“课堂话语分析”刍议被引量：51

On Classroom Discourse Analysis

导出

摘要课堂话语是一种充满矛盾而又不断得到调整并得以多元并存的过程。本文探讨作为一种跨学科研究的课堂话语分析的意蕴;梳理基于"沟通理性"的课堂话语分析的视点。课堂话语分析所追求的理想的教学沟通型态是一个多元声音交响的过程,而教师唯有倾听每一个学生的声音,才能跨越疆界,导演出有声有色的合唱的世界。 Classroom discourse is a process that is full of contradictions and constantly adjusts and co - exists in diversity. This paper discusses the implication of classroom discourse analysis as an interdisciplinary study and sorts through the opinions of classroom discourse analysis based on the ＂ communicative rationality＂. The ideal pattern of instruction communication that classroom discourse analysis pursues is an interaction process generated by multiple voices. Teacher would cross borders and direct a alive chorus of the world only by listening to each student＇s voice.

作者钟启泉

机构地区华东师范大学课程与教学研究所

出处《全球教育展望》 CSSCI 北大核心 2013年第11期10-20,共11页 Global Education

基金教育部人文社会科学青年基金项目"课例研究的国际比较"(项目编号:10YJC880001)的研究成果之一

关键词课堂话语分析沟通理性教学沟通课堂文化 classroom discourse analysis communicative rationality instruction communication classroom culture

分类号 G424.21 [文化科学—课程与教学论]

引文网络
相关文献

参考文献13

1[日]秋田喜代美,藤江康彦.教学研究与学习过程[M].东京:财团法人广播大学教育振兴会,2010:93,94-95,106,105.
2[日]秋田喜代美.课堂研究与话语分析[M].东京:财团法人广播大学教育振兴会,2006:53,53.65-66.
3日本教育方法学会.现代教育方法事典[M].东京:图书文化,2004.65.
4[英]Vivien Burr.社会建构主义赏析:何谓话语分析[M].田中一彦译.东京:川岛书店,2002:74,84,197.
5[日]佐藤学.课程与教师[M].北京:教育科学出版社,2003.379.
6[美]Thomas L.Good,Jere E.Brophy.课堂研究[M].吴文忠译.台北:五南图书出版公司,1997:2,2-3,34-36.
7何包钢.哈贝马斯的沟通理性观述评[C].//中国学术论坛.华东师范大学中国现代思想文化研究所,2006.
8[日]木下百合子.教学沟通与课堂语言之研究:沟通与语言的学科论分析[M].东京:风问书房,1996:1.
9[日]岸田元美.师生关系:教育实践的基础[M].东京:教育开发研究所,1987:157-160,165,166-167,168.
10[新西兰]D.Hodson.新编理科教学论[M].小川正贤主泽.东京:东洋馆出版社,2000:196.

二级参考文献9

1孙可平,邓小丽.理科教育展单[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,2002:56-59.
2C. B. Brandt, Scientific discourse in the academy: A case study of an American Indian undergraduate [ J ], 2007, Science Education, Vol. 92, 825-847.
3Vygotsky, L., Thought and Language [ M ], 1978, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
4E. Mortimer and P. Scott, Analysing discourse in the classroom, In R. Millar, J. Linch & J. Osborne (eds.), Improving Science Education [M], 2000, Buckingham: Open University Press, 126- 142.
5P. H. Scott & E. F. Mortimer, Meaning making in high school science classrooms: A framework for analyzing meaning making interactions, In K. Boersma et al. (eds.), Reasearch and the Quality of Science Education [ M ], 2005, the Netherlands: Springer, 395 406.
6J. L. Lemke, Talking Science: Language, Learning, and Values [M], 1990, USA: Ablex Publishing Corporation, 45-46.
7B. A. Brown and E. Spang, Doulble talk: Synthesizing everyday and science language in the classroom [ J ]. 2007, Science Education, Vol. 92, 708 732.
8C. J. Boulter, Language, models and modelling in the primary science classroom [M]. In J. K. Gilbert and C. J. Boulter (eds.), Developing Models in Science Education, 289- 305.
9J. W. Willison and P. C. Taylor, (2rnplenlentary epistemologies of science teaching, In P. J. Aubusson, A. G. Harrison and S. M. Ritchie ( eds. ), Metaphor and Analogy in Science Education [ M], 2006, The Netherlands: Springer, 25-35.