The principle of education and teaching must be known to friends who have studied pedagogy. Let's recite the concept together.
Education (moral education) is passed, and only through teaching can it really produce practical results. Teaching is the basic way of moral education.
Do you understand?
Don't know anything?
It's simple, right?
It seems that moral education should be realized through teaching.
Not difficult. It can't arouse interest.
As an epoch-making figure who studies education and teaching, how can he put forward a truth that is well known to all women and children? Isn't it obvious? I have an expression on my face. You don't have to tell me. Don't I know that moral education depends on teaching?
In fact, maybe we don't know the truth.
When I opened the book and saw a sentence, I suddenly felt as if I had never understood this truth.
Herbart said that not all teaching is educational, such as studying for income, livelihood and hobbies, no matter whether such learning makes a person better or worse.
He emphasizes the educational nature of teaching, and the ultimate goal of teaching is to make you a better person.
His emphasis on teaching always reminds me of Socrates' knowledge, that is, virtue, and my feelings are in the same strain.
Knowing your feelings and behaviors can form a good moral quality. Maybe we can't just rely on knowledge, but knowledge is the beginning of action. Without your own "knowledge", how can you guide your own "actions"? Some people will say that I practice, and I can also form virtue from practice. I don't deny that practice produces true knowledge, but if practice doesn't rise to the level of values, can it really form virtue? I don't know, I can think of, for example, Jiang Yang's unpretentious Lao Wang. But I think he also has his own moral judgment and thinking. He is not ignorant. He thinks you are a good man, so I am happy to send you eggs.
I firmly believe that these people's inner understanding of goodness is simple.
Back to teaching, in our teaching, can we be sure that our teaching is instructive? This is very problematic. We used to ridicule teachers for reading sentences, but there was no education and teaching. Since the ancient sages in China, no one has not supported the cultivation of gentlemen with both ability and political integrity. Virtue is always greater than talent. I think Herbart's education and teaching includes this.
Can our teaching be done?
I ask myself, the education I received since I was a child, not every course can achieve this kind of peace of mind.
What the teacher always says is: "The exam is to be tested."
There is another sentence: you are the worst one I brought. )
We now put special emphasis on moral education, precisely because the teaching in the hands of teachers needs to be improved, which cannot be completely blamed on teachers. This is our whole education system. In order to meet the needs of society, the corresponding cultural background, the political function of education and other complex factors are affecting the teaching of our school.
I just want to say that Herbart has already said what we emphasize today.
Moral education doesn't mean that you implement it concretely and preach it loudly. We should improve the quality of teachers, and we should attach importance to moral education. I think good moral education is not a moral education class, but permeates daily teaching, and it is the deep feeling conveyed behind every teacher's words: "She sews carefully and makes up thoroughly, fearing that the delay will make him go home late", and the classroom atmosphere created when the teacher talks about life education is vividly displayed by videos and pictures. Her own charm aroused the emotional resonance of the students. She intends to trace the history back to the ancient Aegean civilization. What were our ancient ancestors doing then? ...
I don't regard moral education as enlightenment. I regard it as a gradually formed guideline for individuals to guide their own lives. Very personal, just like Hamlet in different people's eyes. I think that through diversified and open classroom activities, students will pay attention to the moment that best suits their experience. Unconsciously, he learned, unconsciously, he had thoughts, unconsciously, he was in tears, unconsciously, there was a gentle guiding color in the classroom.
Educators of humanistic curriculum theory advocate "whole person education" instead of "education above the neck". I think they are emphasizing that education is a person who is committed to acquiring knowledge, and at the same time really feel the educational color behind teaching and become a unique and self-fulfilling person.
I think Herbart's moral education not only refers to observing social morality and forming good moral character, but also requires that teaching should be artistic, arouse students' interests in many aspects, and finally form their own outlook on life and values.
This is what he calls the principle of education and teaching.
He entrusts the teacher with an important task, just as Xunzi has high requirements for the teacher, because teaching is definitely not a simple process of imparting knowledge and experience, it is an interactive art, an enlightening art, and an art that we should think about and explore.
I think these educators are trying to think about what is a good education and what is a good teaching, so as to give us better guidance. Even if you can't think of a great theory, try your best to understand the meaning behind their ideas!
The road ahead is long, think more. ...
? Dance in the wind