文章标题:时代需要新思想
文章作者:霍韬晦
发表日期:2011年11月14日
发表媒体:《联合早报•言论》
最近一个月,大家都在谈论美国普罗群众“占领华尔街”(Occupy Wall Street)的示威活动。这个活动已经延续一个多月,最盛大的一天是在10月15日,全球共有80多个国家丶951个城市响应,香港也有数百人参与“占领中环”,发出的声音不容忽视。
首先,这个活动没有组织者、领导者,群众都是通过互联网自发参加,但却很有秩序,各种设备不缺。例如在示威广场除了架设帐幕、铺设床褥之外,还有食物站、通讯中心、图书中心、药房……似乎准备长期作战。当然,在金融区,也有一些激动的群众冲击银行,但并未演化为大规模的暴力,尚算理性。
这说明什么?说明示威者颇有共识,虽然参加者来自各阶层、各行业,甚至家庭主妇、嬉皮士,但都是心怀愤懑,深受委屈,把矛头直指向华尔街,似乎华尔街的金融巨鳄就是罪魁祸首。有了共同指控,大家就很容易团结,而且互相劝勉,不要让示威行动变质。
金融巨鳄只是少数,为甚么会成为社会大众的共同敌人?表面看,是因为金融银行经营不善(实际原因是掌权大鳄为了利益,设计种种金融产品愚弄客户,巧取豪夺),炒卖失败却要政府动用纳税人的钱来挽救它们。纳税人的钱早已用光,但大鳄们却如常收取巨额花红,这种不公平令人愤怒。据统计,美国最富有的400人去年所拥有的财产总值近1.5300万亿美元,但全国却有15%的美国人生活于贫穷线下,即4600多万人。金融海啸之后,美国失业人数大增,许多大学生毕业后都找不到工作。贫富悬殊,生活水准下降,前景不明,令人忧虑。现实上的不公,政府未有处理,反而对金融机构丶金融大鳄提供保护,所谓“大至不能倒”(too big to fail),群众不愤怒才怪!
华尔街控制全球经济命脉
这是资本主义吗?整个社会好像由掌握资本的人控制,连政府也受其支配,则资本主义所允诺的人的自由在哪里?人原来被蒙骗,前台与后台两副面孔。历史资料证明:金融集团一直在政治上兴风作浪,甚至与历年的国际战争都脱不了关系。如当年(1924-1931)华尔街的财阀不是向德国提供了1380亿马克的贷款的话,德国不可能在第一次世界大战战败后,以惊人的速度复兴,并装备出欧洲最强大的军事力量来(资料见宋鸿兵著《货币战争》第五章),结果爆发第二次世界大战。美国财阀为什么要这样做?就是为了发战争财吗?
中国辛亥革命初,革命军成立南京临时政府,孙中山就任大总统,立即面临财政问题,急需资金,于是向英、日等国财团洽商借贷。另一方面,袁世凯代表清廷末日皇朝宣称立宪政制,亦向外国借款。各国财团择肥而噬,开出种种条件,如要求抵押盐务、轮船招商局等,孙中山甚至考虑答应租让满洲给日本。袁世凯窃国后,更大举向日本借贷,其后继人段祺瑞更准备答应苛刻的“二十一条”,终于引起学生反抗,酿成“五四运动”。外国财团借债权人身份以控制别国命脉,这种历史事实太多。这是金钱殖民,尽管现在已是全球化时代,但金融巨鳄的这一思维并未改变。可悲的是:这种金钱至上的价值观念终于使奉行资本主义多年的本国人民也成为受害者。拿破仑说:“金钱没有祖国,银行家不知道何为爱国及高尚,他们唯一的目的就是获利。”今天再一次得到了证明。
资本主义最可贵的地方就是人可以凭藉其天赋与努力自由创造,人人都可以有机会。政府必须保护这一平等机制,但现在这个机会没有了,自由已经倾侧在金融巨鳄这一边。所以有意改变全球化的操作方式的诺贝尔经济学奖得主(2001年度)斯蒂格利茨(Joseph E. Stiglitz)批评说:这种方式(财阀与政府联手)并非资本主义,而且违反了经济学的最基本原则:公平。这样下去只有形成资本帝国,贫者愈贫,富者愈富,结果就是99% vs. 1%,那99%的人如何生活呢?这种全球化的掠夺根本就是伪善(hypocrisy of globalism),而并非使落后国家脱贫。斯蒂格利茨的话无疑就是此次“占领华尔街”行动的号角。
有人认为斯氏是资本主义中的左派,接近社会主义。亦有人认为:政府向金融机构注资包底是社会主义,为了政治因素而使他们免责,好像中国大陆的贪官,以后大家更没有风险意识,风险由全民承担了。
还有人认为:占领华尔街的人是“暴徒”,好像要发动“阶级战争”,利用群众来影响国策。这些话,真是南辕北辙,不只资本主义失去方向,美国社会也在分裂。
出现贫富两极、99% vs. 1%,究竟是资本主义、自由市场的自然发展,还是政府政策受金融机构捆缚有以致之?当面对群情汹涌、要求公平的时候,政府继续奉行市场原教旨主义还是要立例劫富济贫(占领华尔街的群众提出要征收罗宾汉税),让所有人都能过较好的生活?出于经济的考虑或许会赞成前者,但若出于政治的考虑便不能不询问99%的人怎么看。
历史证明,纯粹走社会主义的路只有贫困,但纯粹走资本主义的路也不见得公平。关键也许不在制度的严密,而在现实人性:人的自私基因若不能减弱,或不能被一个更高的价值理念化解,始终出问题。所谓上有政策,下有对策,在资本主义则化贪婪为动力,创造出丰富的物质文明,如今全球受害;社会主义要跃过贪婪而侈谈平等,亦是缘木求鱼,结果生产停滞。什么时候,人类才能明白问题原来在自己身上,只有正确面对贪婪,培养出高尚的人生观与价值观,才不致使自己落入那讨厌的1%!资本主义和社会主义的外向思维都已经穷途末路,时代需要新思想!一味通过制度或政策来管治社会,都不能免除毛病,距离公平愈来愈远。我认为只有把问题回到人自身上来审视,才能找到新的价值观念。
作者为新加坡东亚人文研究所所长,香港东方人文学院院长
Life Study Resource 是 Life Study Blog 的支流,延续着“终身学习生命学问”的宗旨,主要是收集了一些资料,作为生命学问的参考资源。博客的中文名为《人文资源》,可分为“人”、“文”两部分:“人物素描”收集了古今中外的人物简介,“文以载道”则收集了一些刊登在媒体刊物的文章。
Monday, November 14, 2011
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Stanford University Commencement Speech 2005
文章标题:Stanford University Commencement Speech 2005
文章作者:Steve Jobs
发表日期:2005年6月12日
发表媒体:Stanford University News
I am honored to be with you today at your commencement from one of the finest universities in the world. I never graduated from college. Truth be told, this is the closest I've ever gotten to a college graduation. Today I want to tell you three stories from my life. That's it. No big deal. Just three stories.
The first story is about connecting the dots.
I dropped out of Reed College after the first 6 months, but then stayed around as a drop-in for another 18 months or so before I really quit. So why did I drop out?
It started before I was born. My biological mother was a young, unwed college graduate student, and she decided to put me up for adoption. She felt very strongly that I should be adopted by college graduates, so everything was all set for me to be adopted at birth by a lawyer and his wife. Except that when I popped out they decided at the last minute that they really wanted a girl. So my parents, who were on a waiting list, got a call in the middle of the night asking: "We have an unexpected baby boy; do you want him?" They said: "Of course." My biological mother later found out that my mother had never graduated from college and that my father had never graduated from high school. She refused to sign the final adoption papers. She only relented a few months later when my parents promised that I would someday go to college.
