelder,B.& Piaget,J.The Growth of Logical Thinking from Childhood to Adolescence [M].New York,NY:Basic Books,1958.
[27] Chinn,C.& Brewer,W.The Role of Anomalous Data in Knowledge Acquisition:A Theoretical Framework and Implications for Science Instruction [J].Review of Educational Research,1993(1):1-49.
[28] [美]罗伯特·埃默森，雷切尔·弗雷兹，琳达·肖.如何做田野笔记[M].符裕，何珉，译.上海：上海译文出版社，2012:1-55.
[29] [美]约瑟夫·托宾，薛烨，[日]唐泽真弓.重访三种文化中的幼儿园[M].朱家雄，薛烨，译.上海：华东师范大学出版社，2014:3-19.
[31] Kuhn,D.& Moore,W.Argument as Core Curriculum [J].Learning:Research and Practice,2015(1):66-78.
[33][34] Ferretti,R.& Graham,S.Argumentive Writing:Theory,Assessment,and Instruction [J].Reading and Writing,2019(6):1345-1357.
[35] Kuhn,D.The Importance of Learning about Knowing:Creating a Foundation for Development of Intellectual Values [J].Child Development Perspectives,2009(2):112-117.
[36] Walton,D.Dialogue Theory for Critical Thinking [J].Argumentation,1989(3):169-184.
[37] Maier,J.,& Richter,T.Text-Belief Consistency Effects in the Comprehension of Multiple Texts with Conflicting Information [J].Cognition and Instruction,2013(2):151-175.
[38] Mercier,H.,& Sperber,D.Why Do Humans Reason?Arguments for An Argumentative Theory [J].Behavioral and Brain Sciences,2011(2):74-111.
[39] Shi,Y.Talk about Evidence during Argumentation [J].Discourse Processes,2020(9):770-792.
[41] Nussbaum,M.Critical Integrative Argumentation:Toward Complexity in Students' Thinking [J].Educational Psychologist,2021(1):1-17.
[42] Clarke,S.,Howley,I.,Resnick,L.,et al.Student Agency to Participate in Dialogic Science Discussions [J].Learning,Culture and Social Interaction,2016(3):27-39.
[43] Ryan,R.,& Deci,E.Self-determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation,Social Development,and Well-being [J].American Psychologist,2000(1):68-78.
[44] O'Keefe,D.Two Concepts of Argument [J].The Journal of the American Forensic Association,1977(3):121-128.
[45] Vygotsky,L.Mind in Society:The Development of Higher Psychological Processes [M].Cambridge,MA:Harvard University Press,1978.
[46] Toulmin,S.The Uses of Argument [M].Cambridge,England:Cambridge University Press,1958.
[47] Harris,K.R.,& Graham,S.Self-Regulated Strategy Development in Writing:Policy Implications of an Evidence-based Practice [J].Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences,2016(1):77-84.
(1)问卷中的个别题目出现了漏填的情况。研究团队采取的做法是直接排除某个学生漏填的题目,但该生其他已经作答的题目仍然纳入分析。因此,每道题的实际有效样本量小于或等于155,且每道题目的有效样本量可能也略有差异。后文出现的n=152和n=153,即说明这两道题的有效样本量分别为152和153,特此说明。
(2)因为篇幅的限制,如想更详细地了解本研究使用的问卷以及编码和分析框架,可以联系研究团队,联系邮箱:cdsyc@126.com。
(3)此题为多选题,各环节人数占比合并后的比例可能超过100%。
基本信息:
中图分类号:G623.15
引用信息:
[1]石雨晨,曹曙,刘群英.学生参与小学《道德与法治》论证式议题教学的学习体验[J].全球教育展望,2022,51(10):87-104.
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
2022-10-10
2022-10-10