李德強

在具體的課堂教學(xué)中，學(xué)生活動往往會出現(xiàn)許多“失控”的狀況，使教學(xué)充滿了矛盾和再選擇可能。直面學(xué)生活動，就是教師面對學(xué)生真實的活動反應(yīng)，及時作出相應(yīng)的教學(xué)抉擇。科學(xué)教學(xué)中做到直面學(xué)生活動，至少需要明確以下三點：

首先，學(xué)生活動應(yīng)該是什么樣的？

只有當(dāng)教師設(shè)計出的學(xué)生活動符合科學(xué)教育規(guī)律的時候，“直面”才會有意義。比如，同樣是研究“食物鏈和食物網(wǎng)”，一種做法是讓學(xué)生在黑板上畫出幾個箭頭，標(biāo)出幾種動植物之間的食物關(guān)系，然后教師給出相應(yīng)的概念。另一種做法是教師展示一個大的生態(tài)環(huán)境，讓學(xué)生利用已有的生活經(jīng)驗，采取多種方法，通過多種途徑，盡可能找出多的食物鏈，然后全班同學(xué)在一起展開討論，探求各類動植物之間的相互依賴關(guān)系，明白關(guān)系中“連結(jié)點”的意義所在，進(jìn)而建構(gòu)起“鏈”和“網(wǎng)”的觀念。對比這兩個學(xué)生活動，前者是可以在少數(shù)個體的作用下完成的，單向運行且具有很強的確定性。后者則不然，來自不同小組或者個體的認(rèn)知會交織在一起，形成一個較為復(fù)雜的“觀點群”，最后在大家共同的活動過程中，形成一個相對一致的觀念。這樣的活動依靠的不是某一個個體，也不是靜止和一成不變的，而是在無數(shù)個不確定性中走向確定的動態(tài)過程，這一過程正是探究實踐所應(yīng)有的學(xué)生活動形式。

其次，教師要有“非中心”意識。

傳統(tǒng)上，教師在科學(xué)課堂中的中心地位是很牢固的，即便是提倡“學(xué)生主體”多年，依然可以看到許多“垂簾聽政”下的學(xué)生自主假象。直面學(xué)生活動，需要解除教師在課堂上的“中心控制器”作用，使學(xué)生多個學(xué)習(xí)共同體產(chǎn)生相互作用，最終達(dá)成一致。要實現(xiàn)這一目標(biāo)，科學(xué)教師至少要做到兩點：

一是對課堂“失控”現(xiàn)象有正確的理解。特級教師章鼎兒曾經(jīng)談到，當(dāng)學(xué)生面對感興趣的教學(xué)材料時，表現(xiàn)出的“失?！迸e動是正常反應(yīng)，教師應(yīng)該用兒童視角去正確看待。為什么有人會認(rèn)為其“失常”呢？就是因為他沖撞了“中心”意識下的某些規(guī)范。如果再深究就會發(fā)現(xiàn)，學(xué)生在活動中的行為、思維乃至認(rèn)知觀點都會時不時脫離教師的預(yù)期，進(jìn)入“失控”狀態(tài)，讓課堂變得難以把控，但這些“失控”同樣不應(yīng)被簡單視為“失?！?。教師需要思考的是，這些“失控”沖撞了教師的哪些“中心意識”，又該如何真正放棄“中心”角色，進(jìn)入學(xué)生活動的真實情形中去。

二是要看到學(xué)生在直面活動狀態(tài)下發(fā)展的可能性。當(dāng)學(xué)生意識到教師中心淡化或者消失的時候，其潛能就會顯現(xiàn)出來，個體、小組以及相互間的思維、觀點的碰撞也會隨之產(chǎn)生，表面看起來的“失控”狀況就會在相互作用的推動下，向著協(xié)調(diào)一致的方向發(fā)展，教學(xué)從而由“無序”走向“有序”。

最后，有適切的行為規(guī)則意識。

“直面”強調(diào)了基于學(xué)生活動的真實反映，“去中心化”突出了活動中各主體的相互作用，行為規(guī)則意識則強化了科學(xué)教師的引導(dǎo)方式及方法。毋庸置疑，直面學(xué)生活動的課堂教學(xué)依然需要教師的引導(dǎo)，以達(dá)成教學(xué)目的，做到“兩不”是基本要求：一是不干涉學(xué)生的思維進(jìn)程。科學(xué)教師應(yīng)該明白，學(xué)生當(dāng)下的每一次表達(dá)都是其現(xiàn)時的最高思維水平，阻止、隔斷等行為都是不可取的。教師需要做的是和大家討論“這樣的說法有什么問題？還有什么更好的想法”等等。二是不站在自己已知或者需要的角度判斷正誤，迫使學(xué)生放棄自己的觀點來認(rèn)可所謂的結(jié)論。教師需要做的是反復(fù)提醒學(xué)生“你何以能夠證明自己的觀點”，并在他們實在難以繼續(xù)下去的時候，為他們提供方法、思路上的支持。

