Recently, in the education industry in Jiangsu Province, a high school teacher taught the Chinese open class and won the first place. The text is a familiar "Peacock Flying".
This lesson has caused great controversy, and was collectively voiced by front-line Chinese teachers.Hua is not true. Of course, there are also teachers who praise and recommend this lesson, such as teaching and researchers.
In a voting activity, 80%of people think that this lesson is very average, and the first prize is a real name.
So what is this lesson?We can learn through the three major parts of this lesson.
First of all, the teacher arranged the homework in advance , allowing students to rewrite Liu Lanzhis fate in contemporary society, and in the form of five words.
This front operation seems unreasonable.Because students need to rewrite, they must be particularly familiar with the text, thoroughly eat the relationship between the characters, and understand the subjective ideas. Since the students are so familiar with the text, what does it mean to this lesson?
And, this rewriting is very difficult.Battle, it takes quite a long time, which has increased the high -intensity schoolwork to students, which is very unreasonable.
The teacher showed the rewriting of three students in the classroom, and also allowed other students to share their ideas.The whole process seemed to be in a hurry, like a dragonfly.
Secondly, the teacher asked the students to use a group as the unit to review the three rewriting homework , and each group must send representatives to comment.
At the same time, the teacher provides two comments ideas. The first is whether the character image after the rewritingWhether Liu Lanzhis ending will change in modern society.
It is estimated that it is difficult for students to comment.
The main contents of the three rewriting homework can be summarized as "defending love articles", "temporary separation" and "personal independence".To ask if the image after the rewriting is consistent with the original poem, students can only answer "consistency" or "inconsistency", and there will be no new views, that is, this problem is meaningless.
As for Liu Lanzhis ending in modern times, it is more difficult for students to answer.Because even in the current society, thousands of people and thousands of people will have different choices, so the teacher may not ask "how do you want Liu Lanzhi to choose", so that the students have room for freedom, and then the teacher will add it againGuide, maybe inspiration or motivation.
Next, the third link is here.
The teacher asked the students to write a post-editing language as a editor, and gave three directions for thinking.The teachers intention is obvious. I hope that students will feel and gain after learning this article.
To be honest, it is difficult for students to write.Sure enough, students will only attribute Liu Lanzhis destiny to "feudal etiquette", and they will only propose empty solutions such as "resisting etiquette" and "living self".And they seem to have no real touch after saying the formalized answer.
At this point, this lesson is "successful".
I watched the first prize of the Jiangsu Provincial Class Tournament, and there were a few doubts:
First, the perspective of rewriting the task is modern society. So as a long narrative poem in the Han Dynasty, how will its value be reflected?Is this overheading the cultural connotation of the work?Second, Liu Lanzhi has a good look. Why cant you like the mother -in -laws love?There is no specific analysis in this class.Third, there are many flash points on Liu Lanzhi. Why did the teacher not explain and did not guide students to think?You know, this may be something that is really inspiring to students.
Some people evaluate this lesson like this: Three links are read carefully, and they are far away from the righteousness of the Chinese classroom. Liu Lanzhi will be alive!
Some people say that public lessons are not personal performance lessons or group performance classes. Classrooms are not theater. Learning is not acting. It is true that the benefit of each student is the true nature of education.
I believe that many teachers are not usually like this.To say "Peacock Flying Southeast", I believe that teachers will guide students to analyze the text carefully, analyze the character image, theme thought, plot advancement, as well as visual language, exquisite terms, rhetoric, and so on.
Some settings look very novel and beautiful, but it will destroy the original beauty of the classic.Is this really good?
What do you think?
(Picture from the Internet, invading deletion, thank you)
