共查询到20条相似文献，搜索用时 62 毫秒
1.
道德实践：学校道德教育的彩虹 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
学校道德教育作为现代学校一个主要目标,在实施过程中较少关注学生作为“人”的发展,道德教育效果不佳。道德实践的提出和进一步完善对于解决目前中小学道德教育的窘状有一定的现实意义。道德实践主张在实践中突出学生主体地位、深化学生主体体验,通过具体的、经常的道德实践实现道德行为养成和道德价值内化的目的。 相似文献
2.
增强中小学道德教育实效性的思考 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
吴佩杰 《南宁师范高等专科学校学报》2000,(2)
实效性是中小学道德教育的生命。如何增强中小学道德教育的实效性,本文就建立分层递进的道德目标,注意德育对象的全体性、整体性和因材性,树立学生是道德活动主体的观念,重视道德需要和道德情感的研究及加强以自我教育为主要内容的研究和实践等问题作了有益的思考。 相似文献
3.
本从本质上对道德信念这个概念的含义进行了具体的剖析，指出了道德信念的作用主要在它是道德动机的最高形态，它能够把学生的道德需要、道德意志、道德意识转化为实际的道德行为，希望广大德育工作要采取各种有效的措施，创造一切条件，让广大学生广泛参加道德实践活动，让他们的道德概念、道德知识在道德实践中转化为坚定而又正确的道德信念。 相似文献
4.
论道德教育实践中的道德能力培养 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
陈炳水 《宁波大学学报(教育科学版)》2000,22(1):56-60
在现代道德教育的实践活动中,应注重对人的道德能力的培养,这是本文提出的中心论点,为此,笔者在界定道德能力概念的基础上,对道德能力形成、发展的原因、趋势以及培养人的这种能力的实际意义作了力所能及的理论探讨,在此基础上,提出了在具体道德教育的实践活动,要抓好道德能力培养应把握的几个问题。『 相似文献
5.
当前,中小学教师道德困境在理论层面界定不清,这影响了现实生活中教师道德水平的有效提升.采用类型分析的方式,依据教师道德困境的起因源头与超越过程等维度,指出教师道德困境存在着“不道德”“非道德”“冷道德”“高道德”等四种类型,进一步分析这些道德困境可以相应地归因于成人主义的横溢、工具理性的扩张、社会冷漠的裹挟、文化传统的钳制等.廓清思想认识、实现制度保障、把握超越次序是超越教师道德困境的具体路径. 相似文献
6.
道德教育是中小学教育的“重头戏”，投入的人力、物力都是相当大的，可从教育的效果来看，并不十分理想。究其原因，是德育工作者对中小学德育的认识上还存在误区：重德育知识的灌输，轻德育能力的实践，忽视学生的主体作用，不重视道德教育的内化，尤为突出的是道德实践在中小学德育工作中显得十分薄弱。笔者认为改革德育实践模式有助于道德教育实效的增强。一、当代道德实践模式的理论探讨重视道德实践就应重视学生的主体作用，而不是一味地“被动灌输”。德育工作必须是一种主动的教育过程，要充分调动他们的积极性。例如，对于一些认识… 相似文献
7.
基于认同的视角,道德教育的关键在于培养围绕那些道德特征联结而组织起来的自我图式。个体道德认同的发展受到内外诸多因素的影响,在具体的道德教育实践中应该强调：营造道德氛围．提供道德行动机会,以及协助个体构建道德原型和行动脚本。 相似文献
8.
要成功地实现道德教育,不能片面依赖于道德理论教育,而更应该注重道德实践教育。班主任作为学校德育的主力军,应十分注重通过道德实践教育这一重要途径,让学生在具体的道德实践中了解生活,提高能力,升华感悟,从而实现道德内化,增进育人效果。 相似文献
9.
战后日本的迅速崛起为世人所瞩目，日本中小学的道德教育自然也成了人们关注的焦点之一。文章就日本现行的小学道德课程教科书加以分析和评论，总结在教学大纲指导下，现行小学《道德》教科书根据不同年龄儿童的心理特征，在贴近学生生活的平凡的故事中传承日本文化，培养学生的道德性，即道德知识、道德判断力、道德实践能力，用实际例子阐明教科书既注重学生的可接受性，又注重和其他学科的相互关联以及师生互动的空间，并且注意到对不同成长程度的学生提出适当的要求，使学生在道德体验中完成从道德认识到道德实践的整合。 相似文献
10.
