论文部分内容阅读
在提高历史教學質量的鬥爭中,課的類型和結構問题具有头等重要的意義。列宾格魯布在他的文章(蘇聯‘历史教學’一九五四年第四號)中,已經把这一問題完全及時地提出来讨論了,這一問題是值得全體历史教师、教学法專家和科学工作者予以嚴重注意的。課的類型和結構的公式化,在历史教學中还常常佔據着優勢地位,這种缺點應該坚决地克服。這種缺點給历史教学质量帶來了多少壞影響是無須特別予以證明的。 現在大概沒有人还來否認實際运用不同類型历史課的必要性,因為實際情况本身就说明了這种必要性。要想完善地、正确地解决任何一種類型历史课這个問題,應該先把這一問題的教學法弄得相当清楚。
In the struggle to improve the quality of history teaching, class type and structure are of paramount importance. In his article (History Teaching of the Soviet Union, No. 4, 1954), Repin Grub had put this question in its fullest form for discussion in a timely manner, a matter that is worth all history teachers, teaching methods Experts and scientists pay serious attention. The formalization of the type and structure of the lesson often occupies a dominant position in history teaching. Such shortcomings should be resolutely overcome. There is no particular need to prove how much the negative impact of such shortcomings has on the quality of history teaching. Now no one else still denies the need to actually use different types of history lessons because the reality itself illustrates this necessity. In order to perfect and correctly solve the issue of any type of history lesson, the pedagogy of this issue should be made quite clear.