下载文档原格式
Situated Cognition and the Culture of LearningJohn Seely Brown;Allan Collins;Paul DuguidEducational Researcher,Vol.18,No.1.(Jan.-Feb.,1989),pp.32-42.Stable URL:/sici?sici=0013-189X%28198901%2F02%2918%3A1%3C32%3ASCATCO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2 Educational Researcher is currently published by American Educational Research Association.Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use,available at/about/terms.html.JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides,in part,that unless you have obtained prior permission,you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles,and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal,non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work.Publisher contact information may be obtained at/journals/aera.html.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission.The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academic journals and scholarly literature from around the world.The Archive is supported by libraries,scholarly societies,publishers, and foundations.It is an initiative of JSTOR,a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community take advantage of advances in technology.For more information regarding JSTOR,please contact support@.Tue Jun2613:52:032007You have printed the following article:Situated Cognition and the Culture of LearningJohn Seely Brown;Allan Collins;Paul DuguidEducational Researcher ,Vol.18,No.1.(Jan.-Feb.,1989),pp.32-42.Stable URL:/sici?sici=0013-189X%28198901%2F02%2918%3A1%3C32%3ASCATCO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-2This article references the following linked citations.If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location,you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR.Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.[Bibliography]Knowing,Doing,and Teaching MultiplicationMagdalene LampertCognition and Instruction ,Vol.3,No.4.(1986),pp.305-342.Stable URL:/sici?sici=0737-0008%281986%293%3A4%3C305%3AKDATM%3E2.0.CO%3B2-6Curvilinear Motion in the Absence of External Forces:Naive Beliefs about the Motion of ObjectsMichael McCloskey;Alfonso Caramazza;Bert GreenScience ,New Series,Vol.210,No.4474.(Dec.5,1980),pp.1139-1141.Stable URL:/sici?sici=0036-8075%2819801205%293%3A210%3A4474%3C1139%3ACMITAO%3E2.0.CO%3B2-IReciprocal Teaching of Comprehension-Fostering and Comprehension-Monitoring Activities Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar;Ann L.BrownCognition and Instruction ,Vol.1,No.2.(Spring,1984),pp.117-175.Stable URL:/sici?sici=0737-0008%28198421%291%3A2%3C117%3ARTOCAC%3E2.0.CO%3B2-%23The Problem of the Essential IndexicalJohn PerryNoûs ,Vol.13,No.1.(Mar.,1979),pp.3-21.Stable URL:/sici?sici=0029-4624%28197903%2913%3A1%3C3%3ATPOTEI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-FLINKED CITATIONS -Page 1of 2-The 1987Presidential Address:Learning in School and out Lauren B.ResnickEducational Researcher ,Vol.16,No.9.(Dec.,1987),pp.13-20+54.Stable URL:/sici?sici=0013-189X%28198712%2916%3A9%3C13%3AT1PALI%3E2.0.CO%3B2-X LINKED CITATIONS -Page 2of 2-。
