教育政策比较研究的价值及其限度

教育政策比较研究作为比较教育的分支领域,从单一国别的历时态纵向比较,发展为国别间就某一范畴具体内容的横向比较,进而上升到政策形成过程中的制度性探讨。教育政策比较研究这一议题在实践应用中,具有“硬币的两面性”：一方面,思维逻辑的重建、文本脉络的厘清、范式取向的调整这三个维度,彰显了政策比较研究的内在价值;而另一方面,“全球—地方化”、价值冲突、非理性修辞、文化偏见等因素,又是政策比较研究中无以超脱的局限。要实现教育政策在并置中比较,需要借助整体化立场、政策知识“、以证据为本”的研究,予以规范。     

试论比较教育的跨学科性及其限度

跨学科性被视为比较教育的本质属性之一,但关于比较教育学科的跨学科原因以及跨学科方法在比较教育中的应用都存在含混不清之处.这使得曾经构建科学比较教育学的跨学科性逐渐成为人们质疑比较教育存在合理性的一个导火索.本文在考察比较教育跨学科原因的基础上,探讨了当前比较教育跨学科研究存在的若干问题,并针对这些问题,提出了比较教育的有限开放.     

论教育研究的价值及其限度

教育研究既非无能,也非万能,而有其自身的价值限度,这是由教育研究的价值本性所决定的。明于此．教育研究者和实践者或许能更加透彻地理解、对待教育研究,把教育研究置于一个恰当的位置。     

三个版本化学新教材中“化学反应速率和限度”内容的比较研究

“化学反应速率和限度”是化学学科最重要的原理性知识之一,也是深入认识和理解化学反应特点和进程的入门知识。由于该节的知识比较抽象,因此在教学时,要注意加强与社会生活的联系,还要注意知识的阶段性和渐进性,把握好内容的深度和广度,防止任意拓宽加深,增加学生负担。本文对人教版、苏教版、鲁教版的《化学2》（必修）中“化学反应速率和限度”内容进行分析和比较,让更多的中学化学教师更好地熟悉本节内容,更有针对性地进行教学。     

“金砖国家”教育的比较研究

基于政治、经济、文化三个角度,对金砖国家"BRICS"高等教育现状进行了探究。从政治下的教育依附、经济下的教育分配和文化下的教育公平来比较分析金砖国家的教育问题,分析我国在高等教育发展中应该注意的问题,为我国现在高等教育的发展提供经验借鉴。     

“区域研究”与比较教育学—以明确“区域”的教育特质为目的的比较研究

为了提高比较教育研究的质量,必须充实教育的“区域研究（area studies)”,区域研究的特色在于：不将区域进行分割而是作为一个整体来把握;采用非单一的,跨学科的方法;研究对象一般选择“现代”的主题,重视田野研究（利用人类学的方法进行实地调查）。开展教育的“区域研究”对于提高比较教育研究的质量至关重要。     

试论"教育的比较研究"和"比较教育研究"

本文从词源学、哲学、学科和方法等维度去认识"比较",认为教育的比较研究是依据一定的参照点或框架,遵循基本法则,展开对任何两个或两个以上的教育事物进行研究。比较教育研究是具有确证身份的比较教育研究者在遵照教育的比较研究的共性下,对民族国家边界内的两个或两个以上民族国家的教育进行跨国性、跨文化性、跨学科性的学科逻辑的研究。     

论“一费制”教育政策的能力限度及其实施

为了治理教育乱收费现象,切实减轻农民负担,我国在农村地区义务教育阶段实施了“一费制”教育政策,但由于多种因素的影响,目前“一费制”教育政策在实施过程中还存在不少问题,说明“一费制”教育政策存在能力限度。因此为了确保“一费制”教育政策目标的实现,政府必须实施完善教育经费投入体制、加强政府机构自身建设、建立教育政策评价体系以及调控教育政策制定执行四个方面的措施。     

论“高校扩招”教育政策的能力限度

"高校扩招"教育政策本身不是万能的,其自身的能力限度决定了它在解决一个问题的同时对由此引发的其他范围内的问题是无能为力的。我们必须正确认识它的双重效应,尽可能地发挥其积极的方面,使"高校扩招"教育政策在实施过程中不断完善,逐渐减少其能力限度,成为真正能促进国家经济建设和推动高等教育发展的科学、合理、有效的教育政策。     

The Limits of Theory in Art Education

The last forty years have seen substantial and dramatic changes in the thinking about education in art. Changes have taken place in art itself and there have been incredible social, political and economic upheavals. All this has led to an enlarged view of art education. It has given rise to the need for greater dialogue and debate. In more recent years, there have been more concentrated and focussed efforts to establish art curricula and standards of accomplishment for art education. In England, there has been the introduction of the National Curriculum and in the USA there has been the development of the National Standards for Arts Education. In both countries there have been numerous efforts at national or state, local and school levels aimed at assessing what students’ `know and are able to do’ in the arts. The role of theory in art education is of some importance. It is through theory that a systematic accounting can be constructed that explains and makes consistent the individual critiques of what is going on in classrooms, schools, committees and the nation-at-large. The paper discusses developments in England and the United States with regard to the theoretical development of curricula and the means for evaluation in art education. It also outlines and discusses the `limits of theory in art education’. It is not opposed to theory; rather it is posited that preoccupations with theory should not over-ride the importance of maintaining a multiplicity of competing (or emerging) meanings. It is argued that theories should inform and illuminate actions rather than place arbitrary limits upon them.     