And 17 years later I did go to college. But I naively chose a college that was almost as expensive as Stanford, and all of my working-class parents' savings were being spent on my college tuition. After six months, I couldn't see the value in it. I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life and no idea how college was going to help me figure it out. And here I was spending all of the money my parents had saved their entire life. So I decided to drop out and trust that it would all work out OK. It was pretty scary at the time, but looking back it was one of the best decisions I ever made. The minute I dropped out I could stop taking the required classes that didn't interest me, and begin dropping in on the ones that looked interesting.
It wasn't all romantic. I didn't have a dorm room, so I slept on the floor in friends' rooms, I returned coke bottles for the 5¢ deposits to buy food with, and I would walk the 7 miles across town every Sunday night to get one good meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple. I loved it. And much of what I stumbled into by following my curiosity and intuition turned out to be priceless later on. Let me give you one example:
Reed College at that time offered perhaps the best calligraphy instruction in the country. Throughout the campus every poster, every label on every drawer, was beautifully hand calligraphed. Because I had dropped out and didn't have to take the normal classes, I decided to take a calligraphy class to learn how to do this. I learned about serif and san serif typefaces, about varying the amount of space between different letter combinations, about what makes great typography great. It was beautiful, historical, artistically subtle in a way that science can't capture, and I found it fascinating.
None of this had even a hope of any practical application in my life. But ten years later, when we were designing the first Macintosh computer, it all came back to me. And we designed it all into the Mac. It was the first computer with beautiful typography. If I had never dropped in on that single course in college, the Mac would have never had multiple typefaces or proportionally spaced fonts. And since Windows just copied the Mac, it's likely that no personal computer would have them. If I had never dropped out, I would have never dropped in on this calligraphy class, and personal computers might not have the wonderful typography that they do. Of course it was impossible to connect the dots looking forward when I was in college. But it was very, very clear looking backwards ten years later.
Again, you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.
My second story is about love and loss.
I was lucky — I found what I loved to do early in life. Woz and I started Apple in my parents garage when I was 20. We worked hard, and in 10 years Apple had grown from just the two of us in a garage into a $2 billion company with over 4000 employees. We had just released our finest creation — the Macintosh — a year earlier, and I had just turned 30. And then I got fired. How can you get fired from a company you started? Well, as Apple grew we hired someone who I thought was very talented to run the company with me, and for the first year or so things went well. But then our visions of the future began to diverge and eventually we had a falling out. When we did, our Board of Directors sided with him. So at 30 I was out. And very publicly out. What had been the focus of my entire adult life was gone, and it was devastating.
I really didn't know what to do for a few months. I felt that I had let the previous generation of entrepreneurs down - that I had dropped the baton as it was being passed to me. I met with David Packard and Bob Noyce and tried to apologize for screwing up so badly. I was a very public failure, and I even thought about running away from the valley. But something slowly began to dawn on me — I still loved what I did. The turn of events at Apple had not changed that one bit. I had been rejected, but I was still in love. And so I decided to start over.
I didn't see it then, but it turned out that getting fired from Apple was the best thing that could have ever happened to me. The heaviness of being successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my life.
During the next five years, I started a company named NeXT, another company named Pixar, and fell in love with an amazing woman who would become my wife. Pixar went on to create the worlds first computer animated feature film, Toy Story, and is now the most successful animation studio in the world. In a remarkable turn of events, Apple bought NeXT, I returned to Apple, and the technology we developed at NeXT is at the heart of Apple's current renaissance. And Laurene and I have a wonderful family together.
I'm pretty sure none of this would have happened if I hadn't been fired from Apple. It was awful tasting medicine, but I guess the patient needed it. Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick. Don't lose faith. I'm convinced that the only thing that kept me going was that I loved what I did. You've got to find what you love. And that is as true for your work as it is for your lovers. Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle. As with all matters of the heart, you'll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don't settle.
My third story is about death.
When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: "If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right." It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?" And whenever the answer has been "No" for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.
Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything — all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure - these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.
About a year ago I was diagnosed with cancer. I had a scan at 7:30 in the morning, and it clearly showed a tumor on my pancreas. I didn't even know what a pancreas was. The doctors told me this was almost certainly a type of cancer that is incurable, and that I should expect to live no longer than three to six months. My doctor advised me to go home and get my affairs in order, which is doctor's code for prepare to die. It means to try to tell your kids everything you thought you'd have the next 10 years to tell them in just a few months. It means to make sure everything is buttoned up so that it will be as easy as possible for your family. It means to say your goodbyes.
I lived with that diagnosis all day. Later that evening I had a biopsy, where they stuck an endoscope down my throat, through my stomach and into my intestines, put a needle into my pancreas and got a few cells from the tumor. I was sedated, but my wife, who was there, told me that when they viewed the cells under a microscope the doctors started crying because it turned out to be a very rare form of pancreatic cancer that is curable with surgery. I had the surgery and I'm fine now.
This was the closest I've been to facing death, and I hope it's the closest I get for a few more decades. Having lived through it, I can now say this to you with a bit more certainty than when death was a useful but purely intellectual concept:
No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don't want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it. And that is as it should be, because Death is very likely the single best invention of Life. It is Life's change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new. Right now the new is you, but someday not too long from now, you will gradually become the old and be cleared away. Sorry to be so dramatic, but it is quite true.
Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.
When I was young, there was an amazing publication called The Whole Earth Catalog, which was one of the bibles of my generation. It was created by a fellow named Stewart Brand not far from here in Menlo Park, and he brought it to life with his poetic touch. This was in the late 1960's, before personal computers and desktop publishing, so it was all made with typewriters, scissors, and polaroid cameras. It was sort of like Google in paperback form, 35 years before Google came along: it was idealistic, and overflowing with neat tools and great notions.
Stewart and his team put out several issues of The Whole Earth Catalog, and then when it had run its course, they put out a final issue. It was the mid-1970s, and I was your age. On the back cover of their final issue was a photograph of an early morning country road, the kind you might find yourself hitchhiking on if you were so adventurous. Beneath it were the words: "Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish." It was their farewell message as they signed off. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish. And I have always wished that for myself. And now, as you graduate to begin anew, I wish that for you.
Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.
Thank you all very much.
文章作者:Steve Jobs
发表日期:2005年6月12日
发表媒体:Stanford University News
I am honored to be with you today at your commencement from one of the finest universities in the world. I never graduated from college. Truth be told, this is the closest I've ever gotten to a college graduation. Today I want to tell you three stories from my life. That's it. No big deal. Just three stories.
The first story is about connecting the dots.
I dropped out of Reed College after the first 6 months, but then stayed around as a drop-in for another 18 months or so before I really quit. So why did I drop out?
It started before I was born. My biological mother was a young, unwed college graduate student, and she decided to put me up for adoption. She felt very strongly that I should be adopted by college graduates, so everything was all set for me to be adopted at birth by a lawyer and his wife. Except that when I popped out they decided at the last minute that they really wanted a girl. So my parents, who were on a waiting list, got a call in the middle of the night asking: "We have an unexpected baby boy; do you want him?" They said: "Of course." My biological mother later found out that my mother had never graduated from college and that my father had never graduated from high school. She refused to sign the final adoption papers. She only relented a few months later when my parents promised that I would someday go to college.
And 17 years later I did go to college. But I naively chose a college that was almost as expensive as Stanford, and all of my working-class parents' savings were being spent on my college tuition. After six months, I couldn't see the value in it. I had no idea what I wanted to do with my life and no idea how college was going to help me figure it out. And here I was spending all of the money my parents had saved their entire life. So I decided to drop out and trust that it would all work out OK. It was pretty scary at the time, but looking back it was one of the best decisions I ever made. The minute I dropped out I could stop taking the required classes that didn't interest me, and begin dropping in on the ones that looked interesting.