doi:10.13440/j.slxy.1674-0033.2019.01.017第33卷第1期２０19年2月商洛学院学报ＪｏｕｒｎａｌｏｆＳｈａｎｇｌｕｏＵｎｉｖｅｒｓｉｔｙVol ．33Ｎｏ．1Feb.２０19收稿日期：2018-10-19基金项目：商洛学院教育教学改革研究重点项目（17jyjx107）作者简介：冯丽君，女，山西运城人，硕士，副教授A Study on College English Blended Teaching andLearning Mold in Universities under ICTFENG Li-jun(School of Humanities,Shangluo University,Shangluo 726000,Shaanxi)Abstract:Blended Teaching and Learning is the inevitable developing tendency of college English education.Under the guidance of constructivism teaching theory,through combining ICT -based internet teaching and learning with traditional classroom teaching,students'abilities of using ICT tools to conduct online self-learning,group learning and communication and feedback will be cultivated.Students-centered flipped classroom teaching will be used mostly at class,with the purpose of stimulating students'interests in learning English and improving their comprehensive application and communication ability of using English,so as to promote the reform and development of college English in universities.Key words:ARM;college English;blended-teaching and learning;ICT;constructivism （商洛学院人文学院，陕西商洛726000）摘要：混合式教学是大学英语教学发展的必然趋势。
人工智能赋能教育变革：国际经验与未来展望徐蕊玥 梁昊楠 周琴（西南大学 教育学部，重庆 400715）摘 要：人工智能引导世界发展的步伐。
教育作为国家发展的重要部分，在人工智能时代，应走在改革的前沿，而人工智能赋能教育变革是当前教育改革的重要形式。
所谓人工智能赋能教育变革，实际是以人工智能技术为依托，通过教育变革实现未来人才的培养目标。
世界各国通过不同方式强调推行人工智能应用策略、构建终身智能学习环境、强化智能时代教师素养和培养“智慧人才”是实现人工智能赋能教育变革的有效途径。
本文结合人工智能赋能教育变革的国际经验对未来教育发展提出方向：规避“马太效应”，实现全纳与公平；厘清技术悖论，构建“人机共生”新生态；“为机器立心”，融合人文取向和科学取向的教育。
关键词：国际视野；人工智能；赋能；发展经验；未来方向中图分类号：G4 文献标志码：A 文章编号：2096-0069（2021）03-0021-06收稿日期：2020-12-23基金项目：第60批中国博士后科学基金资助“基于MOOC 平台的教师专业学习共同体构建研究”（2016M 602618）；西南大学中央高校基本科研业务费项目“‘互联网+’时代教师网络学习共同体构建研究”（SWV 1609120）作者简介：徐蕊玥（1994— ），女，贵州都匀人，硕士研究生，研究方向为比较教育学；梁昊楠（1996— ），女，山东淄博人，硕士研究生，研究方向为比较教育学；周琴（1978— ），女，重庆人，教授、硕士生导师，研究方向为比较教育学、教师教育。
“计算机科学和人工智能之父”艾伦·图灵于1950年发表的论文《计算机器与智能》被视为现代人工智能的开端。
经过近70年的发展，人工智能已成为产业链条变革和科学技术革命的核心驱动力，许多传统行业正在被颠覆，教育也在变革。
“智慧教育” “智能教育”“人工智能教育” “教育人工智能”等相关热词相继问世，人工智能赋能教育变革成为重要趋势。
什么是联通主义一、联通主义概述2005年以来，加拿大学者George Siemens在《教育技术与远程学习》国际学刊等学术媒介上发表了“Connectivism” 系列研究成果,Connectivism一词在国内有“联通主义”、“关联主义”和“连接主义”等译述。
他在《Connectivism: A Learning Theory for the Digital Age》一文中系统阐述了联通主义学习理论(Siemens,2005)。
西蒙斯将联通主义学习理论定位为：数字时代的学习理论，它是应时代的网络化特征而提出的。
该理论将学习视为连接和网络形成的过程(Siemens,2005)，它最适合于复杂的学习和快速变化的领域中的学习(Siemens,2009)，被誉为具有划时代意义的里程碑式的学习理论。
