[SSI Learning] 专题研讨纪要：在社会性科学议题学习中开展德育（2022-05-25）
Seminar Minutes: Implementing Moral Education in SSI Learning (05/25/2022)

主题研讨

2022年5月25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“在社会性科学议题学习中开展德育”在线研讨会议。温州道尔顿小学吴煦老师分享案例。首都师范大学科学教育研究中心主任丁邦平教授、北京教育科学研究院德育研究中心谢春风主任、北京教育科学研究院班主任研究中心赵福江主任、杭州市基础教育研究室初中部金京生主任，以及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出席会议并进行指导。

案例分享

吴煦从“课程框架设计时考虑德育空间”和“课程实施细节中开发德育价值”这两个方面来说明了《温州野生大黄鱼》中开展德育的思路。学生在“妈妈在禁渔期买了一条野生大黄鱼，我该怎么办”的问题引导下通过上网查阅、整理资料、实地走访调查来解决问题，并通过小组陈述调查历程、阐述观点来增强对道德问题的亲临性，由此让学生更容易换位思考与共情。基于教学的过程，吴老师总结了在社会性科学议题学习中开展道德教育的几点经验：1.真实的情境让学生对道德更加敏感；2.立场冲突让学生对道德理解更全面 ；3.科学论证帮助学生加深道德理解；4. 个性化的方案表达保护学生的个体差异。

专家评议

丁邦平指出，本课题符合社会性科学议题的课型，同时考虑到了道德教育的问题。课堂教学融合了海洋生态环境、生命教育的科学内容教学，并将科学思维融入了道德推理和道德判断的教学过程中。学生在活动过程中积累的解决冲突问题的体验，将有助于学生科学思维的培养及道德推理的发展，对未来学生面对真实情境中的选择具有重要影响。教师可以在课程结束后对学生进行观察、访谈，如此既能了解学生学完本课后的真实体验和前后行为变化，也有助于教师专业发展。

谢春风评析了案例对“三对关系的成功处理”。第一，知与行的关系，让学生在行动中提高自己的道德认知；第二，主体和客体的关系，学生是自身认知发展、道德情感发展的主体，教师把孩子这颗“种子”置于具有争议性的议题的肥沃土壤中，让孩子自己生长发芽；第三，技与道的关系，在错综复杂的教学方法中把握了育人之道。教师对学生的道德教化在潜移默化中形成，并建议当面对冲突问题时相应地给孩子更大的探索空间，同时还可以借鉴全景学习来丰富课堂教学。

赵福江从课堂改革的视角来进行分析。社会性科学议题学习中开展道德教育是非常有研究价值的，课堂教学是实现立德树人教育根本任务的重要途径。这种方式既调动了学生的积极性，又培养了学生独立思考、独立分析以及批判性思维的能力。教师可以进一步将讨论拓展到相关的其他冲突问题，增强议题与生活的联系性、跨学科性。此外，除了道德角度，还可以从社会法律、法规等不同的角度来引发学生思考，进一步促进学生的认知的发展。

金京生认为“禁渔期该不该吃大黄鱼”体现了社会性科学议题中的“议”，即存在“议”的空间。“禁渔期该不该吃大黄鱼”这一问题能够让学生产生认知冲突，并通过学生实践调查来解决冲突，是一种用论证的方式来实现道德推理的培养。另外，角色扮演也有利于培养学生的换位思考、多角度思考问题的能力。一般来说，道德推理有两种方式：一是关于某个具体行为是否正当的论证，二是关于某个现存的社会惯例是否公正的论述，教师可以从这两方面对学生进行道德推理能力的培养。

林静肯定了“禁渔期该不该吃大黄鱼”是社会性科学议题学习中开展道德教育的有效尝试。社会性科学议题学习项目要挖掘议题中的道德两难情境，培养学生道德敏感与道德决策能力。道德推理有别于科学推理。道德推理体现在定义困境、识别干系人、确定需要遵守的法律法规、考虑决策选项、理论分析、换位思考、寻求帮助、做出决策、确定评价标准的过程。林静进一步指出，社会性科学议题学习是跨学科融合学习路径的育人活动，而道德伦理教育是育人的重点，所以项目团队要开展社会性科学议题学习中的道德教育研究，并要走向专业化，以更好地促进学生德学兼优的全面发展。

Themed seminar

On the evening of May 25, 2022, from 19:00 to 21:10, the Beijing Normal University SSI Learning Project Team held an online seminar via Tencent Rooms, themed “Implementing Moral Education in SSI Learning”. Wu Xu from Wenzhou Dalton Elementary School shared a case study. Professor Ding Bangping, director of the Research Center of Science Education of Capital Normal University, Xie Chunfeng, director of the Moral Education Research Center of the Beijing Academy of Educational Sciences, Zhao Fujiang, director of the Coordinator Research Center of the Beijing Academy of Educational Sciences, Jin Jingsheng, director of the Junior High School Division of the Hangzhou Basic Education Research Office, and Lin Jing, head of the SSI-L Project Team and director of Science Development Department of Collaborative Innovation Center of Assessment for Basic Education Quality at Beijing Normal University, attended the meeting and offered comments.

