第一篇：赵玉环单一的评价机制扼杀了多少学生的自信心
单一的评价机制扼杀了多少学生的自信心
教书20多年了，当班主任也将近20年了。大家知道，班主任不光负责自己所教学科的教学，还额外负责学生的所有事情，与学生接触最为亲密。班主任是学生最可依靠的人，但同时也是学生最畏惧的人。原因是班主任一定程度上决定着学生的情绪、做人的素质，甚至其人生发展。
社会给学校要成绩，学校给老师要成绩，最后，很大程度上把压力转嫁到了班主任身上。班主任怎么办？只能把压力转嫁到学生身上。所以，导致教育者人人都把目光盯在了学习成绩上。学习好就是好学生，就招人待见。学习不好就是差生，就招人反感。品格再好的差生也会因此发生着变化：先是脸上无光，进而可能还会想努力学习，可是如果总是靠在最后呢？他们就会慢慢失去信心和兴趣，失去热情和拼搏的精神，于是逐渐地自卑起来有的甚至不敢大声说话，连笑也不敢了，认为自己没有资格了。目睹着这些孩子的变化，我时常有一种负罪感：他们学不好文化课久没有资格抬头挺胸了吗？就必须付出自信和热情吗？就必须整日痛苦或者麻木吗？可是，这些却是他们走上社会自我发展的必备素质啊！当然，班中总会有一些学生成绩不错的，姑且称之为人才，但是，这是以多少差生的做人素质的丢失甚至被动辍学为代价的。这一切源于对学生、对学校的评价方式过于单一。这一点不改，再好的评价机制也是摆设。
目前，国家大力推行素质教育，推行与之相匹配的“中学生综合素质测评“，这让我们看到了曙光，也是广大学生的福祉。可是，问题不在于这个“中学生综合素质测评“指定地有多好，而在于如何执行，如何让选拔人才的学校不得不重视。我认为国家还应该把这种综合素质评价延伸到大学和社会。说起来不太好操作，这需要大家出主意，想对策，但至少有一点容易操作，比如从某个学校走出的学生严重违法就应该与他的就读学校的考核挂钩。这虽说不太公平，但至少是一种约束。
当然，以上情况的改变应首推国家教育部门的大政方针，那么，作为基层的教育者在评价 教师和学校政绩不变而导致良好的“中学生综合素质测评“落实不了的情况下应如何做呢？
1、首先要培养学生的热情 一个没有热情的民族是注定不会发展的，而这个责任就落在一代又一代学生身上。如何让高度的热情成为学生发展的不竭动力是一个值得研究的课题。,由于教育方法的不当、教学方式的呆板单调、课业负担的繁重、成绩不前等原因,造成许多学生学习态度冷淡,厌学情绪严重。调动学习学习积极性,培养学生的学习热情,成了教师的重要工作之一。使学生想学、乐学、会学,焕发他们身上蕴藏着的学习热情,具体要做到以下几个方面: 第一、树立远大志向,加强学习目的性教育学习并不一定都是引人入胜的,有些学习内容枯燥艰深,这就需要学生用坚强的意志克服困难。教师则平时注意对学生进行学习目的性教育,使其树立远大志向。学习目的性教育切忌空洞的理论说教。可以采用树立榜样的方法,向同学们讲述伟人少年立志、刻苦学习的故事(如周恩来总理中学立志“为中华之崛起而读书”):请身边通过学习改变命运的成功人士现身说法,更有感染力和说服力;还可以召开主题班会,以“我长大后要干什么”“学习的意义”等为主题请每位同学谈一谈自己的理想和对学习的看法。这样既可以使每位同学都有机会思考这类问题,又可以使教师及时掌握每名学生的思想动态,有针对性地进行教育。第二、制定合理的、具体的学习目标。除了远大的学习志向,每个学生还应有切合实际的具体学习目标。第三、多设置一些活动，这样就能给不同能力的学生提供不同的展示机会。比如各种内容的手抄报展评、各种内容的演讲比赛、手工制作、绘画作品等，只要注重培养学生的热情办法就会层出不穷。
2、其次要培养学生的自信心
自信心是一个人对自身价值和能力的充分认识和评价。对自己充满信心的人，容易形成积极乐观的情绪和百折不挠的意志，敢于面对新的问题和挑战，不轻易言败；而缺乏自信心的人，容易沮丧、灰心，在困难面前犹豫不决，畏缩不前，甚至逃避。如何培养小学生的自信心呢？
第一、赏识激励。赏识是树立学生信心最重要和最有效的方法，教师只有表达自己对学生的赏识才能使学生信心倍增。而学生对于老师的一言一行都很在意，他们很渴望经常得到老师的赏识。如何表现、何时表现效果最佳呢？下面几点需把握好。
（1）、赏识要真诚，使学生确信是真的。教师要细心地观察和了解，准确、具体地说出孩子的表现与成就，然后再热情地夸奖学生。这样学生不仅会确信教师的赏识是真的，从而对自己充满自信，而且会对教师心存一种感激，从而更加努力，充满、自信和活力。
（2）、表达赏识应形式多样。表达赏识的主要方法有口头表扬、赞许的眼光或微笑、恳切的鼓励、物质的奖励，手势（如竖大拇指）等。根据不同的情况，施以不同的方法。
（3）、赏识表扬要及时。如果表扬或鼓励是在第一时间提供的就会得到最令人满意的结果。因为孩子的注意力转向是很快的，因此，教师要时刻关注学生的每一点细微的进步，每一个小小的闪光点，并及时给予夸奖和鼓励，让孩子产生成就感和自豪感，促使其不断进步，从而增强自信。
（4）、赏识表扬不能过度。赏识教育主张对孩子多肯定，多鼓励，少批评，但不等于孩子犯了错误就不去批评，依然不断地赏识。再者，过度赏识，会导致孩子自满自傲、任性，不能客观正确地评价自我，若稍遇坎坷便一蹶不振。我们要适当把握赏识力度，不同孩子赏识的程度不同。如胆小呆板的孩子多肯定鼓励，少批评指责。对调皮、好动、表现差的孩子要善于捕捉其闪光点，及时肯定鼓励，扬长避短。
第二、善待学生的过失和失败，尤其是第一次，这是重树学生自信心的有效方法。
“人非圣贤，熟能无过”。当学生犯错时，教师要以包容的胸怀，善待学生的过失，诚恳地指出其不对之处，让他们明白如何做人做事，不应随意地责骂和讽刺，否则可能会一棍子打死学生，使其变得胆小或自暴自弃。这样，原本是一件坏事，处理得好就会转化为一个教育的良机，学生会因此明白了什么是对，什么是错，知道了应该怎么做才是好，对学生自信心的重建是一个很好的方法。
“胜败乃兵家常事”，老师一定要让学生明白这个道理，当然也不要让学生以此当做自己失败的借口，这个分寸要把握好。一次又一次的考试，总有学生考试失利，老师要善于观察成绩发布时学生的表现，要留心那些垂头丧气的学生，应及时采取措施给予疏导，千万不可任其发展，因为这种情绪一旦产生而学生自己又无力排解时就会形成一个巨大的阴影，严重挫败学生的自信心。
总之，小学老师要充分认识到小学阶段对学生自信心建立的重要性，要积极探索实践各种好方法，努力培养起小学生强有力的自信心，为培养更多优秀人才打下良好基础，为素质教育的健康发展做出我们应有的贡献。
单一的评价机制扼杀了多少学生的自信心
单位：石家庄市第三十八中学
作者：赵玉环
第二篇：学校扼杀了学生的创造力？Ken Robinson Ted英语演讲视频中英字幕,英语文本（共）
演讲稿英语文本：
