论文部分内容阅读
徐江先生的《中学语文“无效教学”批判》在本刊今年第9期刊发后,引起了强烈的反响。有的人说徐先生伤害了整个语文界,有的人说徐先生指出了中学语文的痛处;有的人读后义愤填膺,有的人则不忍释卷。这是好事。我们从这些不同甚至截然相反的反应中,看到了老师们的教育理想,看到了语文教学未来的希望。批评家最好的批评就是他的文本。徐先生的文章白纸黑字俱在,批评者的观点如今也一并呈现,是耶非耶,都交与读者自己评判。不管怎样,批判是为了建设,我们关于“无效教学”一文的讨论,就是为了寻找一条“有效教学”的路。徐先生的文章虽冠以“批判”之名,其实他着墨最多的是关于“有效教学”的具体建议。我们期待您的参与,一起走出路来。
Mr. Xu Jiang’s “secondary school language” invalid teaching “criticism” in the 9th issue of this issue after publication, aroused strong repercussions. Some people say that Mr. Xu harmed the entire Chinese language community. Some people said that Mr. Xu pointed out the sore point of secondary school language. Some people were filled with indignation after reading it and others did not tolerate it. This is a good thing. From these different or even diametrically opposite reactions, we have seen the teachers’ ideal of education and we have seen the hope of the future of Chinese teaching. The best critic of critics is his text. Mr. Xu’s articles are written in black and white, and the critics’ views are now presented together. He is Jephthah, both of whom are handed over to the readers themselves. In any case, criticism is for construction. Our discussion of “invalid teaching” is to find a way of “effective teaching.” Although Mr. Xu’s article is titled “Criticism,” he actually made the most specific suggestions on “effective teaching.” We look forward to your participation and work out together.