Case sharing

Wu Xu illustrated the idea of ​​moral education in the social scientific issue of “the Yellow Croaker of Wenzhou”, from two aspects — “taking into account of moral education space in curriculum framework design” and “developing moral education value in curriculum implementation details”. With the lead-in question of “What should I do if my mum buys a yellow croaker during the fishing ban?”, students solved the question by online search, data collation and on-site visits and investigation. Through group presentations on their investigation process and opinion elaborations, they have enhanced their personal closeness to moral issues, hence making it easier to think transpositionally and empathize with others. Based on the teaching process, Wu summed up several points of experience in implementing moral education in SSI Learning: 1. Real context makes students more sensitive to morality; 2. Conflicting stance offers students a more comprehensive understanding of morality; 3. Scientific argumentation helps deepen students’ understanding of morality; 4. Expressions of personalized program conserve students’ individual differences.

Expert comment

Ding Bangping pointed out that this project conforms to the SSI curriculum category, meanwhile taking into account of the moral education issue. The in-class teaching has integrated scientific content of marine ecological environment and life science education, and incorporated scientific thinking into the teaching process of moral reasoning and moral judgment. Students have accumulated experience of resolving controversial issue throughout these activities, which will contribute to cultivating students’ scientific thinking and developing their moral reasoning, leaving important impact on their choices under real situations in the future. Teachers can observe and interview students after class, which makes them better understand students’ real experience and behavior changes before and after class, and in the meantime is conducive to their professional development.

Xie Chunfeng commented on the successful handling of three relationships within the case. The first is the relationship between knowledge and practice that allows students to improve their moral cognition through actions. The second is about the relationship between subject and object: students are the subject of their own cognitive, moral and emotional development, whereas teachers should take students as “seeds” and put them onto the fertile soil of controversial issues, allowing them to grow and spout. The third is the relationship between techniques and principles. The principle of education is well grasped in the intricate teaching techniques. Teachers’ moral education to students is developed in a subtle way. It is suggested that when confronted with controversial issues, students should be given more space for exploration. Meanwhile, teachers can also learn from all-around learning to enrich in-class teaching.

Zhao Fujiang analyzed this case from the perspective of classroom reform. It is of great research value to carry out moral education in SSI Learning. In-class teaching is an important way to realize the fundamental task of moral education. This method not only stimulates students’ enthusiasm, but also cultivates their ability of independent thinking, independent analysis and critical thinking. Teachers can further expand the discussion to other relevant controversial issues, enhancing the connection between the social scientific issue and real life, as well as the interdisciplinary nature of the issue. In addition to the aspect of morality, teachers can also encourage students to think from the social, legal, regulatory, and other perspectives, and further promote students’ cognitive development.

Jin Jingsheng believed that the issue of “Are we supposed to eat yellow croakers during the fishing ban?” represents the discussable characteristics of socioscientific issue, in other words, there is space for discussion. The question “Are we supposed to eat yellow croakers during the fishing ban?” engenders cognitive controversy among students. It is through practice and investigations that students resolve controversial issues, and hence a way of using argumentation to realize the cultivation of moral reasoning. Meanwhile, role play is also conducive to cultivating students’ ability of transpositional thinking and multi-dimensional thinking. Generally speaking, there are two ways of moral reasoning: one is to argue whether a specific behavior is justified, and the other is to expound whether an existing social norm is just and fair. Teachers could develop students’ moral reasoning ability from these two aspects.

Lin Jing affirmed that the issue of “Are we supposed to eat yellow croakers during the fishing ban?” is an effective attempt to implement moral education in SSI Learning. SSI Learning project should delve into the moral dilemma of the issue, and cultivate students’ moral sensitivity and moral decision-making ability. Moral reasoning is different from scientific reasoning. Moral reasoning is characterised by the process of defining dilemmas, identifying stakeholders, determining laws and regulations to be complied with, considering decision-making options, theoretical analysis, transpositional thinking, seeking assistance, making decisions, and identifying evaluation criteria. Lin Jing further pointed out that SSI Learning is an education activity of interdisciplinary integration learning path, and moral and ethical education is the focus of education. Therefore, the project team should carry out research on SSI Learning moral education, move forward to professionalism, and further promote students’ all-round development with both moral and academic excellence.