切實直面學生活動

李德強

在具體的課堂教學中，學生活動往往會出現許多“失控”的狀況，使教學充滿了矛盾和再選擇可能。直面學生活動，就是教師面對學生真實的活動反應，及時作出相應的教學抉擇?？茖W教學中做到直面學生活動，至少需要明確以下三點：

首先，學生活動應該是什么樣的？

只有當教師設計出的學生活動符合科學教育規律的時候，“直面”才會有意義。比如，同樣是研究“食物鏈和食物網”，一種做法是讓學生在黑板上畫出幾個箭頭，標出幾種動植物之間的食物關系，然后教師給出相應的概念。另一種做法是教師展示一個大的生態環境，讓學生利用已有的生活經驗，采取多種方法，通過多種途徑，盡可能找出多的食物鏈，然后全班同學在一起展開討論，探求各類動植物之間的相互依賴關系，明白關系中“連結點”的意義所在，進而建構起“鏈”和“網”的觀念。對比這兩個學生活動，前者是可以在少數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知會交織在一起，形成一個較為復雜的“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，而是在無數個不確定性中走向確定的動態過程，這一過程正是探究實踐所應有的學生活動形式。

其次，教師要有“非中心”意識。

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

一是對課堂“失控”現象有正確的理解。特級教師章鼎兒曾經談到，當學生面對感興趣的教學材料時，表現出的“失?！迸e動是正常反應，教師應該用兒童視角去正確看待。為什么有人會認為其“失?！蹦?？就是因為他沖撞了“中心”意識下的某些規范。如果再深究就會發現，學生在活動中的行為、思維乃至認知觀點都會時不時脫離教師的預期，進入“失控”狀態，讓課堂變得難以把控，但這些“失控”同樣不應被簡單視為“失常”。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，進入學生活動的真實情形中去。

二是要看到學生在直面活動狀態下發展的可能性。當學生意識到教師中心淡化或者消失的時候，其潛能就會顯現出來，個體、小組以及相互間的思維、觀點的碰撞也會隨之產生，表面看起來的“失控”狀況就會在相互作用的推動下，向著協調一致的方向發展，教學從而由“無序”走向“有序”。

最后，有適切的行為規則意識。

“直面”強調了基于學生活動的真實反映，“去中心化”突出了活動中各主體的相互作用，行為規則意識則強化了科學教師的引導方式及方法。毋庸置疑，直面學生活動的課堂教學依然需要教師的引導，以達成教學目的，做到“兩不”是基本要求：一是不干涉學生的思維進程。科學教師應該明白，學生當下的每一次表達都是其現時的最高思維水平，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，迫使學生放棄自己的觀點來認可所謂的結論。教師需要做的是反復提醒學生“你何以能夠證明自己的觀點”，并在他們實在難以繼續下去的時候，為他們提供方法、思路上的支持。

Face Students’ Activities

LI Deqiang

中圖分類號：G424文獻標識碼：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.