2024年5月20日~6月2日，北京师范大学“社会性科学议题学习（SSI-L）”项目办在2所北京师范大学基础教育发展管理部“撷英计划”合作校，即北京师范大学附属实验中学、北京师范大学亚太实验学校，继续开展集体备课、课堂观察以及课后讨论等一系列教学研究活动。
这两周，以“应对全球变暖，发展中国家与发达国家是否应该承担相同的责任”为驱动性问题，亚太学校教师带领学生开展了一场“谁语争锋”的辩论赛；实验中学以“为减缓全球气候变暖，政府鼓励民众使用新能源车”为话题情景，展开“选燃油车VS选新能源车”的辩论会。
课堂上，两所学校教师组织学生角色扮演，正反方学生分别列队，主持人有序组织辩手轮流发言。辩手们站在各自代表方的立场上，从经济、环保、技术、道德等角度，发表自己的观点和理由，随着同学们在辩论现场上你来我往，辩论过程不断推进，语言与思维交相呼应，争论焦点逐渐清晰。大家最终意识到从国家到个人，都应根据不同的情况，选择不同的方式，共同承担责任，携手同行，应对全球变暖。
这些鲜活的活动有效地开启了学生分析问题、筛选信息、形成证据、逻辑推理、开展辩论的思维活动，锻炼学生们日后面对日益复杂社会性科学问题时能做出负责任决定。
From May 20 to June 2, 2024, the Beijing Normal University Socio-Scientific Issues-based Learning (SSI-L) Project office continued to carry out a series of teaching and research activities, such as collective lesson preparation, classroom observations, and after-class discussions, in two partner schools of the BNU Basic Education Development and Management Department’s Xieying Program — the Experimental High School Affiliated to Beijing Normal University, and the Asia-Pacific Experimental School of Beijing Normal University.
In the past two weeks, teachers from the Asia-Pacific Experimental School led students to organize a “tit-for-tat” debate competition with the driving question of “Should developing countries and developed countries bear the same responsibilities in response to global warming?” The Experimental High School launched a debate on “Choosing ICE vehicles VS new energy vehicles” with the scenario setting as “the governments encouraging the public to use new energy vehicles to mitigate global warming”.
Teachers from both schools organized role-play activities in class, with students from the pros and cons lining up separately and the judge organizing debaters to speak up in turns. Standing in the position of different representatives, debaters expressed their own opinions and reasons regarding aspects of the economy, environmental protection, technology, and morality. As students argued back and forth, the debate process continued to move forward with their language and thinking echoing each other and the focal point getting clear. Eventually, students realized that from the governmental and individual levels, they should choose different ways based on different situations, share responsibilities, and work together to address global warming.
These lively activities have effectively stimulated students’ thinking, including analyzing problems, screening information, forming evidence, logical reasoning, and conducting debates. They also trained students to make responsible decisions when faced with increasingly complex socioscientific problems in the future.