论文部分内容阅读
【摘要】通过分析英语国家和中国的英语课程大纲，可以揭示和比较隐藏在两国英语教育中的意识形态，并借此反思英语教学中和课程改革中可能存在的一些问题。
Curriculum includes the knowledge embodied in textbooks, as well as the experience acquired through learning activities. The content of curriculum is not neutral. On the contrast, the curriculum is affected and restricted by the dominant political power and social culture. On the one hand, the content of curriculum derives from culture, and it inherits and communicates culture as the carrier of culture. On the other hand, cultural restricts and determines the content and character of curriculum, setting the fundamental logical origin, rule and boundary.
By analyzing the curriculum documents and official papers of English education in university in NSW, Australia and China, we can unravel the concealing ideologies embedded in two communities. The analysis shows that Australian university incline towards progressivism, utilitarianism and reconstructionism, preferring student-centeredness , free choices and students’ autonomy and independence, encouraging critical, creative and exploring spirit, whereas Chinese educational system, influenced by classical humanism and Confucianism, puts the emphasis on uniformity, harmony, orderliness and discipline.
Only when contrasting with others, we can really see our own, reflecting and examining the common-sense that seems to be taken for granted. By comparing with Austrian curriculum ideology, some flaws in Chinese educational ideology are exposed.
First, it undervalues the autonomy and self-fulfillment of students. The contemporary curriculum ideology in China is still social-orientated and knowledge –centered (Peng, 2004 ). This ideology inclines to cultivate learners for social needs, ignoring personal needs and interest. Students learn knowledge for the knowledge’s shake. Education only serves for preparing the future after children grow up but for the growth of children.
Second, the institutional power of curriculum content is excessive. In the process of learning, especially in the basic educational level, teachers pay attention to delivering knowledge in the textbook, and unconsciously generalize and objectify this legislated knowledge. Students are instructed to completely accept the content in textbooks and teachers’ explanation that follow the curriculum paper and legislated teachers’ book. Finally, students’ thought become the racecourse of the dominant ideology, losing the critical and creative spirit.
Finally, the curriculum is closed and lack of flexibility. Curriculum and textbooks for university is managed by the central government. That means from curriculum design, syllabus, textbook compilation, textbook selection to teaching hours and teaching schedule are all determined by the central government and unified though the national level. Once determined, curriculum cannot be changed for a long time. The content usually fails to reflect the new development of technology and society. Besides, the high unity of curriculum and textbook results in a difficulty to meet the particular needs of various regions, making curriculum depart from learners experience and social reality.
Nowadays, the curriculum ideology in China has been deeply influenced by the western culture. Some western educational concepts have successfully blended in Chinese culture while some are still ineffective. Among those western ideologies that are advocated by scholars to be imported, “critical thinking”， in my opinion, is most difficult to implement.
In terms of critical thinking, many scholars debate whether Chinese students have critical ability. Personally, I think the overall critical thinking ability of Chinese students is much lower than that of students in western countries. This is due to both cultural and political reasons. Main learning strategies that students were encouraged to use are keeping knowledge firmly in mind, drawing inferences about other cases from one instance, and organizing knowledge in system, but never criticize. They are seldom required to criticize an article or looking for a different view of what they learn. Some occasional challenges always received suppress. Nowadays, with the gradually penetration of western culture, many scholars advocate to develop students’ critical thinking ability in university level. However, neither teachers nor students can totally understanding this new concept, nor feel confident and comfortable to behave oppositely to their previous experience.
As an important communication method and medium of culture, curriculum provides the approach and mechanism that guide the increment, innovation of culture as well as the meaning and criteria of cultivating children. During the process of communication culture, the curriculum never simply repeats the culture. On the contrary, it will give a new meaning to the existing culture, according to social changes, different personal situation of learners, and the change of educational ideology. With the increasing communication with the world, Chinese curriculum ideology continuously integrated the local culture and foreign culture. This will gradually lead to a culture transformation and social progress that stimulate the development of human.
References：
[1] Ho, J. W.Y. (2002). Curriculum documents as representation of institutional ideology: A comparative study. Language and Education 16 (4), 284--‐302.
[2] Liang, Zhirong. (1998). Early childhood education. Beijing: Beijing normal university press.