联通主义以George Siemens和Stephen Downes为代表人物和核心推动者，他们提出了联通主义8个原则：•学习和知识存在于多样性的观点之中。
•学习是一个与特定的节点和信息资源建立连接的过程。
•学习可能存在与非人的应用中。
•学习的能力比当前所掌握的知识更加重要。
•为了促进持续性的学习，我们需要培养和维护连接。
•发现领域、观点和概念之间的关系的能力是最核心的能力。
•流通是所有联通主义学习活动的目的。
•决策本身就是一个学习的过程。
联通主义学习理论自提出后得到了快速的发展，多种观点应运而生，核心观点可归结为学习观、知识观、教师观、学生观。
0102 知识观03 学生观04 教师观二、联通主义VS传统学习理论Siemens采用“区分学习理论的五个决定性问题”证明联通主义学习理论是一种学习理论，并将其与其他学习理论进行区分。
1学习是如何发生的(1)行为主义认为学习是建立刺激—反应之间的连接，主要关注的是可观察的行为（黑箱）;(2)认知主义认为学习是有机体积极主动地形成新的完形或认知结构；(3)建构主义认为学习就是意义建构的过程;(4)联通主义认为学习分布于网络、社会中，并利用技术加以促进以达到更高水平的思考、推理程度。
剑雅12test5大作文范文英文回答：1. How can technology be leveraged to enhance the learning experience for students in K-12 education?Technology can be leveraged to enhance the learning experience for students in K-12 education in a variety of ways.Personalized learning: Technology can be used to personalize learning for each student, based on their individual needs and learning styles. This can be done through the use of adaptive learning software, which can track each student's progress and adjust the difficulty of the material accordingly.Engaging content: Technology can be used to create more engaging and interactive content for students. This can include the use of videos, simulations, and games tohelp students learn in a more fun and motivating way.Collaboration and communication: Technology can be used to facilitate collaboration and communication between students and teachers. This can be done through the use of online forums, discussion boards, and video conferencing.Assessment and feedback: Technology can be used to assess student learning in a more efficient and timely way. This can be done through the use of online quizzes, polls, and surveys.2. What are the ethical implications of using technology in K-12 education?There are a number of ethical implications that need to be considered when using technology in K-12 education.Privacy: Technology can be used to collect a lot of data about students, including their academic performance, their online activity, and their social interactions. It is important to ensure that this data is collected and used ina responsible and ethical way.Equity: Technology can be used to improve equity in education by providing all students with access to the same high-quality learning resources. However, it is also important to ensure that technology does not exacerbate existing inequalities.Bias: Technology can be biased, and this bias can be reflected in the way that technology is used in education. For example, some algorithms that are used to personalize learning can be biased against certain groups of students. It is important to be aware of these biases and to take steps to mitigate them.中文回答：1. 如何利用技术提升K-12教育中学生的学习体验？技术可以通过多种方式提升K-12教育中学生的学习体验。
