[SSI Learning] 专题研讨纪要：社会性科学议题教学设计与实施的现实困境 ——以《垃圾分类与处理》个案分析为例（2022-05-11）
Seminar minutes: The Practical Dilemma of SSI Lea Learning Design and Implementation——A Case Analysis of “Waste Sorting and Disposal” (05/11/2022)

2022年5月11日晚19:00-21:10，北京师范大学社会性科学议题学习项目组在腾讯会议室举行主题为“社会性科学议题教学设计与实施的现实困境”在线研讨会议。福建师范大学孔艺老师、福州市群众路小学张劭翊老师共同作为主讲人，分享了《垃圾分类与处理》这一个案在实践过程中的经验与思考。SSI-L项目负责人、中国基础教育质量监测协同创新中心科学提升部主任林静、山东威海教育教学研究院特级教师张涛、北京市通州区教师研修中心特级教师曹春浩出席会议并进行指导。

◆主讲分享

孔艺和张劭翊根据《垃圾分类与处理》的活动设计与课堂应用，介绍了社会性科学议题教学在设计与实施两个方面的思考。在完成对个案基本介绍之后，着重对实施教学中存在的三个问题进行了剖析，分别是：学生讨论热度高，发言质量不高；班级辩论常出现一言堂、一边倒的情况；课堂反应热烈，课后作业冷淡。

结合对教学过程的反思，孔艺和张劭翊进一步分析了产生三个问题的可能性原因。一是，活动情境可能距离学生已有认知和经验较远，探讨的问题比较大，供给学生思维发展的脚手架不足。二是，学生可能习惯于讲授式课堂，独立思考不够，在小组讨论时易从众。三是，课后作业设计没能引发学生兴趣，活动过程也缺乏监控、指导及评价。

◆专家评议

张涛认为，本案例在实施当中呈现出来的“观点一边倒”“课后作业冷淡”等问题是现在SSI-L课堂实施中的典型问题。这些问题之间是紧密相关的，反映了学生在思维的深刻性和广阔性方面有待提高，需要在活动设计上有所突破，并建议将解决问题的重点落在提高学生兴趣和能力这两方面。社会性科学议题的选择要贴近学生生活，切入点要小而具体。可以从学生的立场出发，找到可切入的现实视角，确定学生感兴趣的、具体的、有争议性的驱动性问题。教学实施过程中，要以学生能够理解和接受的方式提出具体的学习要求，既包括思维方面的要求，也包括活动方面的要求。此外，要增加项目的时间投入，就议题涉及到的各个层面进行深入研究，以促进学生能够更全面的考虑问题。

曹春浩从驱动性问题这一视角出发，对该个案的设计进行了点评。他指出，SSI-L的驱动性问题应该具有核心性、矛盾性、争议性、论证性。学生的兴趣不强，是因为驱动性问题的核心性和争议性不够，没有充分激发学生参与，因此要尽量提出一些可以从多角度回答的复杂问题。学生在获取答案的过程中，需要利用多种方法进行取证和论证，实现科学思维的发展。同时也要注意，驱动性问题与分问题之间是存在逻辑关系的，分问题要服务于驱动性问题。以《垃圾分类与处理》这一议题为例，驱动性问题可以是“是否要建设垃圾焚烧发电厂？”，分问题可以设置为烧的是什么垃圾（垃圾分类）？烧的过程与结果是否环保（垃圾处理）？

林静指出，社会性科学议题学习活动的设计，其实是一项课程建设过程，教师需要以系统的视角来实现“理想的课程”、“实施的课程”与“实际的课程”之间的内在一致性。在活动设计时，确定适宜的议题，思考围绕该议题学生可以学习什么，来建构理想的课程。进入课堂教学阶段，要关注如何让学习真实发生，以有效的教学策略来支持并不断调整活动方案，切实地让学生有生成性学习过程与体验。在课程实施过程中，还要关注活动目标是否落实在学生身上了，即教学目标达成与否。这还需要有效的评价来监控、促进“实际的课程”的效益。林静进一步指出，要让学生真正发生学习的首要前提是研究学生的认知，要站在学生的立场上，开展设计和教学。

