论文部分内容阅读
一、符号游戏,准确性较差。纵观近年来的高考语文标准化试卷,全卷的文字阅读量已逐年增至6000字左右,而考生用来答题的字数一般仅有105个左右(作文除外),答题符号却多至36个以上。这种“标准化”的试题多是把解答范围划定出来,把文字替考生组织好,有的是写出几个答案,让考生加以辨认、选择。考生往往只需填写一个符号,而不需要自己去动笔组织语言。这样的测试,往往准确性较差。有些考生从几个现成的答案中挑选正确答案,往往是并无绝对把握而胡乱选定的。去年笔者在监考中亲自目睹到有个考生用五分钱的硬币答标准化的选择题。这样的测试,非但难以测验学生的真实水平,而且也容易助长“学生的侥幸心理”。二、重结果轻过程,重符号轻表达。这种测试本身,就是把考生拒于思考分析试题的语言文字材料之外,他们所能做的,只是对命题者思考分析的结果做一番选择,如果说这就是什么“考能力”,那么这种能力的要求也实在太低了,远远达不到《大纲》的
First, the symbol game, the accuracy is poor. Taking a look at the examination papers for the college entrance examination in recent years, the volume of text readings has increased to about 6,000 words year by year. The number of words candidates use to answer questions is generally only about 105 (except composition), but the number of answer questions is as large as 36 or more. . This “standardization” of the test questions is mostly delineated the scope of the solution, the text organized for the candidates, and some are to write a few answers to allow candidates to identify and select. Candidates often only need to fill in a symbol, and do not need to write their own language. Such tests are often less accurate. Some candidates choose correct answers from several ready-made answers, often randomly selected without certainty. Last year, the author personally witnessed an examinee using a five-cent coin to answer a standardized multiple-choice question. Such a test will not only be difficult to test the true level of students, but also easily encourage “students’ luck.” Second, focus on the results of the light process, the weight of light symbols. This kind of test itself rejects examinees outside the language materials of the analytical questions. What they can do is to make some choices about the result of the propositional analysis. If this is what the “ability to test” is, then The demand for this ability is too low, and it is far from the Outline.