龚鹏程x莎拉轩尼诗｜要保持教育中的不确定性

龚鹏程对话海外学者第八十一期：在后现代情境中，被技术统治的人类社会，只有强化交谈、重建沟通伦理，才能获得文化新生的力量。这不是谁的理论，而是每个人都应实践的活动。龚鹏程先生遊走世界，并曾主持过“世界汉学研究中心”。我们会陆续推出“龚鹏程对话海外学者”系列文章，请他对话一些学界有意义的灵魂。范围不局限于汉学，会涉及多种学科。以期深山长谷之水，四面而出。

莎拉轩尼诗教授（Professor Sara Hennessy）

剑桥大学教育学院教师发展与教学创新教授、EdTech Hub研究中心主任

龚鹏程教授：您好。在学校因新冠疫情关闭期间，学校教师如何利用科技进行教学并与学生沟通接触的？ 后疫情时代，他们将面临的最大挑战是什么？

莎拉轩尼诗教授：龚教授，您好。这场新冠疫情迅速升级，我们迫切需要为教师提供支持与帮助，为远程或混合教学制定策略。我在教育技术中心的团队与T4教育的同事合作，在2021年对教师进行了一次全球性的调查。该调查评估了疫情对教师和学生的影响，提供了关于他们在前一年（疫情高峰期）独特的经验。我们惊人地收到了来自165个国家的教师的20,679份答复。东亚和太平洋地区以及南亚是调查占比最大的区域范围。

调查结果显示，超过一半的教师认为互联网接入和硬件的不足阻碍了学校提供高质量的教学。不幸的是，由于对使用数字工具的重视程度提高，国家内部地区以及各国之间，包括城市和农村地区之间，原先在获取技术方面的差距进一步扩大了。

一个有趣的发现是，与公立学校和其他学校相比，低成本的私立学校提供的数字设备较少（从而引出了一个问题，即父母交的学费都花在哪儿了？）

教师们报告说，在家里接触互联网或科技较少的学生最有可能遭受损失。

教师们最常使用的工具是：（1）用于在线教学的视频会议；（2）用于联系学习者和家长的社交软件；（3）视频资源（如在线/数字电视）；（4）虚拟学习环境；（5）数字教科书。

技术的使用是很好的，几乎一半的教师在新冠疫情期间在网上授课。然而，同样比例的教师需要通过纸质打印的方式来为学生提供教学材料！可见在教学方面，技术的使用相当不足。

一个更积极的发现是，42%的教师在上一年花了超过10天的时间进行教师职业发展培训（TPD），比通常的经合组织（经济合作与发展组织）国家的年度平均水平还要高，这是相当值得注意的。

正如我们可以想象的那样，这种TPD大部分集中在培养使用数字工具进行在线教学的能力。

超过一半的教师认为，在这个领域需要更多的TPD——高于所有其他潜在的需求，包括一般的教学法和教师的身心健康。

教师们还希望学校把重点放在支持学生的自我约束、实践和反思上，而不是仅仅放在指导上。

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.

龚鹏程教授：在中低收入国家，基于技术教学的主要挑战是什么？

莎拉轩尼诗教授：要强调的第一点是，不加批判地认为技术具有积极的、"变革性 “的好处是错误的。事实上，许多研究表示对学习没有影响，有些甚至显示出有负面的影响！⏤⏤但是，负面的结果往往没有被报道。

然而，我们需要避免重复过去的错误。一个相当令人沮丧的例子是，像笔记本电脑和平板电脑这样的便携式设备不断大规模地推出，但却没有首先帮助教师学会在课堂上有效地使用它们进行学科教学（不仅仅是技术培训）。

总而言之，必须确定科技技术的附加值与成本效益要高于传统方法，并严格测试其效益。

当然，在许多国家，基础设施方面的挑战是真实存在的。这些国家的互联网连接不完善，甚至供电系统也可能不是普遍存在的。许多学生和教师也缺乏接触数字设备的机会，以及使用这些设备的技能。

国家和地区内部也存在分歧；农村社区和低收入群体在校外使用技术的经验往往较少，因此涉及他们的项目需要提供更多的帮助。

一种方法不可能适用于所有人！这意味着“最佳实践”和“有效的方法”这两个术语具有误导性。他们认为，促进科技学习的方法是普遍有效的。相反，有效的实践——包括技术的选择——只有在特定的环境中，针对特定的教育目的和需求才会成功。

地方性的差异意味着推广一项举措是很棘手的。扩大规模需要建立在与当地利益相关者的合作设计、开发、试验和反思之上。他们需要以与文化相关的方式塑造并实施倡议，以解决当地问题。

在中低收入国家，很少有关于教育技术使用的研究——用于教师发展或学生学习——帮助适应个人的学习水平或边缘化学习者的需求。我所说的边缘化是指女孩、农村社区、残疾学生、受危机影响的人和少数民族语言学习者等。

我们需要记住，绝大多数的互联网和软件内容都是英文的，这使得它们普遍无法使用。

教育技术中心探讨了这些问题。

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.

