“新课程要革‘讲’的命?”话题发表(见本刊2005年第2期)后,引起了广大教师的关注,纷纷来稿参与讨论。从这些来稿看,对新课程教学还要不要讲授基本持肯定的态度,问题是如何理解讲授及如何讲授,对此许多老师提出了颇具启发性的见解。但对《“错误”的以诗解诗?》课例的评价,依然分歧很大。对于某一堂课有不同的看法是正常的,问题在于这些争论背后的一些思维假定。比如,大家都认为讲授是必要的, 实际日常教学也多以讲授为主, 可为何在评判一堂课是否体现了新课程的理念、精神时,又往往以讲多讲少为主要的甚至是唯一的依据呢?为什么总是把表面上“讲”多了一点的课定义为反新课程呢?为什么许多教师反映,在新课程的公开课上,执教者宁愿追求虚浮热闹的自主合作、讨论交流而拒绝必要的、精彩的“讲”呢?这些看似悖谬的现象提醒我们,可能是我们思考教育的某些思维习惯、理念假定出了问题。 我们刊发以下几篇文章,不过是给大家关注并反思影响我们教育行为、看法的思维假定提供引子罢了。愿更多的人以梁启超式的自我解剖精神——“不惜以今日之我—与昨日之我挑战”来澄清、揭示、检讨我们过去不曾意识到的思维假定。 After the topic was published (see the 2nd issue of this issue in 2005), it aroused the concern of the majority of teachers and all contributed contributions to the discussions. Judging from these contributions, we should also not basically teach the new curriculum with a positive attitude. The question is how to understand the teaching and how to teach it, and many of the teachers have put forward some enlightening opinions. However, the evaluation of the “lesson” from the “wrong” poem is still very different. It is normal to have a different view of a lesson, but the problem lies in some of the thinking behind those arguments. For example, everyone thinks that lecturing is necessary, and the actual daily teaching is mostly lecturing. Why is it that when judging whether or not a lesson embodies the concept and spirit of a new curriculum, it is often the main or even the only Why is it always the case that many more classes on the surface are said to be anti-new curriculums? Why do many teachers reflect that in the open curricula of the new curricula, co-optees would rather seek for their own fraternity and cooperation and discussion and exchange And refuse the necessary, wonderful “speaking”? These seemingly absurd phenomenon reminds us that we may think of some of the thinking habits of education, the concept assumed a problem. We have published the following articles, but to give you a general view of and reflect on the thinking that affects our educational behavior and presuppositions. May more people clarify, reveal and review the thinking assumptions that we did not realize in the past with the self-dissection spirit of Liang Qichao - “Willing Today with Me - Challenged with Me Today”.