面对当代教育争议

IF 2.5 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Eric M. Anderman, D. Cristol
{"title":"面对当代教育争议","authors":"Eric M. Anderman, D. Cristol","doi":"10.1080/00405841.2022.2096371","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Most individuals would be extremely uncomfortable if they learned that their medical doctor was using medical practices that were convenient and easily implemented, but not actually supported by research. Many of us would quite likely seek a second opinion if we became aware of such behavior. But can the same be said of an educator who uses instructional practices that are not informed by research? Or if an educator uses instructional practices that research has clearly demonstrated as being ineffective? Education is a field that is rife with such controversies. Several recent books (e.g., Berliner & Glass, 2014; Proctor et al., 2015) have explored some of these controversies in depth. Despite this, it has been our observation that there are some educational practices that are widely used, despite there being ample evidence indicating their ineffectiveness. To put this into the current political context, it is important to note that debates have raged recently regarding both the content and instructional practices that schools should (and should not) be using. With regard to content, current debates have focused in particular on topics such as sex education, climate change, and race. Controversies also have been reignited with regard to the books that students should (and should not) be asked to read as part of the curriculum. This issue has received much media attention (e.g., this was recently covered by The New York Times). But current debates have focused not just on the content that is taught, but also on the types of instructional practices that educators use. For example, in some communities, instructional practices that focus on nurturing socioemotional outcomes are under attack (Prothero & Blad, 2021). As editors of Theory into Practice, we decided to devote an issue of the journal to an exploration of the research behind some contemporary controversial issues that are alive and well in schools. Rather than deciding on the issues that we deemed as relevant, we developed a call for proposals for articles for a special issue of the journal focusing on contemporary controversies in education. We put out an open call and disseminated it widely. In the end, we received an extraordinary number of extremely high-quality proposals. Given the quality of the proposals and the potential implications of the articles in positively impacting policy and practice, we decided to devote two issues of the journal to these articles. Thus we are delighted that the summer 2022 issue includes the first set of these articles.","PeriodicalId":48177,"journal":{"name":"Theory Into Practice","volume":"42 1","pages":"251 - 253"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Confronting contemporary controversies in education\",\"authors\":\"Eric M. Anderman, D. Cristol\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/00405841.2022.2096371\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Most individuals would be extremely uncomfortable if they learned that their medical doctor was using medical practices that were convenient and easily implemented, but not actually supported by research. Many of us would quite likely seek a second opinion if we became aware of such behavior. But can the same be said of an educator who uses instructional practices that are not informed by research? Or if an educator uses instructional practices that research has clearly demonstrated as being ineffective? Education is a field that is rife with such controversies. Several recent books (e.g., Berliner & Glass, 2014; Proctor et al., 2015) have explored some of these controversies in depth. Despite this, it has been our observation that there are some educational practices that are widely used, despite there being ample evidence indicating their ineffectiveness. To put this into the current political context, it is important to note that debates have raged recently regarding both the content and instructional practices that schools should (and should not) be using. With regard to content, current debates have focused in particular on topics such as sex education, climate change, and race. Controversies also have been reignited with regard to the books that students should (and should not) be asked to read as part of the curriculum. This issue has received much media attention (e.g., this was recently covered by The New York Times). But current debates have focused not just on the content that is taught, but also on the types of instructional practices that educators use. For example, in some communities, instructional practices that focus on nurturing socioemotional outcomes are under attack (Prothero & Blad, 2021). As editors of Theory into Practice, we decided to devote an issue of the journal to an exploration of the research behind some contemporary controversial issues that are alive and well in schools. Rather than deciding on the issues that we deemed as relevant, we developed a call for proposals for articles for a special issue of the journal focusing on contemporary controversies in education. We put out an open call and disseminated it widely. In the end, we received an extraordinary number of extremely high-quality proposals. Given the quality of the proposals and the potential implications of the articles in positively impacting policy and practice, we decided to devote two issues of the journal to these articles. Thus we are delighted that the summer 2022 issue includes the first set of these articles.