中学历史学科研究性学习与教学

【作者】 郑流爱；

【导师】 聂幼犁；

【作者基本信息】 华东师范大学 ， 课程与教学论， 2003， 硕士

【摘要】 学习方式的变革是当前各个学科课程改革的焦点。本研究致力于中学历史学科的研究性学习与教学，通过目标—教学—评价这一课程框架，分五大部分对相关问题进行了讨论： 在“缘与起”中，本文对“研究性学习”进行了综述，主要内容涉及：“研究性学习”的文本释义——以研究的认知方式和心理过程进行学习；“研究性学习”的主要内涵——作为学习方式的研究性学习、作为教学策略的研究性学习和作为课程形态的研究性学习；“研究性学习”的历史性与时代性——后者是对前者的继承、发展和超越。最后，引出本文主题——中学历史学科研究性学习对其必要性与可行性作了论述，并交代了本研究的过程与方法。 上篇阐述了中学历史学科研究性学习的涵义、意义及其目标体系等理论问题。本研究主要将研究性学习定位于一种学习方式，次及教学策略，再及课程形态。本研究从认知、理论、过程和情感四个方面初步构建了中学历史学科研究性学习的目标体系，符合课标要求，体现学科特征。 中篇对中学历史学科研究性学习的实施进行了研究。在提升研究性教学经验的基础上，本文提出了中学历史学科研究性学习的四种基本教学模式——课前设计的问题式研究性学习、即时调整的问题式研究性学习、本内主题式研究性学习和本外专题式研究性学习，阐述了相应的教学策略和教学方法，并辅以具体案例。整体地看，学生的研究层次从观察他人研究到模仿他人研究再到独立自主探究，相应地，教学策略也从典型示范、过程引导走向机智指导。总之，从“采猎性研究”到“耕牧性研究”再到“纵横捭阂地研究”是研究性学习发展的一般过程。 下篇的主题是中学历史学科研究性学习的评价。本研究围绕评价主体——学生主体评价、教师(或专家)主体评价和多元主体评价，兼及其它评价方式，举例阐述了该篇主题。最后，本研究还附例了学科教育测量中的“研究性试题”加以分析。本篇试图说明：教学与评价是矛盾的统一体；中学历史学科研究性学习的评价以过程性的、定性的评价方式为主，但不应排斥结果性的、定量的评价方式。尤其是当前，基础型课程乃“重中之重”，研究性学习方式又尚未扎根，后者的引导作用不仅必要，而且重要，这也符合“教评一体”的精神。 最后，学习方式体现的是教师、课程资源和学习者之间的关系，而教师的组织、指导和调控决定着学习方式的多样性、灵活性和实效性。因此，教师的素养直接影响着学习方式转型的成效、教学策略运用的功效和课程开发的实效。本研究就教师专业发展的途径在“结语”中作了概述，目的在于说明：教师教育这一环节，是“本中之本，课程之魂”，亟待弥补、充实、提高。更多还原

【Abstract】 The changing of learning style is the common focus of curriculum reform in all subjects in high school nowadays. This dissertation addresses itself to inquiry learning (IL) in high school history. Along with the traditional curriculum development framework that from objective to instruction and to assessment, it discussed the following main questions through five segments:Introduced by the "origin", the dissertation sketched out the general understanding of IL. It was concerned with the main matters here: the explanation of IL-learning by cognitive mode and psychology progress of "inquiry"; the main interpretations of IL-as a learning style, a teaching strategy and a curriculum form; the historical development and practical significance of IL-the latter succeeds, extends and transcends the former. In the end, the theme of the study-the inquiry learning in high school history was elicited, the necessary and feasibility of which were accounted for, and the process and approaches of which were represented.The previous section set forth the theory meaning, practical significance and the framework of objectives of the EL in high school history. EL here was mainly oriented to a learning style, then a teaching strategy, and finally a curriculum form. Besides, the objective framework was primarily established on the base of the four parts: cognition, history theory, inquiry process and sensibility. It was desired to accord with the major idea of Nation’s Curriculum Standard, and embody the character of history subject.The continuing section discussed the implement of the EL in high school history. On the ground of abstracting the inquiry-teaching examples, the dissertation developed four essential models of the EL in high school history. They included question-oriented EL by designed before class; question-oriented EL by adjusting promptly in class; task-oriented EL under textbook and subject-oriented EL beyond textbook with representative cases. Effective strategies and methods corresponding to them were also suggested. Generally speaking, the EL of students should undergo a process-from observing others’ inquiry experience to imitating others’ inquiry methods and to researching on their own, accordingly, the teaching strategy from demonstrating representatively to guiding becomingly and to directing advisably. Anyway, from "researching like collection" to "researching like cultivation and farming" and to "researching in length and breadth" is the general avenue of the implement of EL.The topic of the last section was the learning assessment of IL in high school history. The study treated it in light of the means of subject-oriented assessment-learners’ assessment, teachers’ (experts’) assessment, multi-subject assessment and other incidental means with ample cases. Moreover, some "inquiry test questions" and analyses to them from history education measurement were exemplified as an important part of the section. The title of the section was, instruction and assessment are oneness of contradiction; the processing, qualitative assessment means are dominant in the assessment means of IL hi high school history, but the consequential, quantitative means shouldn’t be supplanted yet. Especially nowadays, the basal curriculum areas are beyond others, but inquiry learning style hasn’t taken root, the leading and stimulating of the processing, qualitative assessment means are necessary and important. This also answers the idea: instruction and assessment are two sides of one thing.Finally, learning style represents the relations among the teacher, curriculum resources and the learner, but the teacher’s organization, instruction and pilot determine the diversity, agility and actual effect of learning style. Consequently, the accomplishment and intelligence of teachers will have a crucial effect on the impact of changing of learning style, the virtue of exertion of teaching strategy, and the substantial results of curriculum development. In the epilogue, the dissertation summarized the approaches to teacher’ profes更多还原