[3] Peng, Hongbin. (2004). The relationship between curriculum and culture. Educational theory and practice, 23
[4] Yang, R. (2011). Chinese ways of thinking in the transformation of China’s higher education system. In J. Ryan (Ed). China’s higher education reform and internationalisation. London: Routledge
Curriculum includes the knowledge embodied in textbooks, as well as the experience acquired through learning activities. The content of curriculum is not neutral. On the contrast, the curriculum is affected and restricted by the dominant political power and social culture. On the one hand, the content of curriculum derives from culture, and it inherits and communicates culture as the carrier of culture. On the other hand, cultural restricts and determines the content and character of curriculum, setting the fundamental logical origin, rule and boundary.
By analyzing the curriculum documents and official papers of English education in university in NSW, Australia and China, we can unravel the concealing ideologies embedded in two communities. The analysis shows that Australian university incline towards progressivism, utilitarianism and reconstructionism, preferring student-centeredness , free choices and students’ autonomy and independence, encouraging critical, creative and exploring spirit, whereas Chinese educational system, influenced by classical humanism and Confucianism, puts the emphasis on uniformity, harmony, orderliness and discipline.
Only when contrasting with others, we can really see our own, reflecting and examining the common-sense that seems to be taken for granted. By comparing with Austrian curriculum ideology, some flaws in Chinese educational ideology are exposed.
First, it undervalues the autonomy and self-fulfillment of students. The contemporary curriculum ideology in China is still social-orientated and knowledge –centered (Peng, 2004 ). This ideology inclines to cultivate learners for social needs, ignoring personal needs and interest. Students learn knowledge for the knowledge’s shake. Education only serves for preparing the future after children grow up but for the growth of children.
Second, the institutional power of curriculum content is excessive. In the process of learning, especially in the basic educational level, teachers pay attention to delivering knowledge in the textbook, and unconsciously generalize and objectify this legislated knowledge. Students are instructed to completely accept the content in textbooks and teachers’ explanation that follow the curriculum paper and legislated teachers’ book. Finally, students’ thought become the racecourse of the dominant ideology, losing the critical and creative spirit.
Finally, the curriculum is closed and lack of flexibility. Curriculum and textbooks for university is managed by the central government. That means from curriculum design, syllabus, textbook compilation, textbook selection to teaching hours and teaching schedule are all determined by the central government and unified though the national level. Once determined, curriculum cannot be changed for a long time. The content usually fails to reflect the new development of technology and society. Besides, the high unity of curriculum and textbook results in a difficulty to meet the particular needs of various regions, making curriculum depart from learners experience and social reality.
Nowadays, the curriculum ideology in China has been deeply influenced by the western culture. Some western educational concepts have successfully blended in Chinese culture while some are still ineffective. Among those western ideologies that are advocated by scholars to be imported, “critical thinking”， in my opinion, is most difficult to implement.
In terms of critical thinking, many scholars debate whether Chinese students have critical ability. Personally, I think the overall critical thinking ability of Chinese students is much lower than that of students in western countries. This is due to both cultural and political reasons. Main learning strategies that students were encouraged to use are keeping knowledge firmly in mind, drawing inferences about other cases from one instance, and organizing knowledge in system, but never criticize. They are seldom required to criticize an article or looking for a different view of what they learn. Some occasional challenges always received suppress. Nowadays, with the gradually penetration of western culture, many scholars advocate to develop students’ critical thinking ability in university level. However, neither teachers nor students can totally understanding this new concept, nor feel confident and comfortable to behave oppositely to their previous experience.
As an important communication method and medium of culture, curriculum provides the approach and mechanism that guide the increment, innovation of culture as well as the meaning and criteria of cultivating children. During the process of communication culture, the curriculum never simply repeats the culture. On the contrary, it will give a new meaning to the existing culture, according to social changes, different personal situation of learners, and the change of educational ideology. With the increasing communication with the world, Chinese curriculum ideology continuously integrated the local culture and foreign culture. This will gradually lead to a culture transformation and social progress that stimulate the development of human.
References：
[1] Ho, J. W.Y. (2002). Curriculum documents as representation of institutional ideology: A comparative study. Language and Education 16 (4), 284--‐302.
[2] Liang, Zhirong. (1998). Early childhood education. Beijing: Beijing normal university press.
[3] Peng, Hongbin. (2004). The relationship between curriculum and culture. Educational theory and practice, 23
[4] Yang, R. (2011). Chinese ways of thinking in the transformation of China’s higher education system. In J. Ryan (Ed). China’s higher education reform and internationalisation. London: Routledge