中小学道德与法治课程一体化建设是转变传统教学模式,为道德与法治教学提供更加丰富、共享资源库的科学路径。通过本文实践分析可知,教师应立足小学道德与法治课程教学寻找一体化切入点,丰富相关课程教学组织模式,提升教学质量,为打好小学道德与法治教育基础,实现中小学道德与法治课程一体化建设目标提供保障。 相似文献
11.
对中小学择校问题的再思考 总被引：1，自引：0，他引：1
对于中小学择校现象应当重新予以认识。择校是指人们对就读学校的选择,在当前具有合理性和必然性。目前择校主要有以分择校、以权择校和以钱择校等三种形式。合理的择校应当以学生的素质为依据,同时视学校的具体情况确定招收择校生的数量及收费标准。择校既具有积极的意义,也有一定的负面影响。解决择校问题要从政府、社会和学校等多方面着手。 相似文献
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Simone Doolaard 《School Effectiveness & School Improvement》2013,24(2):241-244
18.
Trevor McCandless 《Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education》2015,36(6):808-820
School prospectuses and promotional videos appeal to parents by presenting idealised images of the education a school provides. These educational idealisations visually realise the form of discipline a school is expected to provide, depending on the social habitus of the parents. This paper presents a content analysis of the images used in 33 sets of marketing materials from a maximally diverse sample of schools from the state of Victoria. These images are interpreted using the lenses of Bernstein's control and Bourdieu's habitus and cultural capital. The promotional images are found to vary systematically in terms of content and form depending on the perceived social class of the students which the schools attract. 相似文献
19.
教育部在2005年颁布了《关于整体规划大中小学德体系的意见》（以下简称《意见》）,《意见》对于加强和改进大学生思想政治教育和中小学生思想道德教育工作,构建具有时代性、把握规律性、增强实效性的大中小学德育体系具有普遍的指导意义。《意见》是针对构建全国性的大中小学德育体系而颁布的,这就决定了它只能忽略差异性而寻求共同性与统一性。这种普遍、共同的、统一的德育体系对地方德育体系和校本德育体系的构建具有宏观指导作用,但它不能取代地方性德育体系。 相似文献
20.
《Paedagogica Historica: International Journal of the History of Education》2012,48(1-2):275-288
This paper tells a story about progressivism, schools and schools of education in twentieth‐century America. Depending on one's position in the politics of education, this story can assume the form of a tragedy or a romance, or perhaps even a comedy. The heart of the tale is the struggle for control of American education in the early twentieth century between two factions of the movement for progressive education. The administrative progressives won this struggle, and they reconstructed the organization and curriculum of American schools in a form that has lasted to the present day. Meanwhile the other group, the pedagogical progressives, who failed miserably in shaping what we do in schools, did at least succeed in shaping how we talk about schools. Professors in schools of education were caught in the middle of this dispute, and they ended up in an awkwardly compromised position. Their hands were busy—preparing teachers to work within the confines of the educational system established by the administrative progressives, and carrying out research to make this system work more efficiently. But their hearts were with the pedagogues. So they became the high priests of pedagogical progressivism, keeping this faith alive within the halls of the education school, and teaching the words of its credo to new generations of educators. Why is it that American education professors have such a longstanding, deeply rooted and widely shared rhetorical commitment to the progressive vision? The answer can be found in the convergence between the history of the education school and the history of the child‐centered strand of progressivism during the early twentieth century. Historical circumstances drew them together so strongly that they became inseparable. As a result, progressivism became the ideology of the education professor. Education schools have their own legend about how this happened, which is a stirring tale about a marriage made in heaven, between an ideal that would save education and a stalwart champion that would fight the forces of traditionalism to make this ideal a reality. As is the case with most legends, there is some truth in this account. But here a different story is told. In this story, the union between pedagogical progressivism and the education school is not the result of mutual attraction but of something more enduring: mutual need. It was not a marriage of the strong but a wedding of the weak. Both were losers in their respective arenas: child‐centered progressivism lost out in the struggle for control of American schools, and the education school lost out in the struggle for respect in American higher education. They needed each other, with one looking for a safe haven and the other looking for a righteous mission. As a result, education schools came to have a rhetorical commitment to progressivism that is so wide that, within these institutions, it is largely beyond challenge. At the same time, however, this progressive vision never came to dominate the practice of teaching and learning in schools—or even to reach deeply into the practice of teacher educators and researchers within education schools themselves. 相似文献