1、David H. Jonassen简介及研究兴趣：Jonassen是著名的建构主义教学设计专家，CLE（建构主义学习环境）设计模型的提出者，情境教学和学习理论的专家。
主要从事的工作包括：建构主义学习环境的设计；学习的认知工具（Cognitive tools (Mindtools) for learning）；认知任务分析（Cognitive task analysis）；问题解决的学习等。
研究专著：《教育传播与技术手册》（主编）；《学习环境的理论基础》（主编）（此书已被翻译成中文，由华东师范大学出版社出版）。
所在学校：现在密苏里哥伦比亚大学，曾经在宾夕法尼亚州立大学作教授。
当前最有影响的建构主义代表人物之一D.H.Jonassen的观点为例，他就特别强调学习环境的设计。
在他最近发表的文章中，提出了一种用于设计建构主义学习环境(Constructivist Learning Environment, 简称CLE)的最新模型，由图可见，它由六部分组成：1. 问题(包括疑问、项目、分歧等)：这是整个建构主义学习环境(CLE)设计的中心，学习者的目标是要阐明和解决问题(或是回答提问、完成项目、解决分歧)；2. 相关的实例(或个案)：与问题相关的实例或个案(如法律、医疗、或社会调查等方面的实例或个案)；3. 信息资源：与问题解决有关的各种信息资源(包括文本、图形、声音、视频和动画等)以及通过WWW从Internet上获取的各种有关资源；4. 认知工具：主要指在计算机上生成的、用于帮助和促进认知过程的工具，通常是可视化的智能信息处理软件。
如知识库、语义网络、几何图形证明树、专家系统等；5. 会话与协作工具：使学习者群体可以相互交流、讨论、协商，共同建构问题的意义；6. 社会背景支持：在设计建构主义学习环境时要考虑社会文化背景、客观环境、物质条件等方面对于当前学习所能提供的支持。
该模型所设计的建构主义学习环境可以为学生的自主学习提供三种教学策略支持：1. 建模策略：建模是CLE中最常用的教学策略。
50实、人机共享智慧、数据与智慧结合赋能未来的数智时代成为可能。
未来学习中心正是数智时代迎合教育4.0理念的一场教育变革，其建设方向是依托图书馆等机构提供智慧化学习场景，通过新技术与数字工具融合现有资源，转变教学方式和服务模式，以培养自主学习、终身学习的复合型现代化人才。
本文以哈佛大学为例，介绍国外未来学习中心的战略构想与实践探索，以期对我国相关领域建设与发展有所启迪。
未来教育的战略构想哈佛大学未来教学中心（T e a c h i n g a n d L e a r n i n g C e n t e r ，简称T L C ）由学习发展副文 张爽未来学习中心将利用现代化科技手段，应对数智时代未来教育发展趋势，为教育范式的改革提供新的思路和路径。
哈佛大学面向“教”与“学”需求，构建未来学习中心的实践经验，或可为我国高校提升教学服务、建设智慧化校园提供参考借鉴。
of Vice Provost for in Learning，简称VPAL）统领，未来教学工作组（Future of Teaching & Learning，简称FTL），教与学创新组（Harvard Innovation for Learning & Teaching，简称HILT）等组织与各学院协同建设，信息技术学院、图书馆和博物馆等机构提供支持。
从所属与命名来看，哈佛大学关于未来学习中心的实践基于教与学两大群体，既关注面向学生的基础传统教学、特定学科教学、复合人才培养，也聚焦教师团队教育方式的创新和改革。
随着教学实践的展开，为顺应未来教育个性化、精准化、多元化趋势，未来教学工作组总结经验，开拓了未来教育建设战略。
重构学习场景教育个性化强调以学习者为中心，关注学生需求和偏好。
研究生院教与学实验室（Teaching and Learning Lab，简称TLL）通过焦点小组访谈、用户测试了解学生需求，快速成型技术（R a p i d Prototyping）打造增强学生体验感的混合教室等多模式课堂，优先考虑互动教学法和点对点教学，达成交互式、协作式及个性化学习模式，创丰富学习内容景广泛的学习方式。
基于UbD “逆向教学设计”的高中英语单元整体教学探究发布时间：2023-02-20T06:39:36.851Z 来源：《中小学教育》2022年第19期9月作者：缪婷婷[导读] 高中英语单元整体教学开展以来，学生在学习过程中碎片化、表层化的学习得到缪婷婷杭州市萧山区第八高级中学【摘要】高中英语单元整体教学开展以来，学生在学习过程中碎片化、表层化的学习得到了完善，但是教师在对单元进行整体设计时仍旧缺乏较好的操作路径。
基于理解的UbD逆向教学设计关注学生的理解，从教学想要达到的学习结果出发，“以始为终”，为整体教学提供了新的视角。
本文通过对逆向教学设计内涵的解读，以及在单元整体教学中实施路径的探索，从而形成逆向教学设计指导下的高中英语单元整体教学模式探究【关键词】高中英语；逆向设计；单元整体教学一．问题提出在高中英语的教学过程中，单元整体授课已经成为趋势。
但是就目前高中英语的单元整体教学情况来看，依旧存在着很多问题，比较突出的问题就是教师对单元整体教学设计的了解不深入，并且在进行单元整体教学设计方面没有合理的模式框架，不能合理地设计单元整体教学目标、单元整体教学评价和单元整体教学活动。
教师在授课时还是独立的课时设计为主，单元整体教学设计的意识和能力不足，学生的英语学科核心素养无法得到落实。
因此，探究一个完整的单元整体教学模式成了一个急需解决的问题。
二．逆向教学设计基本内涵UbD（Understanding By Design）意思为通过设计来理解。
UbD 框架下教学设计模式是格兰特·威金斯（Grant Wiggins）和杰伊·麦克泰格（Jay MeTighe）开发出来的一种教学设计框架。
该教学设计框架是以明确的学习目标为起点、以促进学生有意义的学习为宗旨、强调评价设计先于课程设计和教学活动开展的创新性的逆向教学设计模式，体现建构主义认知理论。
UBD 教学设计框架分为三个阶段：确定预期学习目标、理清评价证据、设计课程与教学活动。
Journal of Technology EducationVol. 14 No. 2, Spring 2003-56-Partnership-Centered Learning: The Case ForPedagogic Balance In Technology Education.
