龔鵬程對(duì)話海外學(xué)者第八十一期：在后現(xiàn)代情境中，被技術(shù)統(tǒng)治的人類社會(huì)，只有強(qiáng)化交談、重建溝通倫理，才能獲得文化新生的力量。這不是誰(shuí)的理論，而是每個(gè)人都應(yīng)實(shí)踐的活動(dòng)。龔鵬程先生遊走世界，并曾主持過(guò)“世界漢學(xué)研究中心”。我們會(huì)陸續(xù)推出“龔鵬程對(duì)話海外學(xué)者”系列文章，請(qǐng)他對(duì)話一些學(xué)界有意義的靈魂。范圍不局限于漢學(xué)，會(huì)涉及多種學(xué)科。以期深山長(zhǎng)谷之水，四面而出。

莎拉軒尼詩(shī)教授（Professor Sara Hennessy）

劍橋大學(xué)教育學(xué)院教師發(fā)展與教學(xué)創(chuàng)新教授、EdTech Hub研究中心主任

龔鵬程教授：您好。在學(xué)校因新冠疫情關(guān)閉期間，學(xué)校教師如何利用科技進(jìn)行教學(xué)并與學(xué)生溝通接觸的？ 后疫情時(shí)代，他們將面臨的最大挑戰(zhàn)是什么？

莎拉軒尼詩(shī)教授：龔教授，您好。這場(chǎng)新冠疫情迅速升級(jí)，我們迫切需要為教師提供支持與幫助，為遠(yuǎn)程或混合教學(xué)制定策略。我在教育技術(shù)中心的團(tuán)隊(duì)與T4教育的同事合作，在2021年對(duì)教師進(jìn)行了一次全球性的調(diào)查。該調(diào)查評(píng)估了疫情對(duì)教師和學(xué)生的影響，提供了關(guān)于他們?cè)谇耙荒辏ㄒ咔楦叻迤冢┆?dú)特的經(jīng)驗(yàn)。我們驚人地收到了來(lái)自165個(gè)國(guó)家的教師的20,679份答復(fù)。東亞和太平洋地區(qū)以及南亞是調(diào)查占比最大的區(qū)域范圍。

調(diào)查結(jié)果顯示，超過(guò)一半的教師認(rèn)為互聯(lián)網(wǎng)接入和硬件的不足阻礙了學(xué)校提供高質(zhì)量的教學(xué)。不幸的是，由于對(duì)使用數(shù)字工具的重視程度提高，國(guó)家內(nèi)部地區(qū)以及各國(guó)之間，包括城市和農(nóng)村地區(qū)之間，原先在獲取技術(shù)方面的差距進(jìn)一步擴(kuò)大了。

一個(gè)有趣的發(fā)現(xiàn)是，與公立學(xué)校和其他學(xué)校相比，低成本的私立學(xué)校提供的數(shù)字設(shè)備較少（從而引出了一個(gè)問(wèn)題，即父母交的學(xué)費(fèi)都花在哪兒了？）

教師們報(bào)告說(shuō)，在家里接觸互聯(lián)網(wǎng)或科技較少的學(xué)生最有可能遭受損失。

教師們最常使用的工具是：（1）用于在線教學(xué)的視頻會(huì)議；（2）用于聯(lián)系學(xué)習(xí)者和家長(zhǎng)的社交軟件；（3）視頻資源（如在線/數(shù)字電視）；（4）虛擬學(xué)習(xí)環(huán)境；（5）數(shù)字教科書。

技術(shù)的使用是很好的，幾乎一半的教師在新冠疫情期間在網(wǎng)上授課。然而，同樣比例的教師需要通過(guò)紙質(zhì)打印的方式來(lái)為學(xué)生提供教學(xué)材料！可見在教學(xué)方面，技術(shù)的使用相當(dāng)不足。

一個(gè)更積極的發(fā)現(xiàn)是，42%的教師在上一年花了超過(guò)10天的時(shí)間進(jìn)行教師職業(yè)發(fā)展培訓(xùn)（TPD），比通常的經(jīng)合組織（經(jīng)濟(jì)合作與發(fā)展組織）國(guó)家的年度平均水平還要高，這是相當(dāng)值得注意的。

