人教版初中英语新教材任务设计的思维品质培养导向分析
An Analysis of Thinking Quality Cultivation Orientation in Task Design of New Junior High School English Textbooks (PEP Edition)
摘要: 思维品质培养是《义务教育英语课程标准(2022年版)》的核心要求。教材作为实现课程目标的关键载体,其任务设计如何体现思维品质导向亟待研究。本研究以新人教版初中英语教材为对象,探讨其任务设计的思维培养特征与递进规律。研究发现:(1) 在整体导向上,教材任务呈现出批判性思维主导、创造性思维协同的格局。其内部特征表现为:批判性思维以“分析”为基石,创造性思维以“建构”为核心;(2) 在递进趋势上,批判性思维随年级逐步强化,评价与论证任务在高年级凸显,创造性思维则呈“U型”分布,九年级出现回升,体现了“先夯实基础、后激发创造”的逻辑。新人教版初中英语教材在思维品质培养上具有系统性强、进阶性明晰的突出优点,同时也存在“设计”类思维训练不足的优化空间。建议教材编写在未来修订中适度增加高阶思维任务多样性;建议一线教师深刻领会编者意图,活用教材,并基于学情进行创造性调整,以最大化地发挥教材的思维培养功能。
Abstract: Cultivating students’ thinking quality serves as a core requirement of the Compulsory Education English Curriculum Standards (2022 Edition). As a key carrier for curriculum goals, textbooks deserve research on the thinking-oriented design of teaching tasks. This paper analyzes the thinking cultivation features and progressive rules of task design in the new PEP junior high school English textbooks. The results show that: first, textbook tasks are dominated by critical thinking and coordinated with creative thinking. Specifically, critical thinking is based on analysis, and creative thinking focuses on construction; second, critical thinking intensifies year by year, with evaluation and argumentation tasks highlighted in senior grades. Creative thinking presents a U-shaped trend and rises again in Grade Nine, following the principle of “solidifying basics before stimulating innovation”. The new textbooks feature systematic arrangement and clear progression in thinking cultivation, yet lack sufficient design-based thinking activities. It is proposed that more diversified high-order thinking tasks be added in future revision. Frontline teachers should fully interpret textbook compilation intentions, flexibly use teaching materials and make targeted adjustments according to students’ needs, so as to give full play to textbooks’ value in optimizing students’ thinking quality.
参考文献
|
[1]
|
义务教育英语课程标准(2025年版) [M]. 北京: 北京师范大学出版社, 2025.
|
|
[2]
|
Facione, P.A. (1990) Critical Thinking: A Statement of Expert Consensus for Purposes of Educational Assessment and Instruction (The Delphi Report). American Philosophical Association. ERIC Document ED315423.
|
|
[3]
|
Paul, R. and Elder, L. (2006) Critical Thinking: Learn the Tools the Best Thinkers Use. Pearson Prentice Hall.
|
|
[4]
|
林崇德. 思维心理学研究的几点回顾[J]. 北京师范大学学报, 2006(5): 35-42.
|
|
[5]
|
文秋芳. 论外语专业研究生高层次思维能力的培养[J]. 学位与研究生教育, 2008(10): 29-34.
|
|
[6]
|
郭宝仙, 章兼中. 英语学科中思维能力的培养[J]. 课程·教材·教法, 2017, 37(2): 80-86.
|
|
[7]
|
洛林·W.安德森. 布卢姆教育目标分类学(修订版) [M]. 蒋小平, 等, 译. 北京: 外语教学与研究出版社, 2009.
|
|
[8]
|
黄远振, 兰春寿, 黄睿. 为思而教: 英语教育价值取向及实施策略[J]. 课程·教材·教法, 2014(4): 63-69.
|
|
[9]
|
夏谷鸣. 英语学科教学与思维品质培养[J]. 英语学习, 2017(2): 9-13.
|
|
[10]
|
兰良平, 郑连忠. 英语教学中创造性思维和批判性思维的培养: 基于会话分析和语言社会化的融合视角[M]. 北京: 外语教学与研究出版社, 2024.
|
|
[11]
|
Wang, H.S., Chen, S. and Yen, M.H. (2021) Effects of Metacognitive Scaffolding on Students’ Performance and Confidence Judgments in Simulation-Based Inquiry. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 17, Article 020108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
|