科學(xué)課堂上，與尋找證據(jù)、訓(xùn)練思維、提出解釋等環(huán)節(jié)相比，達(dá)成共識(shí)很容易被忽視，使教學(xué)缺乏深度。

達(dá)成共識(shí)通常是指通過(guò)協(xié)商取得一致意見?？茖W(xué)家在“做科學(xué)”的過(guò)程中，也會(huì)為自己的觀點(diǎn)提供充分的證據(jù)和解釋模型，并接受大家的質(zhì)疑與評(píng)價(jià)，在此基礎(chǔ)上再作出進(jìn)一步的思考和研究，這實(shí)際上就是一個(gè)達(dá)成共識(shí)的科學(xué)活動(dòng)。在科學(xué)研究的道路上，這樣的活動(dòng)并不是單向、一次性的，而是不斷往復(fù)的。

從學(xué)生“做科學(xué)”的角度講，教學(xué)的意義不僅僅在于簡(jiǎn)單地獲取結(jié)論，而是通過(guò)展開達(dá)成共識(shí)的過(guò)程，使學(xué)生有機(jī)會(huì)參與交流、質(zhì)疑、評(píng)價(jià)等活動(dòng)，進(jìn)而對(duì)科學(xué)是什么、科學(xué)探究是什么等有初步的認(rèn)識(shí)。要想達(dá)到這樣的目的，就要對(duì)“達(dá)成共識(shí)”的教學(xué)路徑有清楚的認(rèn)識(shí)，并以此為出發(fā)點(diǎn)來(lái)改進(jìn)具體的教學(xué)。

達(dá)成共識(shí)是一個(gè)交流的過(guò)程，這和一般的漫無(wú)目的的聊天不太一樣，它需要探究者圍繞某個(gè)問(wèn)題，提出自己的觀點(diǎn)，并依靠證據(jù)對(duì)自己的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行闡釋，在他人的質(zhì)疑和評(píng)價(jià)中多次發(fā)表、完善自己的想法?？梢?，參與交流的學(xué)生都應(yīng)該具備以下三個(gè)基本條件：要有自己的觀點(diǎn);要有支撐自己觀點(diǎn)的證據(jù)，也就是用事實(shí)來(lái)證明觀點(diǎn)的合理性、正確性等;要能夠把自己的觀點(diǎn)、證據(jù)等聯(lián)系起來(lái)，通過(guò)一定的方式表達(dá)出來(lái)，讓聽者明白自己的觀點(diǎn)是什么，是如何證明這些觀點(diǎn)的。

這些條件實(shí)質(zhì)上對(duì)前置教學(xué)中教師應(yīng)該幫助學(xué)生重點(diǎn)關(guān)注什么，以及如何展開學(xué)習(xí)提出了要求，其要義就是提出觀點(diǎn)并做好參與討論的準(zhǔn)備，這也正是達(dá)成共識(shí)所必需的基礎(chǔ)。海森堡曾經(jīng)說(shuō)：科學(xué)扎根于交流，起源于討論。作為創(chuàng)造性很強(qiáng)的科學(xué)活動(dòng)，立足于交流的達(dá)成共識(shí)過(guò)程無(wú)疑是非常有教育價(jià)值的。

達(dá)成共識(shí)是一個(gè)不斷往復(fù)的過(guò)程。和許多教師習(xí)慣了的“點(diǎn)對(duì)點(diǎn)”獲得結(jié)論的方式不一樣，達(dá)成共識(shí)會(huì)在證據(jù)與解釋之間進(jìn)行反復(fù)。也就是說(shuō)，最后結(jié)論的得出，是大家在對(duì)前面的交流結(jié)果不斷修正的基礎(chǔ)上共同形成的。這一特點(diǎn)傳達(dá)出了三個(gè)基本要求：一是允許觀點(diǎn)存在不完整性、不準(zhǔn)確性，但是要基于現(xiàn)有證據(jù)提出;二是可以通過(guò)不同的路徑來(lái)證明自己的觀點(diǎn)，但不能脫離研究的共同問(wèn)題;三是在確證的前提下，他人的經(jīng)驗(yàn)是可以為我所用的。概括地講，往復(fù)是不斷完善證據(jù)形成更加合理解釋的過(guò)程，這也就從一定的角度對(duì)課堂教學(xué)的活動(dòng)形態(tài)提出了新的要求，點(diǎn)狀、線形以及異口同聲的言語(yǔ)狀態(tài)都不足以形成不斷往復(fù)的達(dá)成共識(shí)過(guò)程，教師需要?jiǎng)?chuàng)造一種充滿爭(zhēng)論，類似于“茶話會(huì)”的解決問(wèn)題的課堂形態(tài)。