正如我們可以想象的那樣，這種TPD大部分集中在培養(yǎng)使用數(shù)字工具進(jìn)行在線教學(xué)的能力。

超過(guò)一半的教師認(rèn)為，在這個(gè)領(lǐng)域需要更多的TPD——高于所有其他潛在的需求，包括一般的教學(xué)法和教師的身心健康。

教師們還希望學(xué)校把重點(diǎn)放在支持學(xué)生的自我約束、實(shí)踐和反思上，而不是僅僅放在指導(dǎo)上。

The pandemic rapidly escalated the urgent need to offer teachers support with developing pedagogical strategies for remote or hybrid teaching and learning. My team inEdTech Hub collaborated with colleagues at T4 Education on a global survey of teachers in 2021. This assessed the impact on teachers and learners, providing unique, timely information about their experiences over the previous (peak pandemic) year. It received an amazing 20,679 responses from teachers in 165 countries. East Asia and Pacific, and South Asia, were the largest regional groups.

The findings showed that more than half of teachers thought insufficient internet access and hardware hindered their schools’ provision of high quality instruction. Unfortunately, the pre-existing geographical digital divides in technology access – within and across districts, regions and countries, including between urban and rural areas – were exacerbated through the escalated emphasis on using digital tools. One interesting finding was that low-cost private schools offered less access to digital tools than government and other schools (begging the question of what parents are paying for?). Learners with less access to the internet or technology at home were reported by teachers as most likely to suffer learning losses. The most common tools that teachers used were (1) video conferencing for online teaching, (2) social messaging to contact learners and parents and (3) video resources (e.g. online / digital TV), (4) virtual learning environment and (5) digital textbooks. Technology use is all well and good, and almost half of teachers taught classes online during the pandemic. However, the same proportion made printed copies of digital resources for learners! Finally, technology was rather under-used for assessing learning.

A more positive finding was that 42% of teachers spent more than 10 days undertaking teacher professional development (TPD) during the previous year, more than the usual annual OECD country average, which was quite notable. As we might imagine, much of this TPD focused on developing competence in using digital tools for online teaching and learning. Over half of teachers prioritised the need for more TPD in this area though– above all other potential needs including general pedagogy and teacher wellbeing. Teachers also wanted schools to focus on supporting learners’ self-regulation, practice and reflection, rather than solely on direct instruction.

龔鵬程教授：在中低收入國(guó)家，基于技術(shù)教學(xué)的主要挑戰(zhàn)是什么？

莎拉軒尼詩(shī)教授：要強(qiáng)調(diào)的第一點(diǎn)是，不加批判地認(rèn)為技術(shù)具有積極的、"變革性 “的好處是錯(cuò)誤的。事實(shí)上，許多研究表示對(duì)學(xué)習(xí)沒(méi)有影響，有些甚至顯示出有負(fù)面的影響！??但是，負(fù)面的結(jié)果往往沒(méi)有被報(bào)道。

然而，我們需要避免重復(fù)過(guò)去的錯(cuò)誤。一個(gè)相當(dāng)令人沮喪的例子是，像筆記本電腦和平板電腦這樣的便攜式設(shè)備不斷大規(guī)模地推出，但卻沒(méi)有首先幫助教師學(xué)會(huì)在課堂上有效地使用它們進(jìn)行學(xué)科教學(xué)（不僅僅是技術(shù)培訓(xùn)）。

總而言之，必須確定科技技術(shù)的附加值與成本效益要高于傳統(tǒng)方法，并嚴(yán)格測(cè)試其效益。

當(dāng)然，在許多國(guó)家，基礎(chǔ)設(shè)施方面的挑戰(zhàn)是真實(shí)存在的。這些國(guó)家的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)連接不完善，甚至供電系統(tǒng)也可能不是普遍存在的。許多學(xué)生和教師也缺乏接觸數(shù)字設(shè)備的機(jī)會(huì)，以及使用這些設(shè)備的技能。

國(guó)家和地區(qū)內(nèi)部也存在分歧；農(nóng)村社區(qū)和低收入群體在校外使用技術(shù)的經(jīng)驗(yàn)往往較少，因此涉及他們的項(xiàng)目需要提供更多的幫助。

一種方法不可能適用于所有人！這意味著“最佳實(shí)踐”和“有效的方法”這兩個(gè)術(shù)語(yǔ)具有誤導(dǎo)性。他們認(rèn)為，促進(jìn)科技學(xué)習(xí)的方法是普遍有效的。相反，有效的實(shí)踐——包括技術(shù)的選擇——只有在特定的環(huán)境中，針對(duì)特定的教育目的和需求才會(huì)成功。

地方性的差異意味著推廣一項(xiàng)舉措是很棘手的。擴(kuò)大規(guī)模需要建立在與當(dāng)?shù)乩嫦嚓P(guān)者的合作設(shè)計(jì)、開發(fā)、試驗(yàn)和反思之上。他們需要以與文化相關(guān)的方式塑造并實(shí)施倡議，以解決當(dāng)?shù)貑?wèn)題。

在中低收入國(guó)家，很少有關(guān)于教育技術(shù)使用的研究——用于教師發(fā)展或?qū)W生學(xué)習(xí)——幫助適應(yīng)個(gè)人的學(xué)習(xí)水平或邊緣化學(xué)習(xí)者的需求。我所說(shuō)的邊緣化是指女孩、農(nóng)村社區(qū)、殘疾學(xué)生、受危機(jī)影響的人和少數(shù)民族語(yǔ)言學(xué)習(xí)者等。

我們需要記住，絕大多數(shù)的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)和軟件內(nèi)容都是英文的，這使得它們普遍無(wú)法使用。

教育技術(shù)中心探討了這些問(wèn)題。

The first point to stress is that uncritical assumptions that technology has positive,‘transformational’ benefits are misguided. In fact, many studies show no impact on learning, and some even show negative effects! However, negative results often go unreported – yet, we need to avoid repeating past mistakes. A key, rather depressing example is the continual rollout at scale of portable devices likes laptops and tablets without first supporting teachers to learn to use them effectively in the classroom for subject teaching and learning (this means far more than technical training). In sum, it’s essential to identify the added value and cost-effectiveness of technology over and above conventional means, and to test its benefits rigorously.

Infrastructure challenges are of course real in many countries, where internet connectivity is patchy and even mains electricity may not be pervasive. Many learners and teachers lack access to digital devices too, and skill with using them. There are divisions within countries and regions too; rural communities and low-income groups tend to have less experience of technology use outside school, so initiatives involving them need to provide more support.

One size does not fit all! This meansthe terms ‘best practice’ and ‘what works’ are misleading. They suggest that universally valid recipes exist for promoting learning with technology. Instead, effective practices — including technology choices — are only successful in specific contexts, for specific educational purposes and needs. Local variation means that scaling an initiative is tricky. Scaling up needs to be based on collaborative design, development, trialling, and reflection with local stakeholders. They need ownership for shaping and implementing initiatives in culturally relevant ways, to address local problems.

Few technology initiatives and very little of the research on EdTech use– for teacher development or student learning – in LMICs supports adaptation to either individuals’ learning levels orneeds of marginalised learners. By marginalised I mean girls, rural communities, learners with disabilities, those affected by crises, and minority language learners, for instance. We need to remember that the vast majority of internet and software content is in English, making it widely inaccessible. EdTech Hub explores these issues.

龔鵬程教授：您曾研究過(guò)課堂上的對(duì)話互動(dòng)。什么類型的對(duì)話在教學(xué)中最有效？

莎拉軒尼詩(shī)教授：在教育 "對(duì)話 "中，參與者不僅僅是說(shuō)話：他們互相傾聽，通過(guò)分享他們的想法來(lái)做出互動(dòng)，并與他人的觀點(diǎn)進(jìn)行交流。

特別是，他們探索和評(píng)估不同的觀點(diǎn)和理由：如果沒(méi)有一定程度的差異，就沒(méi)有什么可談的！

在對(duì)話中，各種想法被聯(lián)系起來(lái)，知識(shí)在課堂內(nèi)或不同課堂之間由集體建立起來(lái)。因此，學(xué)習(xí)取決于社會(huì)活動(dòng)，而不是從知識(shí)淵博的權(quán)威向新手傳遞知識(shí)。

我們?cè)趧虼髮W(xué)的團(tuán)隊(duì)通過(guò)對(duì)英格蘭48所小學(xué)的72名教師教授的144節(jié)數(shù)學(xué)、英語(yǔ)和科學(xué)課的詳細(xì)分析（逐個(gè)交談），得出了有關(guān)影響師生交流的有力證據(jù)。有兩種對(duì)話與標(biāo)準(zhǔn)化測(cè)試的學(xué)習(xí)成果密切相關(guān)：

·基于或詳細(xì)闡述他人的想法，并邀請(qǐng)他人基于自己的想法進(jìn)行構(gòu)建

·挑戰(zhàn)、懷疑、反對(duì)或質(zhì)疑他人的觀點(diǎn)——批評(píng)但尊重他人

然而，只有當(dāng)這些形式的談話發(fā)生在對(duì)學(xué)生給予鼓勵(lì)與幫助的課堂氛圍中，學(xué)習(xí)成果才是明顯的：

·學(xué)生的積極參與——多個(gè)學(xué)生發(fā)表了自己的觀點(diǎn)，并與其他人的想法進(jìn)行了有效的交流

高質(zhì)量的小組工作與學(xué)習(xí)成果的聯(lián)系更加緊密，特別是當(dāng)參與者持有并探索不同的觀點(diǎn)時(shí)。

事實(shí)上，對(duì)科學(xué)小組工作的研究表明，遇到相反的觀點(diǎn)可以使學(xué)生在課程結(jié)束后的幾周內(nèi)進(jìn)行更多的學(xué)習(xí)。這是因?yàn)樗麄儠?huì)繼續(xù)反思并接觸到更多的相關(guān)信息。

小組學(xué)習(xí)是有效的，因?yàn)樵诜窒碇?，學(xué)生可以在壓力較小的環(huán)境中排練想法、練習(xí)推理并解決問(wèn)題。他們可以讓其他學(xué)生“看到”他們的思考，他們可以反思并評(píng)估新的想法，也就是說(shuō)，他們不再被動(dòng)的去傾聽。對(duì)美國(guó)小學(xué)數(shù)學(xué)的研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，提供詳細(xì)、正確的解釋并輔以證據(jù)，可以提高成績(jī)。

In educational ‘dialogue’, participants don’t just talk: they listen to each other, they contribute by sharing their ideas, they justify their contributions and engage with others’ views. In particular, they explore and evaluate different perspectives and reasons: without a degree of difference, there is not much to talk about! In dialogue, contributions are linked and knowledge is built collectively within or across lessons. So, learning depends on social activity rather than being a transmission of knowledge from more knowledgeable authorities to novices.

Our team at the University of Cambridge produced evidence concerning the impact of teacher-student dialogue through detailed (speech turn-by-turn) analyses of 144 lessons in mathematics, English and science taught by 72 teachers in 48 primary schools across England. There were two kinds of talk that came out as strongly associated with learning gains on standardised tests:

·building on or elaborating others’ ideas, and invitations to others to build on ideas

·challenging, doubting, disagreeing with or questioning others’ views – critically but respectfully

However, learning gains are only evident when these forms of talk happen in the context of a supportive classroom ethos, i.e. where there is:

·active student participation – multiple students give extended contributions and engage productively with others’ ideas

High quality small group work is even more strongly linked with learning gains, especially when participants hold and explore different views. In fact, research on groupwork in science shows that encountering opposing views can prime students for even more learning to take place in the weeks after the session. This is because they continue to reflect and to encounter more relevant information.

Groups are effective because learners can rehearse ideas and practise reasoning and problem solving in a less stressful environment before sharing. They can“make thinking visible” to other students, who can reflect on and evaluate the new ideas, i.e. they go beyond passive listening. Studies of primary school mathematics in the US found that providing detailed and correct explanations backed up with evidence relates to higher achievement.

龔鵬程教授：教師可以采取哪些實(shí)用方法來(lái)使他們的課堂互動(dòng)對(duì)學(xué)習(xí)更有成效？

莎拉軒尼詩(shī)教授：教師可以從發(fā)現(xiàn)他們所處環(huán)境中有問(wèn)題的、令人費(fèi)解的或有趣的方面開始。一個(gè)好的方法是記錄一堂課或一次討論，然后系統(tǒng)地確定他們的學(xué)生的對(duì)話和他們自己的實(shí)踐目前的樣子的。然后，有一些技巧可以用來(lái)提高學(xué)習(xí)活動(dòng)中的有效參與度。這包括提出開放性問(wèn)題并明確使用 “談話的基本規(guī)則”——幫助學(xué)生進(jìn)行對(duì)話。這些，以及提供句柄引導(dǎo)（例如 “我不同意X，因?yàn)椤保┛梢允箤W(xué)習(xí)者習(xí)慣于傾聽、參考他人想法、表達(dá)同意或者反駁。