Good morning.How are you? It's been great, hasn't it? I've been blown away by the whole thing.In fact, I'm leaving.There have been three themes, haven't there, running through the conference, which are relevant to what I want to talk about.One is the extraordinary evidence of human creativity in all of the presentations that we've had and in all of the people here.Just the variety of it and the range of it.The second is, that it's put us in a place where we have no idea what's going to happen, in terms of the future, no idea how this may play out.I have an interest in education--actually, what I find is, everybody has an interest in education;don't you? I find this very interesting.If you're at a dinner party, and you say you work in education--actually, you're not often at dinner parties, frankly, if you work in education, you're not asked.And you'll never ask back, curiously.That's strange to me.But if you are, and you say to somebody, you know, they say, “What do you do,” and you say you work in education, you can see the blood run from their face.They're like, “Oh my god,” you know, “why me? My one night out all week.” But if you ask people about their education, they pin you to the wall.Because it's one of those things that goes deep with people, am I right?, like religion, and money, and other things.I have a big interest in education, and I think we all do, we have a huge vested interest in it, partly because it's education that's meant to take us into this future that we can't grasp.If you think of it, children starting school this year will be retiring in 2065.Nobody has a clue, despite all the expertise that's been on parade for the past four days, what the world will look like in five years' time.And yet we're meant to be educating them for it.So the unpredictability, I think, is extraordinary.And the third part of this is that we've all agreed nonetheless on the really extraordinary capacity that children have, their capacities for innovation.I mean, Sirena last night was a marvel, wasn't she, just seeing what she could do.And she's exceptional, but I think she's not, so to speak, exceptional in the whole of childhood.What you have there is a person of extraordinary dedication who found a talent.And my contention is, all kids have tremendous talents and we squander them, pretty ruthlessly.So I want to talk about education and I want to talk about creativity.My contention is that creativity now is as important in education as literacy, and we should treat it with the same status.[applause] Thank you.That was it, by the way, thank you very much.Soooo, 15 minutes left.Well, I was born.I heard a great story recently, I love telling it, of a little girl who was in a drawing lesson, she was 6 and she was at the back, drawing, and the teacher said this little girl hardly paid attention, and in this drawing lesson she did.The teacher was fascinated and she went over to her and she said, “What are you drawing?” and the girl said, “I'm drawing a picture of God.” And the teacher said, “But nobody knows what God looks like.” And the girl said, “They will in a minute.”
