Proposer, Professor of Yangzhou University: Wu Xing
Deputy Head, Professor of Nanjing Normal University: Ma Hongjia, chemistry is changing steadily, die, Xing Wu, do you want to change all the students to Yang Da?
Chemistry is more abnormal than mathematics, so abnormal, the dream is broken, and it is so dirty! ! Like a competition, a papermaker is a butcher, and he doesn't kill pigs. Professor Zheng Ziyue said: Chemistry is not science at all!
Coax us sinners in Jiangsu and embarrass us by winning a Nobel Prize. Show that you are capable. How many people have been hurt by the college entrance examination system in Jiangsu, that pig brain, and got a 50% B.
Chemistry is killing me, and my hand holding paper is shaking again. Who gave it? Let people live! ! !
It is said that mathematics is difficult and chemistry is more difficult. I am also a representative of chemistry class, and I feel cold when I see the topic.
Why is it so difficult? Chemistry is not good I have done dozens of sets of comprehensive exercises, and the results are directly in line with this abnormal test paper. It makes people feel that the chemical industry era in Jiangsu is over!
Although mathematics is difficult, it is not as difficult as chemistry, which does great harm to candidates. Moreover, biology is not difficult in chemistry, which is absolutely unfair to candidates who choose materialization.
The damn thesis teacher has gone too far. Let's go directly to the chemical factory for chemistry class in the future. As for the exam, it is still necessary to focus on books. Students who produced such a paper failed in the exam, and many students with high scores failed in the exam. You are not harmful.
What stupid teacher's problem is not big at all, and it has never been so sad.
Chemistry is too difficult. What is the purpose of the teacher's writing a paper? Can he show his level by crying his students? Can such a teacher make propositions in the future? If his level is very high, then I will give him a few questions to do, which seriously violates the current concept of new curriculum reform.
Proposers use their own level as the level of students to make propositions. Such a teacher should be expelled from the proposition team forever and even be held accountable. Such people bring shame to Jiangsu.
How many students who usually study hard will the teacher who writes the chemistry paper kill this time?
I studied chemistry in high school for three years, and many of them came up with industrial problems without being admitted. Innovation is still a brain teaser.
I usually protect A against a+. If I were Chemistry C, I would retaliate against the society and hack to death the sb who helped the college entrance examination system. ..
I was planted in chemistry, and materialization is unfair. I really want to hack the proposer to death!
Ask this person if he has a brain cramp. This is a difficult test paper. They all grew up eating shit.
First, the education examination institute was smashed, and then the Cultural Revolution. The root of the problem lies in Jiangsu college entrance examination system.
The leader of the chemistry proposition group killed hundreds of candidates in Jiangsu, and the last chemistry pushed me down the abyss.
The biological difficulty is much lower than the chemical difficulty, which is absolutely unfair to the candidates who choose physical chemistry! ! !
The easiest thing is 20%A, and the hardest thing is 20%A. The problem is that all chemistry students are good students, and only 20% A is unfair.
Science in college entrance examination increased the difficulty of mathematics and chemistry. But the biggest and most unexpected growth is chemistry. Although the difficulty of mathematics has greatly increased, compared with chemistry, it can really be described as "dwarfing". Seeing this test paper, I found many problems worth thinking about. First of all, we must understand; What kind of chemistry skills are required of students in senior high schools? The following aspects illustrate my point of view:
1) The overall difficulty of the test paper is seriously out of touch with the teaching practice.
From the requirements for students' chemistry learning, we can be sure that the "exam instructions" emphasize a key word: "Basic (Ben)" From the actual learning situation of senior high school students, we can also see the reason for this emphasis: a student who has been exposed to chemistry since the third grade will only study chemistry for four years even if he chooses science. In addition, there are many repetitions in the teaching contents of junior high school chemistry and senior high school chemistry, which can be combined into a chapter of senior high school chemistry, so students really receive chemistry education for only three years. Under this condition, it is impossible for us to ask students to have a high and accurate grasp of chemistry. This is the requirement of the actual teaching situation, but unfortunately, this year's Jiangsu chemistry college entrance examination proposer obviously ignored this point: many candidates were caught off guard, and this year's chemistry test paper was full of "competition flavor". I can't play my best.
2) The background of the test questions is divorced from daily production and life.
This year's chemistry topics 15 and 16 investigated the related contents of experiment and chemical production respectively. But I found that the background settings of these two topics are less common. The experiment of 15 is rarely touched by students, and the subsequent design experiment questions are also very poor, and the candidates' thinking is bound by limited space. I think this is contrary to the requirements of the new curriculum standard for cultivating students' innovative ability. The 16 problem itself is a failure problem. First of all, it failed to be close to the reality of life and production. And I also thought of one thing, that is, chemistry propositions all over the country are desperately pursuing new technologies and new processes this year. What's new, what's new-all the latest technologies published in chemistry magazines are moved to high school papers. Not to mention whether it is far-fetched to ask such a question. If these processes are really so close to the content of high school curriculum, what did the experts and doctors who designed these processes learn in college? Did they come out of college for four years and use high school things to complete such a complicated industrial production process design? Then what chemistry department should our university open?
3) the test paper is unreasonable, and the label should be "supplemented": extremely irresponsible to students!
There have been rumors in recent years that if the college entrance examination is difficult this year, it will be looser when marking papers, and the harder it is, the looser it will be. One year, Jiangsu college entrance examination physics was said to be extremely difficult. Later, it was changed to adjust the test paper group: as long as there are words, there are points! It's really ridiculous. This is the first move to undermine the rigor of teaching. Why? Your paper stumped everyone, and as a result, you graded it randomly when you changed it. This is a contradiction in itself: since you want everyone to do well in the exam, why not allocate the difficulty of the paper reasonably so that everyone can give full play to their personal level?
4) The test paper design failed, and the discrimination was not obvious.
The examination paper is simple and cannot show the degree of discrimination. Similarly, if the test paper is too difficult, it is impossible to distinguish the level of students. Take this college entrance examination as an example. First of all, for top chemistry students, the problem is basically a cinch. For better students, they can't solve problems, and many people can only get intermediate problems, and their total score is close to that of intermediate students. In other words, there is a "bottleneck effect", and a large number of people are squeezed into 607080 points, which makes it impossible to distinguish the degree of students' mastery of knowledge. This is not conducive to the performance of most students' personal level. At the same time, this is also a disrespect for the candidates' efforts for more than ten years-because this test paper failed to let them release the hard-won strength accumulated in 12 years.
The 20 10 college entrance examination has passed, and the success or failure can only be put in a joke, but I hope that many diseases exposed in this chemistry exam are worth pondering by every educational participant. Children are our future and hope. They have suffered too much expectation and too much pressure from all sides. But I can say that they are all very good, and they are all top-notch good children! ! ! As children, they have done their best. The college entrance examination should not give them such an unfair blow. I hope that the 20 1 1 college entrance examination candidates will not repeat the same mistakes.