Zhu Jiaxiong: What should preschool teachers do?

Preschool education expert Jef J. van Kuyk opened his speech at a seminar held in Jinan with the argument that \”education is a paradox.\” He said that whether we should \”protect children\” or \”let children take risks and make them tough and independent\”; whether we should \”keep close to vulnerable children\” or \”keep a distance from children and cultivate their control\” One\’s own abilities\”…Such a paradox leaves teachers and parents in a position to decide what to do, making it difficult for scholars and people from all walks of life to hold on to their own opinions and debate endlessly. 01 Kindergarten education is full of paradoxes. There are many paradoxes in compulsory education in my country. Professor Gu Mingyuan once proposed eight paradoxes in Chinese education. For example, in some places, on the one hand, they advocate quality education, and on the other hand, they put pressure on schools and teachers to achieve higher education rates; on the other hand, they stipulate that students’ academic burden should be reduced, and on the other hand, teachers arrange many family activities and even require Students and parents work together to complete this task, which makes many parents miserable. Compared with compulsory education, the paradox of kindergarten education is not \”inferior\”. Here are a few examples: on the one hand, the first-grade school education is required to have a \”zero starting point\” in order to seamlessly integrate with the relaxed kindergarten education; on the other hand, The requirements for the first-grade primary school curriculum have not been substantially reduced, but have been increased for various reasons. On the one hand, it emphasizes that games are the basic activities in kindergartens and pays no attention to teachers\’ teaching, or even weakens teaching; on the other hand, in the practice of kindergarten education, teachers all teach children in kindergartens and regard this as their important responsibility. . On the one hand, teachers are required to study children\’s interests and needs from the perspective of children, and organize, arrange and intervene in children\’s game activities based on the research results; on the other hand, teachers do not know how to do research because children cannot read \” \”Book\”, its interests and needs are intrinsic. The interests and needs of each child are different and change with time, place, and situation. It is impossible for teachers to fully understand the interests and needs of children. Even if they \”clarify\”, It is difficult to arrange and intervene in children\’s play activities based on research results. On the one hand, various methods are used to restrict the use of teaching materials by teachers and children; on the other hand, it is difficult to solve the implementation problems of educational activities through teachers\’ spontaneous curriculum preparation, resulting in a large number of teaching errors and other serious problems that transcend the \”bottom line\” of education. On the one hand, teachers are encouraged to become researchers, and they should flexibly seize educational opportunities in educational situations and respond to problems arising from children at any time; on the other hand, they are unable to cope with the scarcity of research-based teachers and the fact that most kindergarten teachers are far from the level of research-based teachers. question. On the one hand, teachers are strongly encouraged to make their own educational toys to suit the interests and needs of children; on the other hand, they cannot guarantee the safety, hygiene and educational value of self-made educational toys. On the one hand, kindergarten teachers are encouraged to have an innovative spirit and design and implement educational activities that are different from others; on the other hand, it cannot solve the problem that \”most teachers do not have such abilities\”. Blind innovation will not only fragment the curriculum and burden teachers Excessive weight may also cause educational activities to run counter to teaching objectives. Teachers encounter this problem almost every day in kindergarten education practicesome paradoxes. This makes what teachers \”hear\”, \”thinks about\”, \”what they are asked to do\”, \”what they can do\” and \”what they get after doing it\” are all in conflict, and also puts teachers into a helpless state; this kind of The situation makes kindergarten teachers increasingly confused about what they should do. 02 \”Don\’t let your children lose at the starting line\” – right or wrong? The so-called paradox is that on the surface the same proposition or reasoning implies two opposite conclusions, and both conclusions can be justified. The fundamental reason for the paradox is the formalization, universalization and absoluteization of traditional logic. In other words, the reason why there are paradoxes is that there are different levels of thinking in propositions or reasoning, confusion between meaning and expression, subjectivity and objectivity, subject and object, facts and values, and there is an asymmetry in thinking structure and logical structure. . For example, \”Don\’t let your children lose at the starting line\” is a slogan that is closely related to kindergarten education. It has been repeatedly quoted and controversial, forming a paradox: \”Should we or should we not let our children lose at the starting line?\” Many scholars have repeatedly called for this to be a wrong slogan. We should give the only childhood back to children and let them grow up happily. For example, some scholars said: \”The slogan \’Don\’t lose at the starting line\’ has greatly influenced and restricted millions of parents.\” \”The \’value\’ of childhood is not just preparation for future life. Childhood itself is also \’life\’ , and it is the best period of life. If childhood is too burdened and unhappy, the beautiful prelude to life will be lost, which will also have a negative impact on the future. \”However, many parents do not \”buy in\” and still take the trouble to do it. They send their children to \”interest classes\” at all costs, for fear that their children will fall behind others in future competition. In fact, no one can verify whether \”Don\’t let children lose at the starting line\” is scientific, whether it conforms to the laws of education, and whether it can benefit future generations. If a marathon team member is tense at the starting line, it does not necessarily determine whether the team member will be able to finish the entire race, nor will it determine whether the team member will run faster in the subsequent races and whether he or she will win in the end. In this case, we have to look at why the person who said this sentence said it. At an international seminar held in Shanghai this year, the author invited Amy (Chinese name: Lin Jinxiu), the former administrator of the California Department of Education, to tell the participants what Head Start is (translated as \”Start Plan\” or \”Early Start\”). Get started\” etc.). Anyone who studies early education in the United States will not fail to mention Head Start – since the 1960s, every president of the United States has supported this action plan; to this day, this program still exists and is funded. Funds are increasing. Head Start is to allow poor children to start learning early and not to let poor children lose at the starting line. The original intention of Head Start was for the U.S. government to \”declare a war on poverty,\” because one of the issues that U.S. politicians are concerned about is narrowing the gap between rich and poor to maintain social stability. As a result, the U.S. government funded early childhood education institutions to allow children to start learning early. so called\”Early reading is the killer of poverty\”, which means that by allowing children to read in the preschool years, we can acquire language skills as early as possible and prevent children from poor families from losing at the starting line. Practices like the U.S. government are not uncommon internationally. It can be seen that what some politicians think of \”don\’t let children lose at the starting line\” is not at the same level as what some educators and psychologists think of \”don\’t let children lose at the starting line.\” The objects they each face and the value of their demands are different. The former talks about big principles, while the latter talks about small principles. It should be noted that scholars can adhere to their own academic opinions and exert influence within the scope of their concerns, but they do not need to assume that what they insist on is the truth and what others believe is fallacy. It should also be noted that politicians hold the main resources and voice of society, and can use policies as leverage to mobilize the whole society to do what they want to do; as the makers and implementers of local policies, officials at all levels implement It is a decree implemented by the rulers, rather than acting according to the preferences of scholars. 03Professor Ye Lan, who returned to kindergarten education, gave a speech titled \”There are no bystanders and outsiders in the development of basic education\” at the \”China Education Thirty People Forum\” and proposed: \”The upper-level decision-makers in basic education cannot make decisions about China, Things at the lower levels are too specific. \”There are macro, meso and micro differences within the education system. Different levels of the system are related, but the responsibilities of different levels are irreplaceable.\” \”The main issue in the upper-level decision-making of basic education.\” It is because the management of matters belonging to the middle and lower levels is too specific and too absolute, such as burden reduction orders, which often end up being a piece of paper. \”The author\’s understanding of these words of Professor Ye Lan is that they are not universal in educational practice. On the contrary, there are many paradoxes; various people at the macro level, meso level and micro level have different positions, perspectives and ways of thinking, and the problems they face and the responsibilities they bear are also different. Likewise, they need to understand and talk to each other, rather than arranging and replacing each other in one direction; otherwise, the \”weak\” party will lose its right to speak and be at a loss in action. In kindergarten education, relative to society and culture, relative to political leaders, administrative officials at all levels and scholars are system components at the meso level. In the process of implementing education, if their remarks are different or even completely contradictory to the macro-level social culture and the policies implemented by the leaders, it will lead to more serious problems. Nowadays, kindergarten teachers in my country feel helpless and even hesitant in the face of various paradoxes existing in educational practice. In this situation, they often follow the trend blindly, and their helplessness will intensify when they find that what they are doing is not what they should do, or what they can do, or it is just wrong for them. Administrative officials and scholars at all levels should understand the hardships and difficulties faced by teachers. They should also understand that problems in the practice of kindergarten education cannot be solved by simply issuing decrees or doctrines. Let kindergarten teachers not be at a loss when facing educational paradoxes, because they have their own positions and perspectives, and they have their own issues to face.The target of education is to solve the problems they face. In other words, give them less advice. Let kindergarten education return more to the fundamentals of education, which is educational practice. It should be oriented by educational practice rather than by some so-called \”advanced ideas\”.