The Limits of Professional Architectural Education

Professional architectural education is overwhelmingly predicated on skills development. Consequently, the humanities are given short shrift. Students overburdened with an abundance of practical tasks cannot be expected to do much beyond completing studio project work with any degree of depth. Such splitting has a negative outcome: at the end of their education, many graduates still have difficulty constructing a convincing argument about their own work. And when professional qualification is achieved, many architects are arguably missing the humanities half of their education. Such a narrowly focused training surely contributes to the general low quality of the built environment that we inhabit. The apparent causes and effects of the current situation are analysed here, especially the degree to which the rise of an academic culture in architecture has paradoxically exacerbated a split between the humanities and design. By widening the divide between speculative, theoretical and historical research and the professional education delivery systems that architectural researchers teach into, the ascendancy of (humanities‐based) research in architecture schools has intensified the separation of theory and history from design. Ultimately, only if the production model that so often organises architecture education is rethought, will it be possible to recuperate a strong humanities stream in design education.     

选择教育的必要与限度

一、选择教育的含义与特征这里所说的“选择教育”,是指对学校教育的内部选择(择教),与对学校教育的外部选择(择校)相对应,关注的是校内教育需求与教育活动的匹配性,通常是以对指导教师、学习班级、学科层级、课程项目、教学组织、社团活动和发展空间的选择为特征的,有的还借助积点学分制管理。像华中师大附中在1996年秋季开始实行的“素质学分制”,上海市晋元高级中学1999学年度开始尝试的“走班制教学”,以及广州市为推进“新课程”而从2004年秋季起在普通高中普遍推行的学分制改革,就都属于此类。按照国内这些选择教育实践的先行者自身所…     

中日MBA教育比较研究

MBA教育自1908于美国诞生到现在,已经走过了上百年的历史。中国与日本作为MBA教育中相对"年轻"的国家,有很多的异同之处。本文首先介绍了MBA教育的相关理论,接着分别阐述了日本及我国MBA教育的发展概况;然后结合中日MBA教育差异进行对比,最后通过上述对MBA教育的阐述与分析,提出对于完善我国MBA教育的对策和建议。     

当代比较教育学研究的发展动态

比较教育学科理论问题仍是一个颇具挑战性的论题。当代比较教育学研究在转变：从宏观研究转向微观研究;从关注国家教育制度转为关注学校教育方法及教育效果;从主要研究发达国家转向重视亚非拉等发展中国家及全球性教育问题;从一味介绍外国教育制度的优越性到同时强调各国教育的独特性及相互借鉴;从仅重视国民教育制度到关注妇女、少数民族等社会弱势群体的教育;从仅注重正规的中小学教育到关注正规教育,非正规教育、非正式教育及私立教育。     

比较教育中的依附理论研究

文章介绍了依附理论在拉丁美洲的产生、发展,依附理论的分类及其各自强调的重点。关于该理论在比较教育中的运用,主要介绍了比较教育中依附理论的关键性概念如"中心"与"边缘"、"不平等"的世界教育和新殖民主义等。依附理论虽然也存在自身不足,但无论运用其分析世界或国内的高等教育、知识的生产和传播方面都会给我们以启示。     

论质的研究方法在我国比较教育研究中的应用

目前质的研究方法已经成为国际范围内比较教育研究的主流方法,而我国的比较教育研究仍以文献研究为主,在方法论上具有一定的局限性。将质的研究方法应用于我国的比较教育研究,将会使比较教育研究呈现出新的特征。     

Moral Education in Early Childhood: The Limits of Constructivism

Broadly speaking there are two polar views on moral education - traditionalism and progressivism. Traditionalists tend to believe that moral values are eternal and universal. They prioritize such “hard” virtues as discipline, courage, restraint, and obedience, and believe in directive behavioral instruction with meaningful consequences for rule-following and rule-breaking. Progressives, the dominant voice in early childhood education, believe that moral values are variable, dependent on social context. They prioritize such “soft” virtues as unselfishness, caring, generosity, and tolerance, and believe virtues are acquired in a “sociomoral environment” of nurturing adults who stress cooperative interchanges and minimal authority. While most programs, despite their “tilt”, acknowledge the need for a balance, they do not specify criteria for making the pedagogical decisions. Without such explicit criteria, a “strong” version of constructivism may demand more of children than they can deliver given their developmental limitations. Two criteria are suggested for determining when traditional methods may usefully supplement constructivist ones: First, one must decide if the matter at stake is a bottom-line non-negotiable value such that a child's dissension is unacceptable. Second, one must determine if the preschooler, given her cognitive egocentricity, moral realism, and “romancing of reality” can make a rational (decentered) choice. There follows a more detailed discussion of blended approaches (traditional and constructivist) within the overall goal of helping children build a moral identity.