A phenomenon: frequent frequency, cheap praise.
In class, when the students answered the questions correctly, the teacher said, "The boy answered really well, so we praised him." So the students raised their hands, gave thumbs up, turned to the praised students and shouted, "Good! Very good! Very good! " The voice is neat and rhythmic, and naughty students also deliberately make faces. Or "like XXX" or "XXX, you are great!" Followed by "clap your hands" orderly and rhythmic applause, from the beginning to the end of the class, "praise" leads to taking up too much time, impacting knowledge teaching, giving students a sense of "hard insertion" and forming a formal practice of evaluation for evaluation.
Phenomenon 2: the language is monotonous and exaggerated.
Case 1: "Looking for the law", when the student said that the law he found was that there were some triangles on the screen, the teacher immediately praised: "You observed it very carefully!" When class was over, the teacher asked the students, "What did you get today?" I said all my life, "I learned to find patterns, and I can draw regularly." After listening to this, the teacher said with satisfaction, "You are so smart, can you still draw?" Is it smart to draw graphics? )
Some people say, "Praise is the cheapest and most effective prize." Appropriate instant oral evaluation is an effective catalyst to promote students' development, which can stimulate students' interest, self-motivation and self-esteem. Many excellent teachers are full of true feelings, and proper evaluation language can often inspire students. However, in the oral evaluation of classroom teaching, we often hear some mechanically repeated cliches, such as: "You are great!" " ""what a good answer! " "You are amazing! "... it can be seen that teachers lack feelings, even exaggerate, giving people a false feeling and lacking substantive evaluation of the content. How can such a language motivate students? How can we realize the function of catalyst?
Phenomenon 3: praise blindly and ignore mistakes.
Case 2: When teaching the "Preliminary Understanding of Diagonal Angle", the teacher asked the students to talk about where they have seen the corner in their lives. Some students said that "there are horns on the red scarf", some students said that "horns are horns" and some students said that "there are horns on a dime". Without analysis, the teacher encouraged loudly: "The students' life experience is really rich and they speak very well! "
I would like to ask, if you don't listen to students patiently and don't analyze them, how can you give targeted guidance to effectively promote students' learning? Teachers don't discriminate and encourage students to speak blindly. It seems to be respect for students' speech, but in fact it is a great disrespect. How can we communicate without listening? How can students make progress without communication?
We should treat students' "mistakes" with appreciation and encouraging language, just like babies who are learning English and toddlers, so as to teach them how to do it, which is beneficial to their development. However, some teachers praise students blindly in their daily evaluation, and are afraid of criticism, which runs counter to the new curriculum concept, resulting in some students being domineering in their daily life and study, some students can't touch the tiger's ass, and some students can't stand any grievances. How can we achieve such a teaching effect?
The fourth phenomenon: teachers do everything in a single form.
Classroom evaluation is often taken over by the teacher, which is the teacher's "patent" and a symbol of the teacher's "authority". For students' answers, whether right or wrong, the teacher has the final say. As soon as the teacher "speaks", students are in a passive or even neglected position, waiting for the teacher to point out and comment, and there are few opportunities for self-adjustment, so students' subjective initiative can not be fully exerted.
In today's mathematics classroom, these evaluation phenomena are not only difficult to arouse students' interest in learning mathematics and desire to express, but also mislead students' cognition and emotion, which is not conducive to students' development in all aspects. Imagine that in this class, students' little faces will be red, their small eyes will glow, their small hands will be held straight, and their mouths will often open? What vitality does such a classroom have! Combined with my classroom practice, talk about some superficial countermeasures:
One of the countermeasures: pay attention to students and skillfully use the language of instant evaluation.
The main orientation of the implementation of the new curriculum in classroom teaching is to "strengthen the development of disciplines, follow the teaching rules, implement the requirements of curriculum standards, and reflect the characteristics of mathematics", which is the starting point of real-time evaluation of mathematics classroom teaching. Based on this, teachers should first properly use body language for immediate evaluation. It is more important to grasp every breakthrough point and make an appropriate immediate evaluation with vivid spoken English. Evaluation should be in-depth, in place and targeted, and vague, one-sided and rigid evaluation language should be prevented. Therefore, the evaluation should be in place. Educator Blake William suggested that useful teacher feedback should be specific, descriptive and timely. "Your answer makes me feel that your mathematical thinking has some logic." "After a long time, I finally see you taking the initiative to answer questions." "Your reasoning ability has far surpassed that of the teacher. You are really great!" Wait a minute. I believe that such real-time evaluation will certainly receive satisfactory results.
The second countermeasure: tolerate students and pay attention to the methods of evaluating students' mistakes.
"Respect for differences and diversity of values" is the basic feature of curriculum evaluation. Teachers should be tolerant of students and skillfully use well-meaning criticism while sincerely praising them. Every student is a living individual with different cognitive levels. Teachers should pay attention to students' inner feelings and protect their self-esteem when criticizing their mistakes in learning.
The mistakes made by students must be clearly pointed out, and objective criticism can make students clear the direction of their efforts. "Encouraging appreciation" must be based on "objective criticism". Criticism in classroom evaluation should be "green", emotional, rational and heartfelt, not simple and rude. Simple and rude criticism will only make students have reflective self-defense to protect themselves. Once this kind of self-defense happens, no matter how correct the teacher's criticism is, it is difficult to enter the students' hearts. Therefore, students' achievements should be affirmed before criticism; Criticism must be justified, specifically where it was wrong, why it was wrong, how it should be done, and so on; Don't forget to add something like "Come on, I'm sure you can make it!" This encouragement makes the criticized students feel that the teacher respects me and trusts me. No matter praise or criticism, only by always taking "all for the development of students" as the foundation can we grasp the degree of praise and criticism in classroom evaluation, give full play to the incentive role of classroom evaluation, and better mobilize students' enthusiasm and initiative in learning mathematics.
The third countermeasure: trust students and expand the space for students' self-evaluation and mutual evaluation.
Whether teachers believe in children is the premise of teachers' reasonable evaluation of children, and also the basis of teachers' self-evaluation and students' mutual evaluation. Rosenthal should be a very convincing example. 1968, Bert Rosenthal, a psychologist, came to a primary school in the United States and selected three classes from grade one to grade six to make a "serious" development prediction for the students in this 18 class. Then, in an appreciative tone, inform the relevant teachers of the list of students with excellent development possibilities. Some students on the list are what the teacher expected, while others are not. When the teacher was confused, Rosenthal explained, "Please note that I am talking about his development, not the present foundation." In this way, the teachers recognized the list from the heart. Eight months later. He came to this school again and retaken 18 class. It is found that the students who provide grades grow faster than other students, and are lively and cheerful, eager for knowledge and have deep feelings for teachers. It turned out that the list he provided was random and had not been tested at all. He just wants to hint at the teacher through "authoritative lies", strengthen the teacher's confidence in the students on the list, and change the concept that teachers don't trust backward children. The concept has changed, and naughty children have become promising children in the teacher's mind, so the teacher's evaluation of these children has also changed, leading to the accelerated growth of children. It can be seen that fully believing in children is a prerequisite. If this problem is solved, we will have confidence in our children and try to encourage them to succeed.