欢迎访问《北京师范大学学报》(社会科学版),今天是

北京师范大学学报(社会科学版) ›› 2018, Vol. 0 ›› Issue (3): 28-40.

• 教育论坛 • 上一篇    下一篇

核心素养的边界与限度——一种比较分析

马健生, 李洋   

  1. 北京师范大学 国际与比较教育研究院,北京 100875
  • 收稿日期:2018-02-01 出版日期:2018-05-25 发布日期:2019-06-21
  • 基金资助:
    北京市社科基金重大项目“国际大都市基础教育质量比较研究”(17ZDA18)

The Boundaries and Limitations of Key Competences:A Comparative Analysis

MA Jian-sheng, LI Yang   

  1. Institute for International and Comparative Education,BNU,Beijing 100875,China
  • Received:2018-02-01 Online:2018-05-25 Published:2019-06-21

摘要: 核心素养是当前我国基础教育领域的主流话语,但是,不论理论研究还是实践工作,误解误用现象普遍,造成的混乱影响了其应有作用的发挥。通过将核心素养与国外使用的“key competences”进行比较发现,核心素养在逻辑、时空和教学等多个方面均跨越了“key competences”的边界和限度。首先,“competence”应为“胜任力”而非“素养”,中文使用者对“素养”望文生义,叠加了太多美好愿望而使核心素养突破了“key competences”本身的逻辑限度,同时也造成了其在逻辑视阈上的边界不清问题;其次,“key competences”本质上是时代更迭演进和职业领域变迁的结果,核心素养超越了“key competences”既有讨论的边界,突破了时间和空间的范畴;最后,“key competences”倡导跨学科教学模式,而由核心素养衍生出的学科核心素养概念却遵循一种学科逻辑,缺少学科间的融合互动,背离了“key competences”在教学实践上的限度。此外,就“key competences”理念本身而言,它在功能定位方面也存在一定的局限性,夸大了外部的职业需求而忽视了教育的本体诉求,致使“个人的全面发展”这一根本性的教育使命未能得到应有的彰显。

关键词: 核心素养, 胜任力, 学科核心素养, 个人的全面发展

Abstract: The “key competences”has been a mainstream discourse in the field of basic education in our country.However,whether it is in theoretical research or practical work,the misunderstanding and misuse of this concept is common,which has caused a lot of confusion,and even affected its function.By comparing the “key competences”used in China with the “key competences” used abroad,we found that the Chinese “key competences”crossed the boundaries and limitations of “key competences”itself in logic,time and space and teaching practice.Firstly,the “competence”should be translated as “Sheng Ren Li”rather than “Su Yang”:the Chinese educators interpreted it without real meaning and loaded it too many meanings to break the logic limit of the “key competences”itself,and it caused confusion in understanding the Chinese “key competences”.Secondly,the “key competences”is essentially the result of the change of times and the change of occupation fields,while the Chinese “key competences”has surpassed the boundary of “key competences” and broken through the scope of time and space.Finally yet importantly,the “key competences” advocates interdisciplinary teaching mode,while the concept of “the key competence of Discipline”derived from the Chinese “key competences”follows a disciplinary logic,lacking of interdisciplinary interaction and deviating from the limitation of the “key competences”in teaching practice.In addition,the “key competences”itself also has some limitations in terms of the function,which puts too much weight on the external occupational demand but ignores the internal demands of education,which resulted in an ineffective manifestation of the essential educational mission of “individual's full development”.

Key words: key competences, the key competences of discipline, individual's full development;

中图分类号: