|
昨日碎碎念：结束了压力山大的见面课，昨天是休整日，完成各种碎事，上午将毕业设计中学生的工作梳理出头绪，开始准备在线课程立项的结题，接着与几家有意请我做培训的单位接洽，落实细节，学校社团联合会的学生记者采访我和梅花桩拳的故事，然后就是快乐的唱歌课。 今天到青岛工学院做报告，明天一天是项目结题的交流和报告，后天再上课。时间够赶，只能这样了。这个周末在家，可以再做一次成长辅导，休闲一个下午。 妻为我煮好出门饺子了，打住不写了，幸福地吃完，启程。 今天的译文，是３天的朗读量，连载将停两天。
今日译文定位 正文（连载1-55） 附录 A. 来自教师的建议 ★今日工作★ 待续 B. 活动案例 今日译文 附录：活动案例 Appendix: Example Activities 下面是在这一系列文章中提到的，可供教师使用的活动和策略。（译者：即正文中一直出现的“原文有链接”。） Below are specific activities and strategies that have been used by instructors to accomplish the commendations in this set of articles. A. 来自教师的建议 Advice from Instructors Authors: Beth Simon (UCSD), Ian Beatty (UNC Greensboro), Brian Katz (Augustana College), Doug Duncan (CU Boulder), DJ Wagner (Grove City College), Mark Maier (Glendale C.C.), Paul Camp (Spelman College), John Hubisz (North Carolina State U.) 概览 为了响应我们征集构建主动学习课程材料的号召，有几位老师分享了他们的一般方法，而不是特定的材料。我们觉得这些原始形式的评论提供了一些表达清晰的教学理念，所以在这里分享出来，以便其他老师能从他们的见解中受益。 Overview In response to our call for materials to use in framing active learning classes, several instructors shared a description of their general approach rather than particular materials. We felt that these comments in their raw form represent some well-articulated pedagogical philosophies, and so we share them here so that other instructors can benefit from their insights. A.1 IAN BEATTY的分享 IAN BEATTY, 北卡罗来纳大学格林斯伯勒分校 (物理) 见Ian的点击器问题和clicker文件中的元通信策略。 IAN BEATTY, UNC Greensboro (Physics) See Ian’s clicker questions and meta-communication strategies in the “clicker” files. 我尽量不把我的课程当成“能帮助你考试的东西”，或者说，把整个游戏都当作考试和成绩来看待。叫我理想主义者好了，但我固执地坚持我的观点(口头上，在我的课程)——关键是要学会既鼓舞人心，又对个人职业、抱负长期有用的东西，考试和成绩是恼人的必需品，我们应该避免对它们产生过分的依赖(今年秋季，在我初级的热学课程中，我实际上在最终课程评分之前，拒绝给出任何分数或其他编码化的评价性反馈。对作业和测验的所有反馈 ，都是对优点、缺点和进展情况的个性化评论。） I try not to frame my course as 'stuff that will help you on the exam' or otherwise cast the whole game as about exams and grades. Call me an idealist, but I stubbornly stick to the perspective (vocally, in my courses) that the point is to learn stuff that's both fascinating and long-term useful to their personal and career aspirations, and that exams and grades are annoying necessities that we should avoid getting too hung up about. (In my junior-level thermo course this fall, I actually refused to give any points, grades, or other codified evaluative feedback until the final course grade at the very end. All feedback on homework and exams was individualized commentary on strengths, weaknesses, and things to work on.) 也就是说, 我将“解释”点击器使用（以及其他我用到的主动学习策略，如小组白板讨论和小组测试）和将之“卖给”学生之间做了清晰的区分。如果学生感觉到好像我在设法向他们兜售想法，他们就会怀疑，因为我曾经愚蠢地传达过这样的思想：(a)点击器是要卖给他们的有争议的东西； (b) 他们对这件事可以有某种有效的观点。我宁愿保持这样的立场——这仅仅是我教的方式，因为大量的证据和实验显示这种方法很好，并且我也想让你理解我正在做什么、为什么要这样做，这样，你们就可以尽可能清楚地扮演好你们的角色。我们越是能保持一心，整个的状况就会更好。看出不同了吗？这些都是与框架有关。 That being said, I make a distinction between 'explaining' clicker use (and other active-learning strategies I use, such as group whiteboarding and group exams) and 'selling' it to the students. If students feel like I'm trying to sell the idea to them, they get suspicious(怀疑), because I've stupidly communicated the idea that (a) clickers are something controversial(有争议的) that needs to be sold, and (b) they have some kind of valid opinion on the matter. I prefer to take the position that 'this is just the way I teach, because overwhelming evidence and experience show that it's what works well, but I also want you to understand what I'm doing and why so that you can play your role with as much awareness as possible. The more we're on the same page, the better this whole thing works.' See the difference? It's all about framing. 我与学生在课程开始阶段和学期中开展了元通信（译者：即讨论为什么这样学和教，对应元认知的内容）。我偶尔也会加入一些大脑是如何工作的，学习研究的花絮等内容。我习惯于解释我为什么用这样的方式教，我想让他们能关注什么。我也会向他们承诺，他们可以自由地询问我课程中的任何元素、任何方面的理由。 I meta-communicate a lot with my students, both at the beginning of the course and throughout. I occasionally interject bits about how the brain works, tidbits(花絮) from learning research, etc. I habitually explain why I'm doing the things I'm doing in my teaching, and what I want them to be focused on. I also promise them that they're always free to ask me the justification for any element or aspect of the course. 我有一套用于支持元通信的点击器问题，也(巧妙地或明显地)传达使用点击器的框架。特征明显地包括了多种可以商榷的选择(这样会触及到原因，而不是仅仅选个答案)、学生可以发现的潜在的模糊性，在学和用物理中可以引发讨论的假设的角色。 I include clicker questions designed to support meta-communication, and also to (subtly or obviously) communicate a certain framing of clicker use. Features include obviously having multiple defensible choices (so it's about reasons rather than answers picked), latent ambiguities that students can discover, leading to discussions about the role of assumptions in learning and doing physics, etc. 我认为，不需要对点击器问题给出任何形式的分数或学分，也不用跟踪哪个学生用了哪个点击器。我可以信心满满地宣告，点击器只是帮助我们交流、讨论和理解这些的工具之一。 I think not giving any form of points or credit for clicker questions, and keeping no track of which students even have which clickers, helps. I can, with great credibility, claim that clickers are merely one more tool to help us communicate, discuss, and generally make sense of this stuff. 坦率地讲，如果学生不进到这种全面参与的主动学习中，他们在我的课堂上会有大问题，不仅仅是点击器的问题。他们经常会抱怨我不会讲很多，我“没有教他们任何东西”，还强迫他们在课外自学所有的内容。 Frankly, if a student isn't into this whole engaged-active-learning thing, they're going to have bigger problems with my class than just the clickers. They usually complain that I don't lecture much and 'don't teach them anything', forcing them to learn everything by themselves outside of class. 所有的学生都对此买帐吗？绝对不是。但是，典型地，足够建立起正向的班级氛围了，那些顽固不化的人也只能不情愿地跟着走了。甚至，他们会在第二个学期末改变他们的立场。 Do all the students buy the approach? Definitely not. But typically, enough do to set a positive class climate, and the recalcitrant ones grudgingly go along. Even those usually change their tune by the end of the second semester in the sequence. 这帮助我像打了鸡血一样尽我所能地教，学生看到了我为他们付出的努力（“让”他们重做考试给额外加分、带回家里的开卷合作测试，等等)。他们可能不同意我的方法，但很少有人怀疑我的真诚意图。这有很长的路要走。 It also helps that I work like a flaming dog to teach as well as I can, and the student see me bleed for them (extra grading from 'letting' them redo exams as take-home open-book collaborative tests, etc.). They may disagree with my methods, but very few doubt my sincere intentions. That goes a long way. 我一再重复使用的元通信手段是“你需要通过说，完成你的学习”。我强调将想法通过语言表达出来的重要性，这样可以得出你真正所想的，改善你的思维，以及直面他人的想法。对我而言，点击器（以及小组白板）就是激发学生彼此讨论的首要的机制。 One of the meta-communication bits I repeat again and again is that 'you need to talk to learn'. I stress the importance of putting your own thoughts into words in order to figure out what you actually think and to improve your thoughts, and of confronting other people's thinking. For me, clickers (and group whiteboarding) are first and foremost a mechanism for provoking students into discussing with each other. 我觉得直接用“对或错”的问题开始课程是一个糟糕的想法。我宁愿让他们立刻品尝能引出更多问题的一个有趣的、有争议的、争论不休的问题，而不是解决了的问题。最近一次我教概念物理，我花10分钟时间讲了一个故事 ，一个少年在游乐园里的过山车中受了重伤（真事），然后抛出了一个简单的点击器问题：“过山车的设计者有错吗？1-是，2-否”。这引发了一场激烈的争论，从自我责任开始，逐渐演变成(在我小心翼翼的推动下)关于弯曲和惯性的积累的争论。嘣：牛顿第一定律就这样闪亮登场了。 I think starting off a course with straightforward 'right or wrong' content questions is a bad idea. I'd rather give them an immediate taste of an interesting, controversial, argumentative question that raises more questions than it resolves. Last time I taught Conceptual Physics, I started off with a 10-minute narrative(故事) about an accident on a roller-coaster at an amusement park where a teenager got seriously injured, (true story), and then pose a simple clicker question: 'Was the designer of the Triple Hurricane [roller-coaster] at fault? 1. Yes; 2. No.' That starts quite a debate, that begins with ideas of self-responsibility but gradually evolves (with some careful nudging from me) to ideas about banking curves and inertia. Boom: Newton's first law has now been motivated. :)
|
|
|