It wasn't all romantic. I didn't have a dorm room, so I slept on the floor in friends' rooms, I returned coke bottles for the 5¢ deposits to buy food with, and I would walk the 7 miles across town every Sunday night to get one good meal a week at the Hare Krishna temple. I loved it. And much of what I stumbled into by following my curiosity and intuition turned out to be priceless later on. Let me give you one example:
Reed College at that time offered perhaps the best calligraphy instruction in the country. Throughout the campus every poster, every label on every drawer, was beautifully hand calligraphed. Because I had dropped out and didn't have to take the normal classes, I decided to take a calligraphy class to learn how to do this. I learned about serif and san serif typefaces, about varying the amount of space between different letter combinations, about what makes great typography great. It was beautiful, historical, artistically subtle in a way that science can't capture, and I found it fascinating.
None of this had even a hope of any practical application in my life. But ten years later, when we were designing the first Macintosh computer, it all came back to me. And we designed it all into the Mac. It was the first computer with beautiful typography. If I had never dropped in on that single course in college, the Mac would have never had multiple typefaces or proportionally spaced fonts. And since Windows just copied the Mac, it's likely that no personal computer would have them. If I had never dropped out, I would have never dropped in on this calligraphy class, and personal computers might not have the wonderful typography that they do. Of course it was impossible to connect the dots looking forward when I was in college. But it was very, very clear looking backwards ten years later.
Again, you can't connect the dots looking forward; you can only connect them looking backwards. So you have to trust that the dots will somehow connect in your future. You have to trust in something — your gut, destiny, life, karma, whatever. This approach has never let me down, and it has made all the difference in my life.
My second story is about love and loss.
I was lucky — I found what I loved to do early in life. Woz and I started Apple in my parents garage when I was 20. We worked hard, and in 10 years Apple had grown from just the two of us in a garage into a $2 billion company with over 4000 employees. We had just released our finest creation — the Macintosh — a year earlier, and I had just turned 30. And then I got fired. How can you get fired from a company you started? Well, as Apple grew we hired someone who I thought was very talented to run the company with me, and for the first year or so things went well. But then our visions of the future began to diverge and eventually we had a falling out. When we did, our Board of Directors sided with him. So at 30 I was out. And very publicly out. What had been the focus of my entire adult life was gone, and it was devastating.
I really didn't know what to do for a few months. I felt that I had let the previous generation of entrepreneurs down - that I had dropped the baton as it was being passed to me. I met with David Packard and Bob Noyce and tried to apologize for screwing up so badly. I was a very public failure, and I even thought about running away from the valley. But something slowly began to dawn on me — I still loved what I did. The turn of events at Apple had not changed that one bit. I had been rejected, but I was still in love. And so I decided to start over.
I didn't see it then, but it turned out that getting fired from Apple was the best thing that could have ever happened to me. The heaviness of being successful was replaced by the lightness of being a beginner again, less sure about everything. It freed me to enter one of the most creative periods of my life.
During the next five years, I started a company named NeXT, another company named Pixar, and fell in love with an amazing woman who would become my wife. Pixar went on to create the worlds first computer animated feature film, Toy Story, and is now the most successful animation studio in the world. In a remarkable turn of events, Apple bought NeXT, I returned to Apple, and the technology we developed at NeXT is at the heart of Apple's current renaissance. And Laurene and I have a wonderful family together.
I'm pretty sure none of this would have happened if I hadn't been fired from Apple. It was awful tasting medicine, but I guess the patient needed it. Sometimes life hits you in the head with a brick. Don't lose faith. I'm convinced that the only thing that kept me going was that I loved what I did. You've got to find what you love. And that is as true for your work as it is for your lovers. Your work is going to fill a large part of your life, and the only way to be truly satisfied is to do what you believe is great work. And the only way to do great work is to love what you do. If you haven't found it yet, keep looking. Don't settle. As with all matters of the heart, you'll know when you find it. And, like any great relationship, it just gets better and better as the years roll on. So keep looking until you find it. Don't settle.
My third story is about death.
When I was 17, I read a quote that went something like: "If you live each day as if it was your last, someday you'll most certainly be right." It made an impression on me, and since then, for the past 33 years, I have looked in the mirror every morning and asked myself: "If today were the last day of my life, would I want to do what I am about to do today?" And whenever the answer has been "No" for too many days in a row, I know I need to change something.
Remembering that I'll be dead soon is the most important tool I've ever encountered to help me make the big choices in life. Because almost everything — all external expectations, all pride, all fear of embarrassment or failure - these things just fall away in the face of death, leaving only what is truly important. Remembering that you are going to die is the best way I know to avoid the trap of thinking you have something to lose. You are already naked. There is no reason not to follow your heart.
About a year ago I was diagnosed with cancer. I had a scan at 7:30 in the morning, and it clearly showed a tumor on my pancreas. I didn't even know what a pancreas was. The doctors told me this was almost certainly a type of cancer that is incurable, and that I should expect to live no longer than three to six months. My doctor advised me to go home and get my affairs in order, which is doctor's code for prepare to die. It means to try to tell your kids everything you thought you'd have the next 10 years to tell them in just a few months. It means to make sure everything is buttoned up so that it will be as easy as possible for your family. It means to say your goodbyes.
I lived with that diagnosis all day. Later that evening I had a biopsy, where they stuck an endoscope down my throat, through my stomach and into my intestines, put a needle into my pancreas and got a few cells from the tumor. I was sedated, but my wife, who was there, told me that when they viewed the cells under a microscope the doctors started crying because it turned out to be a very rare form of pancreatic cancer that is curable with surgery. I had the surgery and I'm fine now.
This was the closest I've been to facing death, and I hope it's the closest I get for a few more decades. Having lived through it, I can now say this to you with a bit more certainty than when death was a useful but purely intellectual concept:
No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don't want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it. And that is as it should be, because Death is very likely the single best invention of Life. It is Life's change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new. Right now the new is you, but someday not too long from now, you will gradually become the old and be cleared away. Sorry to be so dramatic, but it is quite true.
Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life. Don't be trapped by dogma — which is living with the results of other people's thinking. Don't let the noise of others' opinions drown out your own inner voice. And most important, have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become. Everything else is secondary.
When I was young, there was an amazing publication called The Whole Earth Catalog, which was one of the bibles of my generation. It was created by a fellow named Stewart Brand not far from here in Menlo Park, and he brought it to life with his poetic touch. This was in the late 1960's, before personal computers and desktop publishing, so it was all made with typewriters, scissors, and polaroid cameras. It was sort of like Google in paperback form, 35 years before Google came along: it was idealistic, and overflowing with neat tools and great notions.
Stewart and his team put out several issues of The Whole Earth Catalog, and then when it had run its course, they put out a final issue. It was the mid-1970s, and I was your age. On the back cover of their final issue was a photograph of an early morning country road, the kind you might find yourself hitchhiking on if you were so adventurous. Beneath it were the words: "Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish." It was their farewell message as they signed off. Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish. And I have always wished that for myself. And now, as you graduate to begin anew, I wish that for you.
Stay Hungry. Stay Foolish.
Thank you all very much.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
芬兰的实质教育
文章标题:芬兰的实质教育
文章作者:陈俐颖
发表日期:2011年9月14日
发表媒体:《联合早报·言论》
9月4日星期天的《联合早报》,有一则潘星华记者关于芬兰的教育的采访报道。被访问的芬兰教授帕思·萨尔博格所简述的芬兰教育,相信不仅让笔者和许多读者非常感动,肯定也让许多积极追求排名、分数考绩的校长、老师、家长和学生们瞠目结舌,一时说不出话来。
芬兰对待教育的态度,不免让人深思。相比我所了解的荷兰教育,芬兰教育鼓励把竞争退后,着力推动教学,这简直是学子学习的天堂!荷兰教育也在学生上中学以前,不给予考试。重视启发学生的兴趣和悟性,推动学生对社会群体的关爱,对基本历史科学语言的认识与个人自我发掘,给予家长的教育报告书,跟芬兰一样,也是重视通过文字描述,对学生的心智、学习与操行进行评估。至于那个所谓全国水平测试,也非强制性的。这个测试一般权充探测学生的志向与能力,是配合学生在小学的报告书,让一些中学校长用以收生分班的参考资料。一些中学校长并不倚重这份一次性鉴定的测试,而更加重视学子接下来在初中的个人表现。芬兰的教育,直到上大学前才让学生参加水平鉴定考试,这是何许的宽容!
对于教育,请再次听一听帕思·萨尔博格教授怎么说:“我们不相信考试,不相信经常有校外统一考试是好的。学生读书12年,唯一的考试是在十八九岁,进大学前的高考。没有考试的学习生涯让教师和学生有更多时间学习他们爱学、想学的东西。我们的老师绝不因为考试而教课,学生也绝不因为考试而学习。我们的学校就是一个百分百快乐学习的场所。”
何谓教育?这就是教育。有教无类。而且,还拥抱一种慈爱关怀的态度,他说:“我们的想法是尽量延缓,不要太早给学生竞争。”
相信教师才能办好教育
何谓教育者?芬兰教育不比较、不评分的特色,师生一致。学校不只不给学生分等级,也不给教师无谓的评比和评分,不考核教师,也没有教师评鉴报告。芬兰的教育部官员会自信地说:“我们的老师,都一样好!”甚至还会反问:“评比教师的意义何在?”他们认为,如果一个社会体制对自己教师连最基本的信任都没有的话,那还谈什么教育呢?
不以学校名誉排名,因为他们非常自信,我们的每一所学校都是好学校。这是笔者最愿意看到的学习氛围。学校,本来就不应该分好学校,二等学校之类,一个国家,要对自己的办学非常有信心;家长对每个学校都有信心,这才是常态。
教育者不沾功利,清廉以志教育的决心去办教育。不评估教师是对教师的信任,不选举最佳来贬低其他教师,不对教师评估来羞辱他们的工作,不给家长学生任何鄙视教师的暗道,这才是常态啊!这不就是我们新加坡1980年代以前,曾经拥有公平对待教育者的态度吗?
萨尔博格说:“我们都明白除非学校有好老师,除非我们不断为教师提供专业培训和支援,除非社会重视教师的价值,否则教育改革是不会成功的。很多国家从行政方面来改革教育,甚至参考商界、企业界,把学校的运作变成公司般的运作,给予奖赏、惩罚等等,这种做法其实并不正确。”
这段话,有没有让目前在搞功利为先,教育为次的教育决策者汗颜,并且反省检讨?
如果教育决策者所办理的教育,没有了测验考试的分数评估,没有了对错的答案,没有了一个问题就一定要得到一个答案的问答教育手法,他们就无法推动教学,这样的教育决策者实在是不称职的。
芬兰的教育,是实质的教育,是深入人性,理解人性,启发人性的教育。芬兰为世人展现了教育的正轨本质是可行的,为世人展现了扶持学生学习的努力,也为世人展现了如何化解分数主义给社会带来的连锁压力、针对学生教育的失衡与分数功利的弊病。
假如你认为,必须以比较、以竞争、以考试才能推动教育,那么,你是个不明白什么是教育的教育决策者。你从一开始就无法相信学生有他们对万物的好奇心,无法信任你的学生有自动学习的推动力,无法用温和的手法去传授知识。请问,你如何跟学生合作,把学识传授下去?
芬兰的教育重视“必须在一个和人温情合作的环境中培养起来,而不是在一个残酷的竞争环境里培养出来。”这也是笔者非常欣赏的办学态度。学子纯真的心灵需要大人的正确指引,而非在过度分数主义的激烈竞争环境中成长。办学的目的,是培养品德操行,启发智慧知识。过度分数功利竞争的教育,只会直接毁害童心的纯良。今天,许多亚洲国家的儿童望向学校的门槛时,有多少会有快乐上学的心情?大量的作业把他们压得喘不过气来。小学生的学习,已经像是变成一条牛搬货物那样的苦劳。
芬兰教育的成功是值得我们借鉴学习的。但愿那些在苦海里浮沉的学子与未来的学子,能得到这类人性关怀的教育手法;而不是校长老师家长怕输型的、大量作业攻势的填鸭式教育。
作者是本地自由撰稿人
文章作者:陈俐颖
发表日期:2011年9月14日
发表媒体:《联合早报·言论》
9月4日星期天的《联合早报》,有一则潘星华记者关于芬兰的教育的采访报道。被访问的芬兰教授帕思·萨尔博格所简述的芬兰教育,相信不仅让笔者和许多读者非常感动,肯定也让许多积极追求排名、分数考绩的校长、老师、家长和学生们瞠目结舌,一时说不出话来。
芬兰对待教育的态度,不免让人深思。相比我所了解的荷兰教育,芬兰教育鼓励把竞争退后,着力推动教学,这简直是学子学习的天堂!荷兰教育也在学生上中学以前,不给予考试。重视启发学生的兴趣和悟性,推动学生对社会群体的关爱,对基本历史科学语言的认识与个人自我发掘,给予家长的教育报告书,跟芬兰一样,也是重视通过文字描述,对学生的心智、学习与操行进行评估。至于那个所谓全国水平测试,也非强制性的。这个测试一般权充探测学生的志向与能力,是配合学生在小学的报告书,让一些中学校长用以收生分班的参考资料。一些中学校长并不倚重这份一次性鉴定的测试,而更加重视学子接下来在初中的个人表现。芬兰的教育,直到上大学前才让学生参加水平鉴定考试,这是何许的宽容!
对于教育,请再次听一听帕思·萨尔博格教授怎么说:“我们不相信考试,不相信经常有校外统一考试是好的。学生读书12年,唯一的考试是在十八九岁,进大学前的高考。没有考试的学习生涯让教师和学生有更多时间学习他们爱学、想学的东西。我们的老师绝不因为考试而教课,学生也绝不因为考试而学习。我们的学校就是一个百分百快乐学习的场所。”
何谓教育?这就是教育。有教无类。而且,还拥抱一种慈爱关怀的态度,他说:“我们的想法是尽量延缓,不要太早给学生竞争。”
相信教师才能办好教育
何谓教育者?芬兰教育不比较、不评分的特色,师生一致。学校不只不给学生分等级,也不给教师无谓的评比和评分,不考核教师,也没有教师评鉴报告。芬兰的教育部官员会自信地说:“我们的老师,都一样好!”甚至还会反问:“评比教师的意义何在?”他们认为,如果一个社会体制对自己教师连最基本的信任都没有的话,那还谈什么教育呢?
不以学校名誉排名,因为他们非常自信,我们的每一所学校都是好学校。这是笔者最愿意看到的学习氛围。学校,本来就不应该分好学校,二等学校之类,一个国家,要对自己的办学非常有信心;家长对每个学校都有信心,这才是常态。
教育者不沾功利,清廉以志教育的决心去办教育。不评估教师是对教师的信任,不选举最佳来贬低其他教师,不对教师评估来羞辱他们的工作,不给家长学生任何鄙视教师的暗道,这才是常态啊!这不就是我们新加坡1980年代以前,曾经拥有公平对待教育者的态度吗?
萨尔博格说:“我们都明白除非学校有好老师,除非我们不断为教师提供专业培训和支援,除非社会重视教师的价值,否则教育改革是不会成功的。很多国家从行政方面来改革教育,甚至参考商界、企业界,把学校的运作变成公司般的运作,给予奖赏、惩罚等等,这种做法其实并不正确。”
这段话,有没有让目前在搞功利为先,教育为次的教育决策者汗颜,并且反省检讨?