Brad WalmsleyIntroductionIn many parts of the world, technology education is a subject area intransition (Eggleston, 1992; Fritz, 1996; Lauda, 1988; Wicklein, 1993). Thishas, and continues to be the case in countries such as America (Newberry, 2001;Sanders, 2001), the United Kingdom (McCormick, 1997) and Australia (Fritz,1996). In each of these aforementioned countries, various modifications tostandards statements (ITEA 2000), curriculum documents (QCA, 1999), andtechnology syllabi (QSA, 2002a; QSCC, 2000) are currently being drafted andredrafted. Curriculum reform in technology education seeks to modify theworkshop-based industrial arts tendency to focus on industrial hand and machineskills (Young-Hawkins & Mouzes, 1991) to a focus more concerned withcritical and creative higher-order thinking skills (Lee, 1996). These types oftechnology subjects are designed to respond to societal changes, such as thoseevident in many of the world’s current post-industrial technological societies(Lauda, 1988).The traditional pedagogy of workshop-type industrial arts subjects was, andin many cases still is, “show and follow” (Fritz, 1996, p.212), and it has beenused to good effect in the building of student competencies, particularlyindustrial skills. However, technology education’s evolution is transforming thesubject from one that requires students to imitate teacher-prescribed industrialhand and machine skills to one that is argued to be unique in the schoolcurriculum (Williams, 2000). Technology education is evolving to become asubject that is concerned with an individual student’s ability to solve real worldproblems by integrating specifically relevant knowledge of materials,technological processes, and systems (Eggleston, 1992; QCA, 1999; QSA,2002b). Technology education students are encouraged to reflect on and modifytheir thinking through their involvement with some form of technologicaldesign-type process. For example, the National Curriculum for Design andTechnology in the United Kingdom (QCA, 1999) places importance on eachstudent’s ability to combine both the practical (hand skills) and theoretical
_________________________Brad Wamsley (bradley1@hypermax.net.au) is with the Centre for Technology Education Research,School of Vocational, Technology and Arts Education, Mt. Gravatt Campus, Griffith University,Nathan, Queensland, Australia.Journal of Technology EducationVol. 14 No. 2, Spring 2003-57-(thinking skills) during their individual and group technological problem-solving activities by stating that students are expected to:
… learn to think and intervene creatively to improve quality of life. The subjectcalls for pupils to become autonomous and creative problem solvers, asindividuals and members of a team. They must look for needs, wants andopportunities and respond to them by developing a range of ideas and makingproducts and systems. They combine practical skills with an understanding ofaesthetics, social and environmental issues, function and industrial practices.As they do so, they reflect on and evaluate present and past design andtechnology, its uses and effects. Through design and technology, all pupils canbecome discriminating and informed users of products, and become innovators.(p.15)
By endorsing documents such as the Standards for Technological Literacy:Content for the Study of Technology (ITEA, 2000), the International TechnologyEducation Association (ITEA) emphasizes the requirement for students tobecome technologically literate. The focus through this and other documents isto define a set of curricula standards for use in all American states that promotesthe development of technological literacy in students. One of the principles thatguided the formation of these standards is the requirement for students toparticipate in “active and experiential learning” (ITEA, 2000, p.3). Thedocument, Technology for all Americans: A Rationale and Structure for theStudy of Technology (ITEA, 1996) provides further support for recognition ofthe importance of combining both thinking and practical activities during atechnological design process. This approach to curriculum formulation is arguedto be significant in terms of developing the technological literacy of students(ITEA, 1996; Lewis & Gagel, 1992). The Technology for all Americansdocument states that:
