Wang Fuqiang: Beware of your "standard answer"
Original Haicheng Floating Dust Wang Fuqiang's Small Courtyard 2022-10-13 06:30 Published on Hebei
On a TV program "Children's Puzzle" type, the host asked: "Why does balloon fly into the sky?" "Why does a kitten wash his face?"... A child replied: "The balloon flies into the sky to find a bird." "The kitten didn't catch the mouse, and was very sad, and cried, so he had to wash his face." The child's answer was very good. Creative, but the host said coldly: "The answer is wrong." Then the correct answer was announced: "Because the balloon contains hydrogen , hydrogen is smaller than the density of air..."
If we only look at the perspective of letting children learn knowledge, the host's answer is beyond reproach, but the children's answers are full of fantasy and innocence, can we bear to hit his creative thinking? So is it more important to protect a child’s imagination, or is it more important to let him learn scientific and cultural knowledge?
It is true that in teaching, the "standardized" answer can indeed point out the correct teaching direction for teachers' teaching, and the answers that students have are absolutely correct, but if you always use "standardized" answers to guide your teaching and fix it into your own teaching method, this may not be correct.
Because of this, students' divergent thinking and creative thinking are all squeezed by "standardized" answers. As long as the students answer not the answers they designed, teachers will strictly demand and do not think about "kill with one stick". Over time, this will be extremely unfavorable to students' growth.
It is obvious that the "standard answer" hinders the development of students and is very likely to turn students into "question-answer machines".
Students are the main body of learning, and the effect of teachers' teaching must be reflected through students, but this reflection is not limited to students being able to answer teachers' various questions in a standardized manner.
There are several paths to a place. What we need to check is not only to see whether the students will walk, but more importantly, let students choose a path that suits them according to their own conditions; there are many solutions to a problem, and more importantly, to let students master these methods and be able to choose a method they like according to the actual situation.
Only in this way can students "learn from one example" instead of following the only one, thereby expanding their thinking space. "Standardized" answers will only turn students into "robots" that answer questions and answers. If the learning environment changes slightly, they will often feel at a loss.
When chatting with the teachers, everyone was worried: Will not pursue "standard answers" affect the test scores? If the score is gone, how can the teacher’s labor results be reflected?
It seems that this worry makes sense. When pursuing standard answers in the exam, it will force the only answer in teaching, "learn whatever you answer." A essay question, the teacher’s key points are: “There are three key points in this question, one is…two…three…” Each key point is a “scoring point”. If you remember two points, you will be wrong in innovation. Once the unquestionable standard answer is established, the mechanism of "those who follow me will prosper, and those who go against me will perish" will be activated immediately.
"On a spring night, a person who had been away from his hometown for a long time, looked at the bright moonlight and missed his hometown, so he recited a poem. What is this poem?" A student replied: "Look up at the bright moon, and looked down at the hometown." As a result, he was judged as ×, and the standard answer was "The spring breeze is green again on the south bank of the river, when will the bright moon shine on me again?" What is worrying is that once students regard the answer as authority and believe it deeply, how can they still have the spirit of questioning?
"Why can't our school cultivate first-class talents?" Qian Xuesen's question is still in his ears, and first-class talents will never stop at the "standard answer".
Therefore, as a teacher with conscience, you cannot add too many rules and regulations to students just for a score in front of you, so that they dare not "overstep the line". Students should be encouraged to think, speak, and dare to innovate.
What's more, the exam is constantly reforming, and the subjective components of the test questions are increasing, striving to test students' personalized insights and open-minded ideas, which also requires students to get rid of the "standard answer" thinking in order to achieve good results.
It should also be noted that the "standardized" answer not only affects students, but also hinders the development of teachers. If teachers are satisfied with the "standardized" answers and encounter problems, they do not try to explore diversified solutions, which will inevitably lead to their teaching becoming increasingly rigid and it will be difficult to adapt to the development of the educational situation.
If everything is based on the "standardized" answer, why should the teaching methods be divided into heuristics and cramming? I'm afraid it's more convenient and quick to "fill in" the answers to students one by one.
From the evaluation of modern education, the basic functions of examinations and evaluation are to cultivate, educate and shape people. The thinking of primary and secondary school students is developing. Blindly using "standardized" answers to identify them will only kill the development of students' thinking and will not achieve the purpose of "educating people" and "developing people".
Similarly, if teachers want to truly become "spicy and colorful", they must not use teaching guide as a "life-saving straw", and copying standard answers and reciting standard answers as the most important teaching method.
When our teaching opens the brains of teachers and students, thinking and questioning become the mainstream of the classroom, is the answer completely "standard", and what's the harm?
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-