论文部分内容阅读
这一堂“开放性”的数学课 ,不仅是时空的开放 ,方式的开放 ,更还有思维的开放 ,思想的开放 .“开放性”的课怎么上 ?像本课那样 ,你试起来再说 ,在干中学 !这样的“开放性”的课好不好 ?提问的人关心的大概不是学生能力的开发状况如何 ,而是“开放性”的题将来考不考 ?如何考 ?这的确点到许多老师的心里去了 .我看这完全是一个观念的解放问题 .人家不是在考作文么 ?一篇作文的分值要占到语文总分值的三分之一呢 .那么 ,考一个像本文那样的开放题 ,分值仅占到总分值的约十五分之一 ,为什么不可以呢 ?其评分标准不会制订得比作文的弱 .公平性的影响决不会高过作文 ,而导向性则一定会好得很!
This “open” mathematics class is not only the opening of time and space, the opening of methods, but also the opening of thinking and the opening of ideas. How does an “open” class go? As you did in this lesson, you try to say it again. In the middle school, what kind of “open” class is good or not? The person who asks questions is probably not concerned with the development status of student ability, but the problem of “openness” will not be tested in the future? How to test? This is indeed a point to many The teacher’s heart went. I think this is a question of the emancipation of the idea. Isn’t the person writing a composition? The score of an essay needs to account for one-third of the total score of the language. Then, try one like this article. For such open questions, the score only accounts for about one-fifth of the total score. Why is it not possible? Its rating criteria will not be set weaker than the composition. The influence of fairness will never be higher than that of the composition. Guiding will certainly be very good!