论文部分内容阅读
您讲课时很系统,这是不可否认的。但历史課是门思想性和政治性很强的科学,应该用阶级观点来分析问题;可是我认为您并沒有用阶级观点来分析问题,爱憎不分明。例如您讲课时经常补充一些材料。这些材料都是关于宫廷、皇帝和资产阶級代理人的生活,但是沒有进行批判。然而关于十月革命这一类的材料却沒有补充什么,就是按照课本讲。后来有的地方就是让看书,而没有給好好分析一下。以一个又紅又专的无产阶级的人民教师的标准来衡量,这是不够的。您在讲拿破仑时,把拿破侖讲得很有組織才能和軍事天才。甚至把他的外貌形容的也很祥細:个很小,他的副官比他高……可是讲亚洲觉醒时,各国的起义就一带过去了,而沒有详细的讲。
It is undeniable that you have a systematic course. However, history class is a science of ideological and political nature and should be analyzed in a class point of view. However, I do not think you are using a class point of view to analyze the problem. Love and hate are not clear. For example, you often add some materials when you lecture. These materials are about the life of the court, emperor and bourgeois agent, but no criticism. However, nothing is added about the material of the October Revolution, that is, according to textbooks. Later, some places let reading, but did not give a good analysis. This is not enough, as measured by the standard of a red and a dedicated proletarian teachers of the people. When you talk about Napoleon, you tell Napoleon well organized and military genius. Even the appearance of his appearance is also very detailed: a very small, his adjutant than his high ... However, when awakening in Asia, the uprisings of all countries over the past, but did not say in detail.