When my son was 4 in England--actually he was 4 everywhere, to be honest;if we're being strict about it, wherever he went, he was 4 that year--he was in the nativity play.Do you remember the story? No, it was big, it was a big story.Mel Gibson did the sequel, you may have seen it, “Nativity II.” But James got the part of Joseph, which we were thrilled about.We considered this to be one of the lead parts.We had the place crammed full of agents in T-shirts: “James Robinson IS Joseph!” He didn't have to speak, but you know the bit where the three kings come in.They come in bearing gifts, and they bring gold, frankincense and myrrh.This really happened--we were sitting there and we think they just went out of sequence, we talked to the little boy afterward and we said, “You OK with that” and he said “Yeah, why, was that wrong?”--they just switched, I think that was it.Anyway, the three boys came in, little 4-year-olds with tea towels on their heads, and they put these boxes down, and the first boy said, “I bring you gold.” The second boy said, “I bring you myrhh.” And the third boy said, “Frank sent this.”
What these things have in common is that kids will take a chance.If they don't know, they'll have a go.Am I right? They're not frightened of being wrong.Now, I don't mean to say that being wrong is the same thing as being creative.What we do know is, if you're not prepared to be wrong, you'll never come up with anything original.If you're not prepared to be wrong.And by the time they get to be adults, most kids have lost that capacity.They have become frightened of being wrong.And we run our companies like this, by the way, we stigmatize mistakes.And we're now running national education systems where mistakes are the worst thing you can make.And the result is, we are educating people out of their creative capacities.Picasso once said this, he said that all children are born artists.The problem is to remain an artist as we grow up.I believe this passionately, that we don't grow into creativity, we grow out of it.Or rather we get educated out of it.So why is this?
I lived in Stratford-on-Avon until about five years ago, in fact we moved from Stratford to Los Angeles, so you can imagine what a seamless transition this was.Actually we lived in a place called Snitterfield, just outside Stratford, which is where Shakespeare's father was born.Were you struck by a new thought? I was.You don't think of Shakespeare having a father, do you? Do you? Because you don't think of Shakespeare being a child, do you? Shakespeare being 7? I never thought of it.I mean, he was 7 at some point;he was in somebody's English class, wasn't he? How annoying would that be? “Must try harder.” Being sent to bed by his dad, you know, to Shakespeare, “Go to bed, now,” to William Shakespeare, “and put the pencil down.And stop speaking like that.It's confusing everybody.”