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48177,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theory Into Practice\",\"volume\":\"42 1\",\"pages\":\"251 - 253\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theory Into Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2022.2096371\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory Into Practice","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2022.2096371","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

大多数人如果知道他们的医生使用的医疗方法是方便和容易实施的,但实际上没有研究支持,他们会非常不舒服。如果我们意识到这种行为,我们中的许多人很可能会寻求第二意见。但是,如果一个教育工作者使用的是没有经过研究的教学实践,情况是否也一样呢?或者如果一个教育者使用的教学实践,研究已经清楚地证明是无效的?教育是一个充满争议的领域。最近出版的几本著作(例如,《柏林人与玻璃》,2014年;Proctor等人,2015)深入探讨了其中的一些争议。尽管如此,据我们观察,有一些教育实践被广泛使用,尽管有充分的证据表明它们无效。在当前的政治背景下,重要的是要注意到,最近关于学校应该(或不应该)使用的内容和教学实践的辩论正在激烈进行。在内容方面,目前的争论主要集中在性教育、气候变化和种族等话题上。关于哪些书应该(或不应该)被要求作为课程的一部分来阅读,争论也被重新点燃。这个问题受到了媒体的广泛关注(例如,《纽约时报》最近就报道了这个问题)。但目前的争论不仅集中在教学内容上,还集中在教育者使用的教学实践类型上。例如,在一些社区,注重培养社会情感结果的教学实践受到了攻击(Prothero & Blad, 2021)。作为《从理论到实践》杂志的编辑,我们决定用一期杂志来探索一些当代学校中存在的、有争议的问题背后的研究。我们并没有决定那些我们认为相关的问题,而是为该杂志的一期专刊征集文章,重点关注当代教育领域的争议。我们公开征集并广泛传播。最后,我们收到了大量高质量的提案。鉴于这些建议的质量以及这些文章对政策和实践产生积极影响的潜在影响,我们决定用两期杂志来刊登这些文章。因此,我们很高兴2022年夏季刊包含了这些文章的第一套。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Confronting contemporary controversies in education
Most individuals would be extremely uncomfortable if they learned that their medical doctor was using medical practices that were convenient and easily implemented, but not actually supported by research. Many of us would quite likely seek a second opinion if we became aware of such behavior. But can the same be said of an educator who uses instructional practices that are not informed by research? Or if an educator uses instructional practices that research has clearly demonstrated as being ineffective? Education is a field that is rife with such controversies. Several recent books (e.g., Berliner & Glass, 2014; Proctor et al., 2015) have explored some of these controversies in depth. Despite this, it has been our observation that there are some educational practices that are widely used, despite there being ample evidence indicating their ineffectiveness. To put this into the current political context, it is important to note that debates have raged recently regarding both the content and instructional practices that schools should (and should not) be using. With regard to content, current debates have focused in particular on topics such as sex education, climate change, and race. Controversies also have been reignited with regard to the books that students should (and should not) be asked to read as part of the curriculum. This issue has received much media attention (e.g., this was recently covered by The New York Times). But current debates have focused not just on the content that is taught, but also on the types of instructional practices that educators use. For example, in some communities, instructional practices that focus on nurturing socioemotional outcomes are under attack (Prothero & Blad, 2021). As editors of Theory into Practice, we decided to devote an issue of the journal to an exploration of the research behind some contemporary controversial issues that are alive and well in schools. Rather than deciding on the issues that we deemed as relevant, we developed a call for proposals for articles for a special issue of the journal focusing on contemporary controversies in education. We put out an open call and disseminated it widely. In the end, we received an extraordinary number of extremely high-quality proposals. Given the quality of the proposals and the potential implications of the articles in positively impacting policy and practice, we decided to devote two issues of the journal to these articles. Thus we are delighted that the summer 2022 issue includes the first set of these articles.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Theory Into Practice
Theory Into Practice EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
3.10%
发文量
41
期刊介绍: Published since 1962, Theory Into Practice (TIP) is a nationally recognized, peer reviewed journal featuring multiple perspectives and scholarly, yet practical and engaging, discussions of important issues in education. TIP publishes articles covering all levels and areas of education, including learning and teaching; counseling; assessment; teacher education and professional development; classroom management; administration and supervision; curriculum; policy; and technology. Each issue of TIP is devoted to a timely theme developed by a Guest Editor who has expertise in the theme area.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信