如果教育决策者所办理的教育,没有了测验考试的分数评估,没有了对错的答案,没有了一个问题就一定要得到一个答案的问答教育手法,他们就无法推动教学,这样的教育决策者实在是不称职的。
芬兰的教育,是实质的教育,是深入人性,理解人性,启发人性的教育。芬兰为世人展现了教育的正轨本质是可行的,为世人展现了扶持学生学习的努力,也为世人展现了如何化解分数主义给社会带来的连锁压力、针对学生教育的失衡与分数功利的弊病。
假如你认为,必须以比较、以竞争、以考试才能推动教育,那么,你是个不明白什么是教育的教育决策者。你从一开始就无法相信学生有他们对万物的好奇心,无法信任你的学生有自动学习的推动力,无法用温和的手法去传授知识。请问,你如何跟学生合作,把学识传授下去?
芬兰的教育重视“必须在一个和人温情合作的环境中培养起来,而不是在一个残酷的竞争环境里培养出来。”这也是笔者非常欣赏的办学态度。学子纯真的心灵需要大人的正确指引,而非在过度分数主义的激烈竞争环境中成长。办学的目的,是培养品德操行,启发智慧知识。过度分数功利竞争的教育,只会直接毁害童心的纯良。今天,许多亚洲国家的儿童望向学校的门槛时,有多少会有快乐上学的心情?大量的作业把他们压得喘不过气来。小学生的学习,已经像是变成一条牛搬货物那样的苦劳。
芬兰教育的成功是值得我们借鉴学习的。但愿那些在苦海里浮沉的学子与未来的学子,能得到这类人性关怀的教育手法;而不是校长老师家长怕输型的、大量作业攻势的填鸭式教育。
作者是本地自由撰稿人
萨尔博格教授:芬兰教育不相信考试
文章标题:萨尔博格教授:芬兰教育不相信考试
文章作者:潘星华
发表日期:2011年9月4日
发表媒体:《联合早报•新闻》
我们不相信考试,不相信经常有校外统一考试是好的。学生读书12年,唯一的考试是在十八九岁,进大学前的高考。没有考试的学习生涯让教师和学生有更多时间学习他们爱学、想学的东西。
我们的老师绝不因为考试而教课,学生也绝不因为考试而学习。我们的学校就是一个百分百快乐学习的场所。
我们教育制度的优点是把合作而非竞争的精神植入其内。我们不怕学生日后会对充满竞争的社会感到恐慌。我们相信俄罗斯一心理学家说:“学生今天学会合作,明天就有竞争能力。”我们相信只要学校教会学生如何合作共享,他日学生就有办法竞争。
——芬兰教授帕思•萨尔博格应邀到新加坡演讲。(郑民达摄)
过去十年,芬兰有两方面值得骄傲,一是诺基亚手机,一是教育。自从苹果iPhone以横扫千军的姿态面世后,诺基亚的光芒消失了,可是芬兰式教育,还是引起世界关注。
这个学生假期多、上课时数少、没有补习、没有额外补课、没有排名次、没有考试、没有压力的北欧小国,过去十年在经济合作发展组织(OECD)每三年举办一次的“国际学生评估”(Programme for International Student Assessment,简称PISA)中,数学、科学、阅读的能力一直名列前茅,让人百思不解。
芬兰能在PISA独占鳌头,连芬兰人也感到意外。因为他们从不强调排名,教师只尽心把每个学生教好。
让芬兰人感到最高兴的是,各国教育界人士纷纷到芬兰取经,连带也带动了芬兰的旅游业。
近日,以研究教育与发展见长的芬兰教授帕思•萨尔博格(Pasi Sahlberg)应邀到新加坡,在一项有关幼儿教育的领导论坛上发表主题演讲。他接受本报记者的专访,畅谈了芬兰教育与众不同之处。
芬兰法律规定,学生在六年级之前,都不能以等级或分数来评断他们。
对分流考试习以为常的新加坡记者而言,听到芬兰教授帕思•萨尔博格(51岁)的这一席话,受到的震惊是不言而喻的。
萨尔博格说:“当教师要评断某个学生的能力和表现时,我们要求用文字描述,详细说明,而不是简单地用分数或等级来评断。因为每个孩子各有所长,教师只有通过种种活动来了解学生,发掘他们的潜力。”
上世纪70年代以前,芬兰学校还称不上是教育的典范。当时它和许多国家一样,学生10岁时,就按考试成绩分班,一种是普通班,一种是职业教育班,分班决定了学童的未来。这像足了新加坡的分流制度。
废除校内外统一考试
萨尔博格说:“我们当时有等级,从4至10,4是不及格,10是最高分。我们看到小学生用等级互相比对,立刻知道自己不及人,或者比人强。班级里按学生的能力分出不同的组别,大家互相比较,我们认为这是不好的,因为每个人的能力和表现都不同。就如我们不能像考大象、企鹅和猴子爬树的技巧那样,它们的能力各异,用标准化的爬树考试来衡量它们的能力是很荒谬的。所以,我们决定废除等级,让教师和学生从此不再以分数来划分等级。很快地教师觉得这样做很好,这就改变了学习的气氛,他们更互相合作,并加强了凝聚力。”
为了在瞬息万变的世界经济体系中立足,芬兰彻底检讨了教育制度,废除了等级,也废除标准化的校内和校外统一考试。
他说:“我们不相信考试,不相信经常有校外统一考试是好的。学生读书12年,唯一的考试是在十八九岁,进大学前的高考。没有考试的学习生涯让教师和学生有更多时间学习他们爱学、想学的东西。我们的老师绝不因为考试而教课,学生也绝不因为考试而学习。我们的学校就是一个百分百快乐学习的场所。”
合作比竞争更重要
在一个没有比较,没有竞争,没有考试的环境里,学生缺乏了推动力,怎么办?
有各种能力评估方法
萨尔博格说:“学生进大学前,是有入学考试的,竞争也很激烈。我们的想法是尽量延缓,不要太早给学生竞争。我知道在亚洲学校之间的竞争很激烈,这些竞争来自教师、家长、学生,大家都在互相比较。我们不要这样。我们要灌输‘合作比竞争更重要’的精神。尤其在学前、中小学,更要营造一个没有竞争的氛围。虽然没有统一考试,但在学校、在课室,有各种各样的能力评估方法。
“我们教育制度的优点,就是把合作而非竞争的精神植入其内。我们不怕学生毕业离开学校时会对充满竞争的现实社会感到恐慌无助。我们相信俄罗斯一位心理学家说:‘学生今天学会合作,明天就有竞争能力’。我们相信只要学校教会学生如何合作、共享,他日学生就有办法竞争。”
从合作中学习竞争
为什么懂得合作就懂得竞争呢?
他说:“竞争首先要‘知己知彼’,认识自己,再认识对方。认识自己,对自己有信心;认识对方,了解对方的优劣,通常都是在和人合作的过程中学到,并在合作的过程中互比高下,这样就发展出竞争的能力。世界是充满竞争,但如何适应这个竞争世界,我们认为不应该从竞争里学习竞争,而是从合作中学习竞争。
“一个人的创新能力,正是在高度竞争的社会中求存的素质。这个能力从开动自己的想象力,具备开放的冒险精神而来。这个素质,必须在一个和人温情合作的环境中培养起来,而不是在一个残酷的竞争环境里培养出来。太竞争的环境,人们为了保持自己的最佳状态,都不愿分享,也不愿冒险,如何能有创新力?所以,我们要教学生互相学习,互相分享,才能互相激荡出新的点子。”
无论谁当政 芬兰人的教育美梦都不变
芬兰教育的成功和芬兰人在上世纪70年代创造了一个正确的美梦有关。无论谁当政,这个梦都不会改变。
帕思•萨尔博格说:“过去40年,芬兰幸运的是有着持续性的教育发展,不受政府更迭影响,不像其他国家,换了政府,换了总统,就什么都换了。我们的教育理想,自三四十年前建立后,就像一个共同追求的美梦,大家都有了共识,不论什么政党上台,都不会改变它。 “我们的梦在上世纪六七十年代提出来,就是要给每个孩子一个好的公立学校学额,就像美国前总统肯尼迪的美梦是要美国人踏上月球那样,我们要给每个学生平等受教育的机会,从学前教育到终生教育都有平等机会。我们没有私立学校,只有自主学校,这些自主学校也是政府公费支付的。
“我们认为美梦必须正确是很重要的,不是很多国家能够做到这点。我们的美梦有启发性,能激动人心,又极为清晰。”
中小学数量是新加坡的10倍
这个“平等”的理念,经过30年,已经在芬兰各方面落实,能力最强与最弱学生之间的差异在经济合作发展组织(OECD)国家或经济体中最低,学生家长的社会经济地位对学生表现的影响最小,学校与学校之间的差异也是最小的。芬兰的学校在学生10岁之前没有淘汰机制,所有学生都享有平等的教育机会。在不到500万人口的芬兰,九年中小学基础教育的学校超过3500所,几乎是新加坡的10倍。
为了实现为每个孩子提供最好的平等教育,芬兰教育部致力聘请有奉献精神,有强烈专业道德的好老师,并给予最好的培训,确保他们把学生教好。
教师也不考核不评比
萨尔博格说:“芬兰和新加坡都很重视教师。我们都明白除非学校有好老师,除非我们不断为教师提供专业培训和支援,除非社会重视教师的价值,否则教育改革是不会成功的。很多国家从行政方面来改革教育,甚至参考商界、企业界,把学校的运作变成公司般的运作,给予奖赏、惩罚等等,这种做法其实并不正确。”
芬兰对教师的学历要求很高,教育法规定,所有学前教育、义务教育、高等教育、成人教育的教师,都必须具备硕士以上学历,并通过教师资格考试,才能申请成为老师。大学里专门培养小学导师的学系平均录取率只有10%,被录取的未来教师都是表现最优异的一群,具备多种才能,以及强烈的教育使命。
芬兰教育不比较、不评分的特色,师生一致。学校不只不给学生分等级,也不给教师无谓的评比和评分,不考核教师,也没有教师评鉴报告。
教育部的官员会说:“我们的老师,都一样好!”甚至还会反问:“评比教师的意义何在?”他们认为如果一个社会体制对自己教师的最基本信任都没有的话,那还谈什么教育呢?
一个从来不要师生抢第一、争第一的国家,突然间成绩被国际评为第一的时候,萨尔博格说:“这绝对不是我们改革教育的目标。我们让学生轻松学习,快乐学习,制造‘创新、创意’出现的空间。我们要成为最有创意的国家。我们不要靠学术科目的成绩取胜,我们要靠创新能力取胜。”
文章作者:潘星华
发表日期:2011年9月4日
发表媒体:《联合早报•新闻》
我们不相信考试,不相信经常有校外统一考试是好的。学生读书12年,唯一的考试是在十八九岁,进大学前的高考。没有考试的学习生涯让教师和学生有更多时间学习他们爱学、想学的东西。
我们的老师绝不因为考试而教课,学生也绝不因为考试而学习。我们的学校就是一个百分百快乐学习的场所。
我们教育制度的优点是把合作而非竞争的精神植入其内。我们不怕学生日后会对充满竞争的社会感到恐慌。我们相信俄罗斯一心理学家说:“学生今天学会合作,明天就有竞争能力。”我们相信只要学校教会学生如何合作共享,他日学生就有办法竞争。
——芬兰教授帕思•萨尔博格应邀到新加坡演讲。(郑民达摄)
过去十年,芬兰有两方面值得骄傲,一是诺基亚手机,一是教育。自从苹果iPhone以横扫千军的姿态面世后,诺基亚的光芒消失了,可是芬兰式教育,还是引起世界关注。
这个学生假期多、上课时数少、没有补习、没有额外补课、没有排名次、没有考试、没有压力的北欧小国,过去十年在经济合作发展组织(OECD)每三年举办一次的“国际学生评估”(Programme for International Student Assessment,简称PISA)中,数学、科学、阅读的能力一直名列前茅,让人百思不解。
芬兰能在PISA独占鳌头,连芬兰人也感到意外。因为他们从不强调排名,教师只尽心把每个学生教好。
让芬兰人感到最高兴的是,各国教育界人士纷纷到芬兰取经,连带也带动了芬兰的旅游业。
近日,以研究教育与发展见长的芬兰教授帕思•萨尔博格(Pasi Sahlberg)应邀到新加坡,在一项有关幼儿教育的领导论坛上发表主题演讲。他接受本报记者的专访,畅谈了芬兰教育与众不同之处。
芬兰法律规定,学生在六年级之前,都不能以等级或分数来评断他们。
对分流考试习以为常的新加坡记者而言,听到芬兰教授帕思•萨尔博格(51岁)的这一席话,受到的震惊是不言而喻的。
萨尔博格说:“当教师要评断某个学生的能力和表现时,我们要求用文字描述,详细说明,而不是简单地用分数或等级来评断。因为每个孩子各有所长,教师只有通过种种活动来了解学生,发掘他们的潜力。”
上世纪70年代以前,芬兰学校还称不上是教育的典范。当时它和许多国家一样,学生10岁时,就按考试成绩分班,一种是普通班,一种是职业教育班,分班决定了学童的未来。这像足了新加坡的分流制度。
芬兰的孩子在假期多、课时少、没有考试、没有压力的环境中快乐成长。(百度网)
废除校内外统一考试
萨尔博格说:“我们当时有等级,从4至10,4是不及格,10是最高分。我们看到小学生用等级互相比对,立刻知道自己不及人,或者比人强。班级里按学生的能力分出不同的组别,大家互相比较,我们认为这是不好的,因为每个人的能力和表现都不同。就如我们不能像考大象、企鹅和猴子爬树的技巧那样,它们的能力各异,用标准化的爬树考试来衡量它们的能力是很荒谬的。所以,我们决定废除等级,让教师和学生从此不再以分数来划分等级。很快地教师觉得这样做很好,这就改变了学习的气氛,他们更互相合作,并加强了凝聚力。”
为了在瞬息万变的世界经济体系中立足,芬兰彻底检讨了教育制度,废除了等级,也废除标准化的校内和校外统一考试。
他说:“我们不相信考试,不相信经常有校外统一考试是好的。学生读书12年,唯一的考试是在十八九岁,进大学前的高考。没有考试的学习生涯让教师和学生有更多时间学习他们爱学、想学的东西。我们的老师绝不因为考试而教课,学生也绝不因为考试而学习。我们的学校就是一个百分百快乐学习的场所。”
合作比竞争更重要
在一个没有比较,没有竞争,没有考试的环境里,学生缺乏了推动力,怎么办?
有各种能力评估方法
萨尔博格说:“学生进大学前,是有入学考试的,竞争也很激烈。我们的想法是尽量延缓,不要太早给学生竞争。我知道在亚洲学校之间的竞争很激烈,这些竞争来自教师、家长、学生,大家都在互相比较。我们不要这样。我们要灌输‘合作比竞争更重要’的精神。尤其在学前、中小学,更要营造一个没有竞争的氛围。虽然没有统一考试,但在学校、在课室,有各种各样的能力评估方法。
“我们教育制度的优点,就是把合作而非竞争的精神植入其内。我们不怕学生毕业离开学校时会对充满竞争的现实社会感到恐慌无助。我们相信俄罗斯一位心理学家说:‘学生今天学会合作,明天就有竞争能力’。我们相信只要学校教会学生如何合作、共享,他日学生就有办法竞争。”
从合作中学习竞争
为什么懂得合作就懂得竞争呢?
