主引多元意見的協(xié)商討論

內(nèi)容概要

　　《主引多元意見的協(xié)商討論--美國社會(huì)研究課程教師的課堂話語分析》(作者馮豫)以獨(dú)特的跨學(xué)科的視角，基于教育心理學(xué)的學(xué)習(xí)理論和西方教育界“社會(huì)研究”課程的認(rèn)識(shí)論，以五位美國優(yōu)秀的中小學(xué)“社會(huì)研究”教師的錄像資料為研究對象，并以兼有定量和定性的課堂話語微分析為研究方法，揭示了這些教師在對學(xué)生的文獻(xiàn)分析進(jìn)行指導(dǎo)以后如何進(jìn)一步引導(dǎo)學(xué)生參與多元意見的協(xié)商討論并形成“歷史移情”的學(xué)科思維方式。《主引多元意見的協(xié)商討論--美國社會(huì)研究課程教師的課堂話語分析》的錄像資料取自于由美國國家人文基金會(huì)和高等教育　　革新基金會(huì)共同資助的科研項(xiàng)目“縱貫歷史的永恒主題”的資料庫，其中包括課堂教學(xué)以及對每位教師課前課后所進(jìn)行的三次訪談。本書第一章描述了探究性“社會(huì)研究”課程的教學(xué)模式、協(xié)商討論在整體教學(xué)模式中的位置及其在教學(xué)中遇到的眾多挑戰(zhàn)，同時(shí)交代了本書四個(gè)具體的研究問題及其生成的依據(jù)。第二章的文獻(xiàn)綜述就課堂討論式的“社會(huì)研究”教學(xué)所引用的理論指導(dǎo)框架以及支持此類教學(xué)所涉及的各種因素進(jìn)行了詳盡的闡述。第三章具體地解釋了用于回答四個(gè)研究問題選擇不同話語分析方法的理由，介紹了作者為確保研究結(jié)果的效度所采取的一些措施。第四章對研究問題一一作了回答，定量分析指出了教師們鼓勵(lì)學(xué)生參與多元意見協(xié)商討論的共同策略和各自面臨的挑戰(zhàn)，定性分析展示了教師們定義教學(xué)角色的話語策略及其過程、提問策略的幾大類別和具體言語行為、促使學(xué)生思考不同意見的策略及其具體的交互過程，以及培養(yǎng)學(xué)生移情關(guān)注的話語策略及其過程。最后一章在回顧研究結(jié)果后對傳統(tǒng)的蘇格拉底式問答教學(xué)和本書探討的主引協(xié)商討論式教學(xué)進(jìn)行比較，接著進(jìn)一步討論本研究對于有關(guān)理論的構(gòu)建和研究方法作出的貢獻(xiàn)，和對于反思型教師的成長具有的實(shí)際意義，最后還指出了本研究的一些局限性和未來的研究方向。

作者簡介

馮豫：美國印第安納大學(xué)教學(xué)系統(tǒng)技術(shù)和教育心理學(xué)雙專業(yè)博士、應(yīng)用語言學(xué)/TESOL碩士，原為復(fù)旦大學(xué)大學(xué)英語部副教授，現(xiàn)任上海杉達(dá)學(xué)院大學(xué)英語部主任、教授。曾為復(fù)旦和高教出版社出版的《二十一世紀(jì)大學(xué)英語（讀寫教程）》（1999）主要編寫人員之一，參加編寫美國SAGE出版社出版的《社會(huì)和行為科學(xué)百科辭書》(2009),以及為已故張亞倫教授續(xù)譯《國史概要》（樊樹志著）(2011)。

書籍目錄

中文概要
Abstract
List of Figures
List of Tables
Chapter One: Background
Background of the Problem
Statement of the Purpose
Research Questions
Key Terms
Summary and Overview
Chapter Two: Review of Literature
Social Constructivist Perspectives on Teaching and Learning
Scaffolding
Engagement in Historical Empathy
Discussion in Social Studies Classrooms
Teacher Questioning
Classroom Discourse, Learning Relationships, and Student
Agency
Summary
Chapter Three: Method
Participants and Settings
Research Design
Research Rigor
Summary
Chapter Four: Results & Findings
Research Question 1 : What learning relationships were created by
the teachers across the group to coordinate student
participation?
Research Question 2 : What questioning strategies did the teachers
use to help their students with their argumentation?
Research Question 3 : How did the teachers attempt to encourage
students to address different perspectives'?
Research Question 4 : Given the data, what discourse strategies can
be characterized as the teachers' attempts to cultivate caring in
their students?
Summary
Chapter Five: Discussion & Conclusion
A Review of Findings
A Discussion of Scaffolding Caring as Empathy in Deliberation
Comparison and Contrast between Deliberative Discussion and
Socratic Discussion
Implications of the Study
Limitations of the Study
Future Directions for Research
Conclusion
References
Footnotes
Appendix A: PIH Project prelesson interview questions
Appendix B: PIH Project postlesson interview questions
Appendix C: Transcription conventions

章節(jié)摘錄

　　A concrete theory of scaffolding historical empathy during deliberative discussion can be a tangible object to which other practicing teachers can relate experientially. It can help teachers to build and rebuild interpretive frameworks for conceptualizing their own scaffolding practices. The explicit categories of scaffolding strategies from this study can help teachers examine their repertoires of discussion-scaffolding skills. An upshot of such conscious knowledge is that to help students learn better， teachers who are working online can allocate their cognitive resources purposefully so that they can focus on noticing students‘ gradual appropriation of scaffolding practices.　　From a teacher learning perspective that emphasizes inquiry as a stance （Cochran-Smith &Lytle， 2001）， this study of teachers’ scaffolding strategies stands to contribute toward understanding-for- practice. In other words， theory building is extended in further practice through other teachers‘ situated， experiential， and reflective development of “practical argument” （Fenstermacher， 1994） amidst the complexity of teaching. It， in essence， serves as a significant epistemic bridge in two ways. One is a rich， active constructivist and contextualized understanding of why and how the scaffolding strategies work.　The other is the conceptual tools for monitoring and reflecting on the use of discourse strategies purposefully to create substantial learning　opportunities for students.　　……

圖書封面

評論、評分、閱讀與下載

---

    主引多元意見的協(xié)商討論 PDF格式下載

---