From 19:00 to 21:10, May 11, 2022, the Beijing Normal University SSI Learning Project team held an online seminar themed “The Practical Dilemma of SSI Learning Design and Implementation” via Tencent Rooms. Two keynote speakers, Kong Yi from Fujian Normal University and Zhang Shaoyi from Qunzhong Road Primary School in Fuzhou, shared their experience and thinking in the implementation process of the issue of “Waste Sorting and Disposal”. Lin Jing, head of the SSI-L project and director of Science Development Department of Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment for Basic Education Quality at Beijing Normal University, Zhang Tao, a Speical-Rank Teacher of Shandong Weihai Education and Teaching Research Institute, and Cao Chunhao, a Speical-Rank Teacher of Beijing Tongzhou District Teacher Research and Training Center, attended the meeting and offered guidance.

Keynote speech

Based on the activity design and in-class practice of the “Waste Sorting and Disposal” issue, Kong Yi and Zhang Shaoyi introduced their thinking on the design and implementation of SSI teaching. After the basic introduction of this case, they focused on the analysis of three problems in SSI learning practice, which are: students have heated discussion and yet poor-quality statement; in-class debates often appear to be solo voices or one-sided views; students are enthusiastic to respond in class but less so towards after-school assignment.

Combined with their reflection on the teaching process, Kong Yi and Zhang Shaoyi further analyzed the possible reasons that have led to the three problems. First, the activity context may be distant from students’ existing cognition and experience and the questions under discussion are relatively broad, which is inadequate to offer scaffolding for students’ thinking development. Second, students may be accustomed to lecture-style classes, lack of independent thinking, and tend to follow others in group discussions. Third, the design of after-school homework fails to stipulate students’ interest, and there lacks monitoring, guidance and evaluation in the activity process.

Expert comment

Zhang Tao believes that those problems presented in this case implementation such as “one-sided view” and “unenthusiastic to assignment” are representative in in-class SSI-L implementation. These problems are closely related to each other, reflecting that it needs improvement in students’ depth and breadth of thinking, and new breakthroughs in activity design. It is suggested that the focus of problem solving should be on developing students’ interest and ability. The selection of social scientific issue should be close to students’ life, with a small and specific entry point. Teachers can start from students’ standpoint, find a practical perspective to delve into, and identify a specific controversial issue of interest to students. In teaching implementation, specific learning requirements should be put forward in a way that students can understand and accept, including both thinking requirements and activity requirements. In addition, it is necessary to increase time investment to the project and conduct in-depth research on all aspects of the topic, so as to encourage students to think through the concerned issue more comprehensively.

Cao Chunhao commented on this case design from the perspective of motivating questions. He pointed out that the motivating questions of SSI-L should be central, contradictory, controversial and argumentative. The reason why students do not have strong interest that motivating questions are not sufficiently central and controversial, which cannot fully stimulate students’ participation. Therefore, it’s important to raise some complex questions that can be answered from multiple perspectives. In the process of obtaining answers, students need to use a variety of methods to collect evidence and make arguments, so as to realize the development of scientific thinking. At the same time, it should be noted that there is a logical relationship between motivating questions and sub-questions, in which sub-questions should serve motivating questions. Taking the issue of “Waste Sorting and Disposal” as an example, the motivating question can be “Whether to build a waste incineration power plant?”, and the sub-questions can be set as “What kinds of waste (waste sorting) can be burned?” “Is the burning process and result (waste disposal) environmentally friendly?”.

Lin Jing suggested that the design of SSI Learning activities is actually a course construction process. Teachers need to realize the internal consistency between “ideological curriculum”, “institutional curriculum” and “experiential curriculum” from a systematic perspective. In activity design, teachers should identify an appropriate issue and think about what students can learn from the issue, so as to construct an ideal curriculum. At the in-class teaching stage, teachers should pay attention to how to make learning truly happen, support and continuously adjust the activity plan with effective teaching strategies, and allow students to have a generative learning process and experience. In course implementation, teachers should also pay attention to whether the activity objectives are conducted onto students, that is, whether the learning objectives are achieved or not. This also requires effective evaluation to monitor and increase the effectiveness of “experiential course” for students. Lin further pointed out that the primary prerequisite to teachers for students to truly learn is to study their cognition, carrying out SSI Learning design and teaching from students’ standpoint.