Anyway, we moved from Stratford to Los Angeles, and I just want to say a word about the transition, actually.My son didn't want to come.I've got two kids, he's 21 now, my daughter's 16;he didn't want to come to Los Angeles.He loved it, but he had a girlfriend in England.This was the love of his life, Sarah.He'd known her for a month.Mind you, they'd had their fourth anniversary, because it's a long time when you're 16.Anyway, he was really upset on the plane, and he said, “I'll never find another girl like Sarah.” And we were rather pleased about that, frankly, because she was the main reason we were leaving the country.But something strikes you when you move to America and when you travel around the world: every education system on earth has the same hierarchy of subjects.Every one, doesn't matter where you go, you'd think it would be otherwise but it isn't.At the top are mathematics and languages, then the humanities, and the bottom are the arts.Everywhere on earth.And in pretty much every system too, there's a hierarchy within the arts.Art and music are nomally given a higher status in schools than drama and dance.There isn't an education system on the planet that teaches dance every day to children the way we teach them mathematics.Why? Why not? I think this is rather important.I think maths is very important but so is dance.Children dance all the time if they're allowed to, we all do.We all have bodies, don't we? Did I miss a meeting?
Truthfully what happens is, as children grow up we start to educate them progressively from the waist up.And then we focus on their heads.And slightly to one side.If you were to visit education as an alien and say what's it for, public education, I think you'd have to conclude, if you look at the output, who really succeeds by this, who does everything they should, who gets all the brownie points, who are the winners。I think you'd have to conclude the whole purpose of public education throughout the world is to produce university professors.Isn't it.They're the people who come out the top.And I used to be one, so there.And I like university professors, but you know, we shouldn't hold them up as the high-water mark of all human achievement.They're just a form of life, another form of life.but they're rather curious and I say this out of affection for them, there's something curious about them, not all of them but typically, they live in their heads, they live up there, and slightly to one side.They're disembodied.They look upon their bodies as a form of transport for their heads, don't they? It's a way of getting their head to meetings.If you want real evidence of out-of-body experiences, by the way, get yourself along to a residential conference of senior academics, and pop into the discotheque on the final night, and there you will see it, grown men and women writhing uncontrollably, off the beat, waiting until it ends so they can go home and write a paper about it.Now our education system is predicated on the idea of academic ability.And there's a reason.The whole system was invented round the world there were no public systems of education really before the 19th century.They all came into being to meet the needs of industrialism.So the hierarchy is rooted on two ideas:
Number one, that the most useful subjects for work are at the top.So you were probably steered benignly away from things at school when you were a kid, things you liked, on the grounds that you would never get a job doing that.Is that right? Don't do music, you're not going to be a musician;don't do art, you're not going to be an artist.Benign advice--now, profoundly mistaken.The whole world is engulfed in a revolution.And the second is, academic ability, which has really come to dominate our view of intelligence because the universities designed the system in their image.If you think of it, the whole system of public education around the world is a protracted process of university entrance.And the consequence is that many highly talented, brilliant, creative people think they're not, because the thing they were good at at school wasn't valued, or was actually stigmatized.And I think we can't afford to go on that way.In the next 30 years.according to UNESCO, more people worldwide will be graduating through education than since the beginning of history.More people, and it's the combination of all the things we've talked about--technology and its transformation effect on work, and demography and the huge explosion in population.Suddenly degrees aren't worth anything.Isn't that true?
When I was a student, if you had a degree, you had a job.If you didn't have a job it's because you didn't want one.And I didn't want one, frankly.But now kids with degrees are often heading home to carry on playing video games, because you need an MA where the previous job required a BA, and now you need a PhD for the other.It's a process of academic inflation.And it indicates the whole structure of education is shifting beneath our feet.We need to radically rethink our view of intelligence.We know three things about intelligence:
One, it's diverse, we think about the world in all the ways we experience it.We think visually, we think in sound, we think kinesthetically.We think in abstract terms, we think in movement.Secondly, intelligence is dynamic.If you look at the interactions of a human brain, as we heard yesterday from a number of presentations, intelligence is wonderfully interactive.The brain isn't divided into compartments.In fact, creativity, which I define as the process of having original ideas that have value, more often than not comes about through the interaction of different disciplinary ways of seeing things.The brain is intentionally--by the way, there's a shaft of nerves that joins the two halves of the brain called the corpus collosum, and it's thicker in women.Following on from Helen yesterday, I think this is probably why women are better at multitasking, because you are, aren't you, there's a raft of research, but I know it from my personal life.If my wife is cooking a meal at home, which is not often, thankfully, but you know, she's doing(oh, she's good at some things)but if she's cooking, you know, she's dealing with people on the phone, she's talking to the kids, she's painting the ceiling, she's doing open-heart surgery over here;if I'm cooking, the door is shut, the kids are out, the phone's on the hook, if she comes in I get annoyed, I say “Terry, please, I'm trying to fry an egg in here, give me a break.”(You know that old philosophical thing, if a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, did it happen, remember that old chestnut, I saw a great T-shirt recently that said, “If a man speaks his mind in a forest, and no woman hears him, is he still wrong?”)
