體驗區
|
| 篇名 |
道尔顿制沉寂背后的“明”与“暗”——以1926年《新教育评论》论战为中心
|
| 並列篇名 |
The Debate about the Dolton Laboratory Plan based on 1926’s New Education Review
|
| 作者 |
娄岙菲(LOU Ao-fei)
|
| 中文摘要 |
道尔顿制传入中国后盛极而衰只有三四年时间，即便中华教育改进社邀请其创始人柏克赫斯特访华并大肆宣传亦未能阻挡其颓势。此时在依然热衷于宣传道尔顿制的《新教育评论》杂志上，清华大学教授邱椿与北京大学教授兼任艺文中学校长高仁山等实践者，就道尔顿制的基本原则和实施过程等展开论战。先行研究大多只看到论战表面的意气之争，并未予以关注。实际上论战背后表现出的“暗流”正可以说明教育界20世纪20年代中期之风气转移。双方论战所聚焦的“方法”与“资格”展现的是教育学走向学院化历程中理论与实践不同取向的张力；高仁山获得较多支持者，主要因其强调调查实验契合了当时教育学转向科学化的潮流；双方论战本有学术意义却应者寥寥，是因教育界部分足以主导舆论之精英，关注焦点逐渐分化，难以形成较为一致的聚焦。
|
| 英文摘要 |
The Dolton Laboratory Plan had gone a process of ups and downs for only three or four years in China. Even Helen Parkhurst’s visit to China could not stop its fading. At this time, there emerged a debate on the basic principles of the Dalton plan and the implementation process between Qiu Chun, a professor at Tsinghua University, and Gao Renshan, a professor at Peking University and president of Yiwen Middle School, and other practitioners, which shows the tension between the different orientations of theory and practice. Most of the previous research only see the contention on the surface of the debate, and therefore do not pay attention to it. The reasons behind it is a sign of the shift in the culture of education in the mid-1920s. The conclusion is: firstly, the “methods” and “qualifications” focused on the debate between the two sides show the tension between the different orientations of theory and practice. Secondly, Gao Renshan gained more supporters, mainly because of its emphasis on investigation experiments in line with the trend of pedology on science at that time. Thirdly, the argument between the two sides is academically significant but with few responses, because the education sector is enough to dominate the elite of public opinion, so the focus of the debate is gradually divided, it is difficult to form a more consistent focus.
|
| 頁次 |
183-196
|
| 關鍵詞 |
道尔顿制
、《新教育评论》
、柏克赫斯特
、中华教育改进社
、The Dolton Laboratory Plan
、New Education Review
、Helen Parkhurst
、China Education Improvement Society
、CSSCI
|
| 卷期 |
17:4
|
| 日期 |
202108
|
| 刊名 |
教育學報
|
| 出版單位 |
北京師範大學
|
| DOI |
10.14082/j.cnki.1673-1298.2021.04.015
|
|
相關文獻 :
客服信箱