他说:“竞争首先要‘知己知彼’,认识自己,再认识对方。认识自己,对自己有信心;认识对方,了解对方的优劣,通常都是在和人合作的过程中学到,并在合作的过程中互比高下,这样就发展出竞争的能力。世界是充满竞争,但如何适应这个竞争世界,我们认为不应该从竞争里学习竞争,而是从合作中学习竞争。
“一个人的创新能力,正是在高度竞争的社会中求存的素质。这个能力从开动自己的想象力,具备开放的冒险精神而来。这个素质,必须在一个和人温情合作的环境中培养起来,而不是在一个残酷的竞争环境里培养出来。太竞争的环境,人们为了保持自己的最佳状态,都不愿分享,也不愿冒险,如何能有创新力?所以,我们要教学生互相学习,互相分享,才能互相激荡出新的点子。”
无论谁当政 芬兰人的教育美梦都不变
芬兰教育的成功和芬兰人在上世纪70年代创造了一个正确的美梦有关。无论谁当政,这个梦都不会改变。
帕思•萨尔博格说:“过去40年,芬兰幸运的是有着持续性的教育发展,不受政府更迭影响,不像其他国家,换了政府,换了总统,就什么都换了。我们的教育理想,自三四十年前建立后,就像一个共同追求的美梦,大家都有了共识,不论什么政党上台,都不会改变它。 “我们的梦在上世纪六七十年代提出来,就是要给每个孩子一个好的公立学校学额,就像美国前总统肯尼迪的美梦是要美国人踏上月球那样,我们要给每个学生平等受教育的机会,从学前教育到终生教育都有平等机会。我们没有私立学校,只有自主学校,这些自主学校也是政府公费支付的。
“我们认为美梦必须正确是很重要的,不是很多国家能够做到这点。我们的美梦有启发性,能激动人心,又极为清晰。”
中小学数量是新加坡的10倍
这个“平等”的理念,经过30年,已经在芬兰各方面落实,能力最强与最弱学生之间的差异在经济合作发展组织(OECD)国家或经济体中最低,学生家长的社会经济地位对学生表现的影响最小,学校与学校之间的差异也是最小的。芬兰的学校在学生10岁之前没有淘汰机制,所有学生都享有平等的教育机会。在不到500万人口的芬兰,九年中小学基础教育的学校超过3500所,几乎是新加坡的10倍。
为了实现为每个孩子提供最好的平等教育,芬兰教育部致力聘请有奉献精神,有强烈专业道德的好老师,并给予最好的培训,确保他们把学生教好。
教师也不考核不评比
萨尔博格说:“芬兰和新加坡都很重视教师。我们都明白除非学校有好老师,除非我们不断为教师提供专业培训和支援,除非社会重视教师的价值,否则教育改革是不会成功的。很多国家从行政方面来改革教育,甚至参考商界、企业界,把学校的运作变成公司般的运作,给予奖赏、惩罚等等,这种做法其实并不正确。”
芬兰对教师的学历要求很高,教育法规定,所有学前教育、义务教育、高等教育、成人教育的教师,都必须具备硕士以上学历,并通过教师资格考试,才能申请成为老师。大学里专门培养小学导师的学系平均录取率只有10%,被录取的未来教师都是表现最优异的一群,具备多种才能,以及强烈的教育使命。
芬兰教育不比较、不评分的特色,师生一致。学校不只不给学生分等级,也不给教师无谓的评比和评分,不考核教师,也没有教师评鉴报告。
教育部的官员会说:“我们的老师,都一样好!”甚至还会反问:“评比教师的意义何在?”他们认为如果一个社会体制对自己教师的最基本信任都没有的话,那还谈什么教育呢?
一个从来不要师生抢第一、争第一的国家,突然间成绩被国际评为第一的时候,萨尔博格说:“这绝对不是我们改革教育的目标。我们让学生轻松学习,快乐学习,制造‘创新、创意’出现的空间。我们要成为最有创意的国家。我们不要靠学术科目的成绩取胜,我们要靠创新能力取胜。”
Thursday, August 18, 2011
学校真的了解品格教育吗?
文章标题:学校真的了解品格教育吗?
文章作者:沈裕生
发表日期:2011年8月18日
发表媒体:《联合早报•言论》
近日看到那么多针对改进教育政策的回响,笔者是一则以喜,一则以忧。喜的是许多人都看到了当今教育体系的偏差,并且提出了不少的改革建议;忧的是,教育是大课题,问题很容易看到,但是要如何解决其实非常不简单。除非我们能对教育的本质有深入的了解,否则一番改革之后,很可能只是劳民伤财,不会看到什么效果。
对于当今的教育环境,笔者看到了两大问题。第一是,教育部乃至校长与老师,真的对品格教育了解吗?好的品格教育不是讲一些道理,设计一些教案,谈一些课题,搞一些活动就可以了。就比如种族和谐日,许多学校都鼓励老师与学生穿异族的传统服装,以表示对其他种族的接受与包容,或者摆摊展示不同种族的文化与物品,让大家对异族文化有多点认识。
这些其实都是很外在与表面的功夫。人与人之间的和谐,最重要是靠我们有一颗开放的心,能够感受到别人的挣扎,感受到别人求好的心,并且懂得自我反省,承担责任。如果老师自己的生命不够成熟的话,是不会有能力去开发孩子的心,引导他、启发他,并且解开他的心结的;因为品格教育其实是一种所谓“生命接引生命”的学问。
所以,如果教育部乃至校长、老师、父母真的明白品格教育的重要性,那么,自己有努力提升自己的品格吗?自己懂得如何提升自己的品格吗?还是我们做大人的只是一味地要求孩子提升他的品格,自己却满足于现状,甚至一天比一天退步都不知道,所谓“学如逆水行舟,不进则退。”孩子有缺点要改进,自己难道没有吗?孩子的缺点需要改进,自己的难道不需要吗?这就是“见不贤,内自省也”的含义。
当你自己进步了,品格提升了,你才对品格教育有所体会,并且真正明白它的重要性。你自己懂得提升自己品格的时候,你才懂得如何帮孩子提升他的品格。不然你只是在空讲道理,是不会有什么效果的;因为孩子也有他的道理,所谓“公说公有理,婆说婆有理”。
今年6月的学校假期,笔者参与的文化教育团体为中学生举办了一个锻炼营,其中有几位来自名校的学生。从家长的口中知道了他们也有一般青少年的毛病,如沉迷电脑,缺乏自律,对长辈没礼貌等等。其中有一位在体育方面表现非常的优秀,赢了许多冠军奖杯。有一次参加学校举办的露营回家后,就把整包露营用的肮脏衣物和用品丢给女佣去收拾。妈妈觉得他应该自己收拾,他就推说自己很累。妈妈就叫他先休息,休息后才去收拾。怎么知道他却丢出一句话,“你怎么当妈妈的,帮孩子一下都不可以”,气得妈妈七窍生烟。
品格教育其实是生命的教育
对这几位在名校就读的孩子的父母,我跟他们说:“你们知道吗,你们孩子就读的这所学校,已经获得了教育部学校奖励计划总蓝图(MOE Masterplan of Awards for Schools)的最高荣誉奖——卓越学校奖(School Excellence Award),你们还能要求什么?”获得这个最高荣誉奖,表示该学校有非常突出的品格教育措施。但是,得了这么高的荣誉奖,为什么学生的品格还是好不到哪里去呢?关键就在,在品格教育方面,教育部只评估学校做了多少,但却没有评估学校的品格教育措施实施后,学生品格真实进步的效果。
