發(fā)布時間：2018-06-25 16:43

  本文選題：中小學(xué) + 道德教育�。� 參考：《華東師范大學(xué)》2011年博士論文

【摘要】：受科學(xué)主義思潮和回歸生活思想等方面的影響,目前道德量化評價在我國中小學(xué)道德教育中得到了廣泛的運用。在實踐上,它能將道德教育的“軟任務(wù)”變成所謂的“硬指標(biāo)”,從而能夠“客觀”地反映學(xué)生的道德狀況和道德教育的成效,并對維護(hù)學(xué)校紀(jì)律和進(jìn)行課堂控制起到一定的積極作用。然而,道德量化評價卻不能有效地促進(jìn)學(xué)生的道德發(fā)展。相反,還有可能會導(dǎo)致一些不良后果：它易使學(xué)生將追求道德分?jǐn)?shù)當(dāng)作道德教育的目的,把道德當(dāng)工具,從而誤解道德的本質(zhì)；產(chǎn)生偽善行為,不利于培養(yǎng)學(xué)生健康的獨立人格。同時,它也可能導(dǎo)致學(xué)校道德教育追求短期效應(yīng),易使學(xué)校道德教育簡單化和淺薄化,不利于共同致力于學(xué)校道德教育,等等。 道德量化評價主要是建立在行為主義心理學(xué)基礎(chǔ)之上的。教師通過道德量化評價對學(xué)生的預(yù)期行為進(jìn)行控制,即只有學(xué)生表現(xiàn)出教師所期望的行為時,才能獲得以道德分?jǐn)?shù)方式呈現(xiàn)出的肯定性評價。這種控制可能對學(xué)生的行為習(xí)慣養(yǎng)成和紀(jì)律教育有某種積極意義,尤其是在矯正年幼學(xué)生的不良行為習(xí)慣方面甚至可能取得立竿見影的效果,但控制是無助于學(xué)生道德發(fā)展的。因此,道德量化評價在道德教育中的流行,實乃誤解了它在道德教育中的作用。 作為一種道德教育方法,道德量化評價有悖于道德的本質(zhì)特征。道德是“出乎道德”與“合乎道德”的統(tǒng)一,亦即評價一種行為是否為道德行為,不僅要看行為本身是否“合乎道德”,更重要的是必須省察主體的行為動機(jī)是否“出乎道德”。同時,只有意志自由的行為才能接受道德評價。但是,道德量化評價卻將所有“合乎道德”的行為都賦予了道德價值,而忽略了對其意志是否善良的省察。另一方面,學(xué)校道德教育旨在使學(xué)生過完滿的生活。因此,道德教育應(yīng)引導(dǎo)學(xué)生對德性生活的向往和構(gòu)建,培養(yǎng)學(xué)生健康的獨立人格,幫助學(xué)生學(xué)會共同生活,而不是基于道德分?jǐn)?shù)的算計和得失。 因此,作為一種外部強(qiáng)化手段,道德量化評價并不能有效地促進(jìn)學(xué)生的道德發(fā)展,達(dá)成學(xué)校道德教育的目的。倘若道德教育將它推到愈高的位置,那么就離道德教育的目標(biāo)愈遠(yuǎn)。這樣一來,在學(xué)校道德教育中,學(xué)校和教師應(yīng)摒棄和超越作為外部控制手段的量化評價方式,采取合格性評價,正確厘清道德的邊界,并實現(xiàn)道德評價的重心由“評學(xué)”向“評教”的轉(zhuǎn)變。
[Abstract]:Under the influence of scientism and the thought of returning to life, the quantitative evaluation of morality has been widely used in the moral education of primary and secondary schools in our country. In practice, it can change the "soft task" of moral education into a so-called "hard target", so that it can objectively reflect the moral status of students and the effectiveness of moral education. And to maintain school discipline and classroom control play a positive role. However, the quantitative evaluation of morality can not effectively promote the moral development of students. On the contrary, it may lead to some undesirable consequences: it makes students tend to misunderstand the nature of morality by using the pursuit of moral scores as the purpose of moral education, morality as a tool, and hypocrisy. It is not conducive to the cultivation of students' healthy independent personality. At the same time, it may lead to the pursuit of short-term effect of school moral education, easy to make the school moral education simple and shallow, is not conducive to joint efforts in school moral education, and so on. The quantitative evaluation of morality is mainly based on behaviorism psychology. Teachers control the expected behavior of students through the quantitative evaluation of morality, that is, only when the students show the expected behavior of teachers, can they obtain the positive evaluation presented by the way of moral scores. This kind of control may have some positive significance to students' behavior habit formation and discipline education, especially in correcting the bad behavior habits of young students, it may even get immediate effect, but it is not helpful to the students' moral development. Therefore, the popularity of quantitative moral evaluation in moral education is a misunderstanding of its role in moral education. As a method of moral education, the quantitative evaluation of morality is contrary to the essential characteristics of morality. Morality is the unity of "moral" and "moral", that is, whether an act is moral or not depends not only on whether the act itself is "moral", More importantly, it is necessary to examine whether the subject's motives are "out of virtue". At the same time, only the behavior of free will can accept moral evaluation. However, the quantitative evaluation of morality assigns moral value to all "moral" behaviors and neglects the examination of whether their will is good or not. On the other hand, school moral education aims to make students live a full life. Therefore, moral education should guide students' yearning and construction of moral life, cultivate students' healthy independent personality, and help students learn to live together, not based on the calculation and loss of moral scores. Therefore, as an external means of strengthening, the quantitative evaluation of morality can not effectively promote the moral development of students and achieve the purpose of moral education in schools. If moral education pushes it to a higher position, it is farther from the goal of moral education. In this way, in school moral education, schools and teachers should abandon and transcend the quantitative evaluation methods as external control means, adopt qualified evaluation, and clarify the boundaries of morality correctly. The emphasis of moral evaluation is changed from "evaluation of learning" to "evaluation of teaching".
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華東師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：G41

【引證文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 張少偉;;為何而教:體育教師專業(yè)道德建設(shè)的基礎(chǔ)[J];北京體育大學(xué)學(xué)報;2012年10期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前4條

1 張素子;慈善行為的道德評價研究[D];廣西民族大學(xué);2013年

2 丁琦;建構(gòu)主義視角下高校德育過程問題探討[D];湖南師范大學(xué);2013年

3 殷雪;分?jǐn)?shù)崇拜與學(xué)校德育[D];南京師范大學(xué);2013年

4 周萍;新疆高級會計師任職資格量化評價體系研究[D];新疆財經(jīng)大學(xué);2013年

，

本文編號：2066797