在學(xué)習(xí)效果最好的課堂上，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)教師講得更少，學(xué)生們輪流講得更多、更長(zhǎng)。教師營(yíng)造了一種開放的課堂氛圍，他們不對(duì)學(xué)生的想法進(jìn)行評(píng)價(jià)（不確定性可能反而是非常富有成效的?。┧麄儠?huì)對(duì)比不同的觀點(diǎn)，提出更多“如何” 和 “為什么”的后續(xù)問(wèn)題。

不過(guò)，在活動(dòng)設(shè)計(jì)中需要支持學(xué)生與他人進(jìn)行想法上的交流；例如，讓學(xué)生們?yōu)橐粋€(gè)共同的目標(biāo)而合作，或建造一個(gè)共同的作品（如故事、海報(bào)/拼貼、思維導(dǎo)圖、演示文稿）。這有助于使思維清晰可見?！罢勗捯c(diǎn)”是一種很好的理性辯論活動(dòng)；它們是挑釁性的或有趣的陳述——而不是問(wèn)題——在討論中讓學(xué)生們（尊重地）表達(dá)自己同意或反對(duì)的觀點(diǎn)。和基本規(guī)則一樣，它們可以用于小組工作或全班討論。

孩子們需要學(xué)會(huì)在小組中有效地交談并合作——他們不是生來(lái)就知道如何做的!

支持這一點(diǎn)的進(jìn)一步技巧包括鼓勵(lì)學(xué)生冒險(xiǎn)，以及從試驗(yàn)和錯(cuò)誤中學(xué)習(xí)，組成具有不同水平的小組，并讓他們負(fù)責(zé)每個(gè)人的參與和學(xué)習(xí)。同樣重要的是，鼓勵(lì)學(xué)生評(píng)估他們自己的合作質(zhì)量，并與其他小組或在全班全體會(huì)議/總結(jié)中分享他們的學(xué)習(xí)成果，這樣他們就能明確自己的想法。然后，他們可以讓他們的同伴作出回應(yīng)和評(píng)論，繼續(xù)進(jìn)行溝通。

我們有大量的材料支持教師采用這些方式，我們非常樂(lè)意讓人們免費(fèi)使用這些材料。

Teachers can start by identifying problematic, puzzling or interesting aspects of practice in their settings. A good way is to record a lesson or discussion and then systematically identify what their students’ dialogue and their own practice is currently like. Then, there are some techniques available to support productive participation in learning activity. These include posing open questions and explicitly using ‘ground rules for talk’ – supporting dialogic practices, negotiated with students. These, and also providing sentence stems (e.g. “I disagree with X because…”)can accustom learners to listening, referencing others, expressing agreement and counter-argument.

In classrooms with the highest learning gains, we find that teachers speak less and students take more, longer turns. Teachers create a sense of openness and they withhold evaluation of students’ contributions (uncertainty can be fruitful!). They contrast different opinions and ask more “how” and “why” follow-up questions.

Support for dialogue in which students engage with others’ ideas needs to be built into activity design though; for example, requiring students to work together towards a common goal or construct a joint artefact (e.g. a story, poster/collage, concept map, presentation). This helps to make thinking visible. ‘Talking points’ are a great activity for reasoned debate; they are provocative or interesting statements – not questions – that students are asked to agree or disagree (respectfully) with during discussion. Like ground rules, they can be used in group work or whole class discussion.

Children need tolearn to talk and work effectively together in small groups – they are not born knowing how! Further techniques to support this include encouraging risk taking and learning from trial and error, composing groups with mixed attainment levels and assigning them responsibility for everyone’s participation and learning. It’s also important to encourage students to evaluate the quality of their own collaboration, and to to share their learning outcomes with other groups or in a whole class lesson plenary/conclusion, so that they make their thinking explicit. They can then ask their peers to respond and comment, continuing the dialogue. Note that we have extensive materials supporting teachers in these ways, which we are very happy for people to use freely.

龔鵬程，1956年生于臺(tái)北，臺(tái)灣師范大學(xué)博士，當(dāng)代著名學(xué)者和思想家。著作已出版一百五十多本。

辦有大學(xué)、出版社、雜志社、書院等，并規(guī)劃城市建設(shè)、主題園區(qū)等多處。講學(xué)于世界各地。并在北京、上海、杭州、臺(tái)北、巴黎、日本、澳門等地舉辦過(guò)書法展?，F(xiàn)為中國(guó)孔子博物館名譽(yù)館長(zhǎng)、美國(guó)龔鵬程基金會(huì)主席。