其实,学生在品德教育测试题上能够写下标准答案,不等于他认同该答案或价值观。就算他认同该答案或价值观,也不等于他能够做得到。或者是他做得到,也不等于他是真心、真诚的。不是真心做出来的行为,都是假的;孔子所谓的“人而不仁,如礼何?”。试问,心的真诚与否只有他本人知道,怎么可能衡量得到呢?所以,学校的品格教育做得好不好,其实是衡量不到的。
除了品格教育的好坏无法量化之外,另外一个难处是教好学生的品格需要大家一起来努力,所以学生的品格如果不好,就不能归咎于某个老师的失责。因为这两个困难,就算我们聘请多一些行政人员,减少老师的行政负担,聘请多一倍的老师分担教育工作,老师空出来的时间与精力,最后都会趋向用来教能够量化并且有助于学校的排名,和用来证明自己个人表现的学术成绩。这就是我所谓的,劳民伤财但到最后仍旧看不到我们要的效果的意思。
所以,笔者看到当今教育环境的另一个大问题,就是我们误用了西方管理学大师彼得•杜拉克的理念:“你不能衡量它,就不能管理它”。我们误以为量化是用来管理学校、校长与老师的表现的唯一方法。我们看不到除了这个方法之外,还有什么其他方法,因为我们多数人对人、对人生、对生命其实并不很了解。如果我们想超越杜拉克的理念,解开这个紧箍咒,我们就必须努力地学习东方古老的智慧。远在大约4500年前的《易经》,对生命已经有很深入的了解。但是品格教育,也就是一种生命成长的教育,是个大课题,不是三言两语就能说透的。
在古代的中国,国君代表政统,国师代表道统。政统是从政治角度讲,道统是从文化立场讲。文化最深刻的是理想世界的思维、人类未来的走向的思考、人类对自己最高价值的了解、人类历史应该实现什么价值等等。所以,文化教育其实比政治管理重要。问题是,国君虽有决策的权力,但不一定有那么高的思想和学问,所以一定要找老师帮忙才行;而且必须是一个有落实能力的老师,不是一个只是懂得讲理论的老师。
作者是文化教育义务工作者
文章作者:沈裕生
发表日期:2011年8月18日
发表媒体:《联合早报•言论》
近日看到那么多针对改进教育政策的回响,笔者是一则以喜,一则以忧。喜的是许多人都看到了当今教育体系的偏差,并且提出了不少的改革建议;忧的是,教育是大课题,问题很容易看到,但是要如何解决其实非常不简单。除非我们能对教育的本质有深入的了解,否则一番改革之后,很可能只是劳民伤财,不会看到什么效果。
对于当今的教育环境,笔者看到了两大问题。第一是,教育部乃至校长与老师,真的对品格教育了解吗?好的品格教育不是讲一些道理,设计一些教案,谈一些课题,搞一些活动就可以了。就比如种族和谐日,许多学校都鼓励老师与学生穿异族的传统服装,以表示对其他种族的接受与包容,或者摆摊展示不同种族的文化与物品,让大家对异族文化有多点认识。
这些其实都是很外在与表面的功夫。人与人之间的和谐,最重要是靠我们有一颗开放的心,能够感受到别人的挣扎,感受到别人求好的心,并且懂得自我反省,承担责任。如果老师自己的生命不够成熟的话,是不会有能力去开发孩子的心,引导他、启发他,并且解开他的心结的;因为品格教育其实是一种所谓“生命接引生命”的学问。
所以,如果教育部乃至校长、老师、父母真的明白品格教育的重要性,那么,自己有努力提升自己的品格吗?自己懂得如何提升自己的品格吗?还是我们做大人的只是一味地要求孩子提升他的品格,自己却满足于现状,甚至一天比一天退步都不知道,所谓“学如逆水行舟,不进则退。”孩子有缺点要改进,自己难道没有吗?孩子的缺点需要改进,自己的难道不需要吗?这就是“见不贤,内自省也”的含义。
当你自己进步了,品格提升了,你才对品格教育有所体会,并且真正明白它的重要性。你自己懂得提升自己品格的时候,你才懂得如何帮孩子提升他的品格。不然你只是在空讲道理,是不会有什么效果的;因为孩子也有他的道理,所谓“公说公有理,婆说婆有理”。
今年6月的学校假期,笔者参与的文化教育团体为中学生举办了一个锻炼营,其中有几位来自名校的学生。从家长的口中知道了他们也有一般青少年的毛病,如沉迷电脑,缺乏自律,对长辈没礼貌等等。其中有一位在体育方面表现非常的优秀,赢了许多冠军奖杯。有一次参加学校举办的露营回家后,就把整包露营用的肮脏衣物和用品丢给女佣去收拾。妈妈觉得他应该自己收拾,他就推说自己很累。妈妈就叫他先休息,休息后才去收拾。怎么知道他却丢出一句话,“你怎么当妈妈的,帮孩子一下都不可以”,气得妈妈七窍生烟。
品格教育其实是生命的教育
对这几位在名校就读的孩子的父母,我跟他们说:“你们知道吗,你们孩子就读的这所学校,已经获得了教育部学校奖励计划总蓝图(MOE Masterplan of Awards for Schools)的最高荣誉奖——卓越学校奖(School Excellence Award),你们还能要求什么?”获得这个最高荣誉奖,表示该学校有非常突出的品格教育措施。但是,得了这么高的荣誉奖,为什么学生的品格还是好不到哪里去呢?关键就在,在品格教育方面,教育部只评估学校做了多少,但却没有评估学校的品格教育措施实施后,学生品格真实进步的效果。
其实,学生在品德教育测试题上能够写下标准答案,不等于他认同该答案或价值观。就算他认同该答案或价值观,也不等于他能够做得到。或者是他做得到,也不等于他是真心、真诚的。不是真心做出来的行为,都是假的;孔子所谓的“人而不仁,如礼何?”。试问,心的真诚与否只有他本人知道,怎么可能衡量得到呢?所以,学校的品格教育做得好不好,其实是衡量不到的。
除了品格教育的好坏无法量化之外,另外一个难处是教好学生的品格需要大家一起来努力,所以学生的品格如果不好,就不能归咎于某个老师的失责。因为这两个困难,就算我们聘请多一些行政人员,减少老师的行政负担,聘请多一倍的老师分担教育工作,老师空出来的时间与精力,最后都会趋向用来教能够量化并且有助于学校的排名,和用来证明自己个人表现的学术成绩。这就是我所谓的,劳民伤财但到最后仍旧看不到我们要的效果的意思。
所以,笔者看到当今教育环境的另一个大问题,就是我们误用了西方管理学大师彼得•杜拉克的理念:“你不能衡量它,就不能管理它”。我们误以为量化是用来管理学校、校长与老师的表现的唯一方法。我们看不到除了这个方法之外,还有什么其他方法,因为我们多数人对人、对人生、对生命其实并不很了解。如果我们想超越杜拉克的理念,解开这个紧箍咒,我们就必须努力地学习东方古老的智慧。远在大约4500年前的《易经》,对生命已经有很深入的了解。但是品格教育,也就是一种生命成长的教育,是个大课题,不是三言两语就能说透的。
在古代的中国,国君代表政统,国师代表道统。政统是从政治角度讲,道统是从文化立场讲。文化最深刻的是理想世界的思维、人类未来的走向的思考、人类对自己最高价值的了解、人类历史应该实现什么价值等等。所以,文化教育其实比政治管理重要。问题是,国君虽有决策的权力,但不一定有那么高的思想和学问,所以一定要找老师帮忙才行;而且必须是一个有落实能力的老师,不是一个只是懂得讲理论的老师。
作者是文化教育义务工作者
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