And the third thing about intelligence is, it's distinct.I'm doing a new book at the moment called Epiphany which is based on a series of interviews with people about how they discovered their talent.I'm fascinated by how people got to be there.It's really prompted by a conversation I had with a wonderful woman who maybe most people have never heard of, she's called Gillian Lynne, have you heard of her? Some have.She's a choreographer and everybody knows her work.She did Cats, and Phantom of the Opera, she's wonderful.I used to be on the board of the Royal Ballet, in England, as you can see, and Gillian and I had lunch one day and I said Gillian, how'd you get to be a dancer? And she said it was interesting, when she was at school, she was really hopeless.And the school, in the 30s, wrote her parents and said, “We think Gillian has a learning disorder.” She couldn't concentrate, she was fidgeting.I think now they'd say she had ADHD.Wouldn't you? But this was the 1930s and ADHD hadn't been invented at this point.It wasn't an available condition.People weren't aware they could have that.Anyway she went to see this specialist, in this oak-paneled room, and she was there with her mother and she was led and sat on a chair at the end, and she sat on her hands for 20 minutes while this doctor talked to her mother about all the problems Gillian was having at school.And at the end of it--because she was disturbing people, her homework was always late, and so on, little kid of 8--in the end, the doctor went and sat next to Gillian and said, “Gillian I've listened to all these things that your mother's told me, and I need to speak to her privately.” He said, “Wait here, we'll be back, we won't be very long,” and they went and left her.But as they went out the room, he turned on the radio that was sitting on his desk, and when they got out the room, he said to her mother, “Just stand and watch her.” And the minute they left the room, she said, she was on her feet, moving to the music.And they watched for a few minutes and he turned to her mother and said, “Mrs.Lynne, Gillian isn't sick;she's a dancer.Take her to a dance school.”
I said, “What happened?”
She said, “She did.I can't tell you how wonderful it was.We walked in this room and it was full of people like me, people who couldn't sit still.People who had to move to think.” Who had to move to think.They did ballet, they did tap, they did jazz, they did modern, they did contemporary.She was eventually auditioned for the Royal Ballet School, she became a soloist, she had a wonderful career at the Royal Ballet, she eventually graduated from the Royal Ballet School and founded her own company, the Gillian Lynne Dance Company, and met Andrew Lloyd Weber.She's been responsible for some of the most successful musical theater productions in history, she's given pleasure to millions, and she's a multimillionaire.Somebody else might have put her on medication and told her to calm down.Now, I think--[applause] What I think it comes to is this: Al Gore spoke the other night about ecology and the revolution that was triggered by Rachel Carson.I believe our only hope for the future is to adopt a new conception of human ecology, one in which we start to reconstitute our conception of the richness of human capacity.Our education system has mined our minds in the way that we strip-mine the earth, for a particular commodity, and for the future, it won't serve us.We have to rethink the fundamental principles on which we're educating our children.There was a wonderful quote by Jonas Salk, who said, “If all the insects were to disappear from the earth, within 50 years all life on earth would end.If all human beings disappeared from the earth, within 50 years all forms of life would flourish.” And he's right.What TED celebrates is the gift of the human imagination.We have to be careful now that we use this gift wisely, and that we avert some of the scenarios that we've talked about.And the only way we'll do it is by seeing our creative capacities for the richness they are, and seeing our children for the hope that they are.And our task is to educate their whole being, so they can face this future--by the way, we may not see this future, but they will.And our job is to help them make something of it.Thank you very much.
点击咨询 