龚鹏程教授：您曾研究过课堂上的对话互动。什么类型的对话在教学中最有效？

莎拉轩尼诗教授：在教育 "对话 "中，参与者不仅仅是说话：他们互相倾听，通过分享他们的想法来做出互动，并与他人的观点进行交流。

特别是，他们探索和评估不同的观点和理由：如果没有一定程度的差异，就没有什么可谈的！

在对话中，各种想法被联系起来，知识在课堂内或不同课堂之间由集体建立起来。因此，学习取决于社会活动，而不是从知识渊博的权威向新手传递知识。

我们在剑桥大学的团队通过对英格兰48所小学的72名教师教授的144节数学、英语和科学课的详细分析（逐个交谈），得出了有关影响师生交流的有力证据。有两种对话与标准化测试的学习成果密切相关：

·基于或详细阐述他人的想法，并邀请他人基于自己的想法进行构建

·挑战、怀疑、反对或质疑他人的观点——批评但尊重他人

然而，只有当这些形式的谈话发生在对学生给予鼓励与帮助的课堂氛围中，学习成果才是明显的：

·学生的积极参与——多个学生发表了自己的观点，并与其他人的想法进行了有效的交流

高质量的小组工作与学习成果的联系更加紧密，特别是当参与者持有并探索不同的观点时。

事实上，对科学小组工作的研究表明，遇到相反的观点可以使学生在课程结束后的几周内进行更多的学习。这是因为他们会继续反思并接触到更多的相关信息。

小组学习是有效的，因为在分享之前，学生可以在压力较小的环境中排练想法、练习推理并解决问题。他们可以让其他学生“看到”他们的思考，他们可以反思并评估新的想法，也就是说，他们不再被动的去倾听。对美国小学数学的研究发现，提供详细、正确的解释并辅以证据，可以提高成绩。

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.

龚鹏程教授：教师可以采取哪些实用方法来使他们的课堂互动对学习更有成效？

莎拉轩尼诗教授：教师可以从发现他们所处环境中有问题的、令人费解的或有趣的方面开始。一个好的方法是记录一堂课或一次讨论，然后系统地确定他们的学生的对话和他们自己的实践目前的样子的。然后，有一些技巧可以用来提高学习活动中的有效参与度。这包括提出开放性问题并明确使用 “谈话的基本规则”——帮助学生进行对话。这些，以及提供句柄引导（例如 “我不同意X，因为……”）可以使学习者习惯于倾听、参考他人想法、表达同意或者反驳。

在学习效果最好的课堂上，我们发现教师讲得更少，学生们轮流讲得更多、更长。教师营造了一种开放的课堂氛围，他们不对学生的想法进行评价（不确定性可能反而是非常富有成效的！）他们会对比不同的观点，提出更多“如何” 和 “为什么”的后续问题。

不过，在活动设计中需要支持学生与他人进行想法上的交流；例如，让学生们为一个共同的目标而合作，或建造一个共同的作品（如故事、海报/拼贴、思维导图、演示文稿）。这有助于使思维清晰可见。“谈话要点”是一种很好的理性辩论活动；它们是挑衅性的或有趣的陈述——而不是问题——在讨论中让学生们（尊重地）表达自己同意或反对的观点。和基本规则一样，它们可以用于小组工作或全班讨论。

孩子们需要学会在小组中有效地交谈并合作——他们不是生来就知道如何做的!

支持这一点的进一步技巧包括鼓励学生冒险，以及从试验和错误中学习，组成具有不同水平的小组，并让他们负责每个人的参与和学习。同样重要的是，鼓励学生评估他们自己的合作质量，并与其他小组或在全班全体会议/总结中分享他们的学习成果，这样他们就能明确自己的想法。然后，他们可以让他们的同伴作出回应和评论，继续进行沟通。

我们有大量的材料支持教师采用这些方式，我们非常乐意让人们免费使用这些材料。

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.

龚鹏程，1956年生于台北，台湾师范大学博士，当代著名学者和思想家。著作已出版一百五十多本。

办有大学、出版社、杂志社、书院等，并规划城市建设、主题园区等多处。讲学于世界各地。并在北京、上海、杭州、台北、巴黎、日本、澳门等地举办过书法展。现为中国孔子博物馆名誉馆长、美国龚鹏程基金会主席。