Face Students’ Activities

LI Deqiang

中圖分類號：G424文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識碼：ADOI：10.16400/j.cnki.kjdk.2021.30.004

LI Deqiang

Deputy Editor in Chief of Science Textbook of People’s Education Hubei Education Press

Vice Chairman of Primary School Science Teaching Steering Committee of Hubei Provincial Department of Education

Excellent Expert in Yichang City， Hubei Province

In the specific classroom teaching， there are of？ ten many "out of control" situations in students’ ac？ tivities， which makes the teaching full of contradic？ tions and the possibility of re selection. Facing stu？ dents’ activities directly means that teachers respond to students’ real activities and make corresponding teaching choices in time. In order to face students di？ rectlyinscienceteaching，atleastthefollowing three points need to be clarified：

First of all， what shouldstudent activities be like？

Onlywhenthestudentactivitiesdesignedby teachersconformtothelawofscienceeducation，"face-to-face" will be meaningful. For example， in the same study of "food chain and food web"， one way is to ask students to draw several arrows on the blackboard to mark the food relationship between sev？ eral animals and plants， and then the teacher gives the corresponding concepts. Another way is for teach？ ers to show a large ecological environment， so that students can use their existing life experience to find asmanyfoodchainsaspossiblethroughvarious methods， and then the whole class will discuss togeth？ er to explore the interdependence between various an？ imals and plants， understand the significance of the"connection point" in the relationship， and then con？ struct a "chain" and "network" The idea of. Com？ pared with the two student activities， the former can be completed under the action of a few individuals， which runs one-way and has strong certainty. The lat？ terisnotthecase.Thecognitionfromdifferent groups or individuals will be intertwined to form a more complex "viewpoint group"， and finally form a relatively consistent concept in the process of every？ one’s common activities. Such activities do not rely on an individual， nor are they static and invariable， but a dynamic process towards certainty in countless uncertainties. This process is the form of student ac？ tivities that inquiry practice should have.

Secondly， teachers should have "non center" con？ sciousness.

Traditionally， the central position of teachers in science classroom is very solid. Even after advocating"student subject" for many years， we can still see many illusions of students’ autonomy under "hanging the curtain and listening to politics". Facing student activities directly， teachers need to remove the role of "central controller" in the classroom， so that stu？ dents can interact with multiple learning communities and finally reach an agreement. To achieve this goal， science teachers should do at least two things：

First， have a correct understanding of the phe？ nomenon of "out of control" in the classroom. Zhang dinger， a special grade teacher， once said that when students face teaching materials they are interested in， their "abnormal" behavior is a normal reaction， and teachers should treat it correctly from the per？ spective of children. Why do some people think it is"abnormal"？Itisbecausehecollidedwithsome norms under the "center" consciousness. If we study further， we will find that students’ behavior， thinking andevencognitiveviewsinactivitieswill deviate from teachers’ expectations from time to time and en？ ter the "out of control" state， making the classroom difficult to control， but these "out of control" should not be simply regarded as "abnormal". Teachers need tothinkaboutwhat"centralconsciousness"these"out of control" have collided with teachers， and how to really give up the "central" role and enter the re？ al situation of students’ activities.

The second is to see the possibility of students’ development in the face-to-face activity state. When students realize that the teacher center fades or disap？ pears， their potential will appear， and the collision of individual， group and mutual thinking and views will also occur. The seemingly "out of control" situation will develop in the direction of coordination under thepromotionofinteraction，sothatteachingwill move from "disorder" to "order".

Finally， have a sense of appropriate rules of be？ havior.

"Facetoface"emphasizesthetruereflection based on students’ activities， "decentralization" high？ lights the interaction of various subjects in activities， and the awareness of behavior rules strengthens the guidance methods and methods of science teachers. There is no doubt that classroom teaching facing stu？ dents’activitiesstillneedsteachers’guidanceto achieve the teaching purpose. The basic requirements are to achieve "two noes"： first， not interfere with stu？ dents’ thinking process. Science teachers should un？ derstandthat every expressionof students is their current highest level of thinking， and it is not advis？ abletostop，partitionandotherbehaviors.What teachersneedtodoistodiscusswitheveryone"what’s wrong with this statement？ What better ideas are there" and so on. Second， do not judge right and wrong fromthe perspective of what they knowor need， and force students to give up their views to recognizetheso-calledconclusion.Whatteachers need to do is to remind students repeatedly "how can you prove your point of view"， and provide them with support in methods and ideas when they are re？ ally difficult to continue.