構(gòu)建達(dá)成共識(shí)的教學(xué)并不是簡(jiǎn)單的事情，因?yàn)樵谖覀兯吹降脑S多課堂中，大都“頭重腳輕”，參與交流變成了走過(guò)場(chǎng)似的作秀，要么在獲取證據(jù)階段，其教學(xué)所指向的就是與結(jié)論一一對(duì)應(yīng)的事實(shí)，幾乎沒(méi)有什么開放性可言，要么一旦學(xué)生講出與期望結(jié)論相關(guān)的答案，教師就馬上予以肯定，學(xué)生幾乎沒(méi)有再交流的可能。所以說(shuō)，達(dá)成共識(shí)對(duì)科學(xué)的教學(xué)設(shè)計(jì)提出了很大的挑戰(zhàn)：教師不僅要在教學(xué)思想上真正看到達(dá)成共識(shí)對(duì)培育學(xué)生科學(xué)素養(yǎng)的作用，而且要把握“不斷往復(fù)”對(duì)獲取證據(jù)的能力、解釋證據(jù)的思維、參與交流的表達(dá)、回應(yīng)質(zhì)疑的思辨的要求，并以此進(jìn)行教學(xué)的轉(zhuǎn)變與改進(jìn)。這樣，學(xué)生在課堂上所獲得的就遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不止那一點(diǎn)結(jié)論了。

李德強(qiáng)

人教鄂教版《科學(xué)》教材副主編

湖北省教育廳小學(xué)科學(xué)教學(xué)指導(dǎo)委員會(huì)副主任委員

湖北省宜昌市市管優(yōu)秀專家

Reaching a Consensus in Class

is not Easy

LI Deqiang

中圖分類號(hào)：G424??????????????? 文獻(xiàn)標(biāo)識(shí)碼：A???????????????? DOI：10.16400/j.cnki.kjdkx.2021.02.004

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 science class， compared with the links of finding evidence， training thinking and putting forward explanation， reaching a consensus is easy to be ignored， which makes the teaching lack of depth.

Reaching a consensus usually means reaching a consensus through consultation. In the process of "doing science"， scientists will also provide sufficient evidence and explanation models for their own views， accept everyone's query and evaluation， and then make further thinking and Research on this basis. This is actually a scientific activity to reach a consensus. On the road of scientific research， such activities are not one-way， one-time， but constantly reciprocating.

From the perspective of "doing science" for students， the significance of teaching is not only to simply get conclusions， but also to make students have the opportunity to participate in communication， questioning， evaluation and other activities through the process of reaching consensus， so as to have a preliminary understanding of what science is and what scientific inquiry is. To achieve this goal， it is necessary to have a clear understanding of the "consensus" teaching path， and take it as a starting point to improve the specific teaching.

Reaching a consensus is a process of communication， which is different from the general aimless chat. It requires the explorers to put forward their own views around a certain problem， and interpret their own views by relying on evidence， and publish and improve their own ideas many times in the questioning and evaluation of others. It can be seen that students participating in communication should have the following three basic conditions： they should have their own views; they should have the evidence to support their views， that is， to prove the rationality and correctness of their views with facts; they should be able to connect their views and evidence， and express them in a certain way， so that the listeners can understand what their views are and how to prove them the point of view is correct.

In fact， these conditions put forward requirements for what teachers should help students focus on and how to carry out their study in front-end teaching. The essence of these conditions is to put forward ideas and be prepared to participate in the discussion， which is also the necessary basis for reaching a consensus. Heisenberg once said： science is rooted in communication and originates from discussion. As a highly creative scientific activity， the process of reaching consensus based on communication is undoubtedly of great educational value.

Reaching consensus is a process of constant repetition. Unlike many teachers' accustomed "point-to-point" approach to conclusions， consensus can be repeated between evidence and interpretation. That is to say， the final conclusion is formed by all on the basis of continuous correction of the previous results of communication. This characteristic conveys three basic requirements： one is to allow the view to be incomplete and inaccurate， but it should be put forward based on the existing evidence; the second is to prove his own viewpoint through different paths， but not to separate from the common problems of research; thirdly， the experience of others can be used for me before confirmation. Generally speaking， reciprocating is the process of constantly improving evidence formation and more reasonable explanation. This also puts forward new requirements for the activity form of classroom teaching from a certain angle. The point shape， line shape and the speech state of different voices are not enough to form a continuous and reciprocating consensus process. Teachers need to create a class full of controversy， similar to the "tea conference" to solve the problem.

The construction of consensus teaching is not a simple thing， because in many of the classrooms we have seen， most of them are "top heavy"， and participation in communication has become a show. Either in the stage of obtaining evidence， the teaching points to the facts corresponding to the conclusions one by one， and there is almost no openness， or once the students speak the answers related to the expected conclusions The teacher immediately affirmed the case， and the students could hardly communicate with each other. Therefore， reaching a consensus poses a great challenge to the teaching design of Science： teachers should not only see the role of reaching a consensus in the cultivation of students' scientific literacy， but also grasp the requirements of "constantly reciprocating" for the ability to obtain evidence， the thinking of explaining evidence， the expression of participating in communication， and the speculative response to questions， so as to carry out the transformation and reform of teaching In. In this way， students get more than that conclusion in class.