幼兒教育不是越早越好

　　幼兒教育不是越早越好

　　TWENTY years ago, kids in preschool, kindergarten and even first and second grade spent much of their time playing: building with blocks, drawing or creating imaginary worlds, in their own heads or with classmates. But increasingly, these activities are being abandoned for the teacher-led, didactic instruction typically used in higher grades. In many schools, formal education now starts at age 4 or 5. Without this early start, the thinking goes, kids risk falling behind in crucial subjects such as reading and math, and may never catch up.

　　20年前，上學(xué)前班、幼兒園、甚至一二年級(jí)的孩子們，大部分時(shí)間都在玩：堆積木、畫畫、創(chuàng)作想象的世界，在腦瓜里想這些事，或和同學(xué)一起玩。但這些 活動(dòng)越來(lái)越多地被老師的教學(xué)所替代，而這種教育方式過(guò)去通常用于年級(jí)較高的學(xué)生。在很多學(xué)校，正規(guī)教育現(xiàn)在是從4或5歲開(kāi)始的。人們認(rèn)為，如果不提早開(kāi)始 接受教育，孩子們?cè)陂喿x、數(shù)學(xué)等關(guān)鍵科目上恐怕會(huì)落后，或許永遠(yuǎn)都無(wú)法再趕回來(lái)。

　　The idea seems obvious: Starting sooner means learning more; the early bird catches the worm.

　　這個(gè)想法似乎是顯而易見(jiàn)的：越早開(kāi)始意味著學(xué)到的越多：早起的鳥(niǎo)兒有蟲吃。

　　But a growing group of scientists, education researchers and educators say there is little evidence that this approach improves long-term achievement; in fact, it may have the opposite effect, potentially slowing emotional and cognitive development, causing unnecessary stress and perhaps even souring kids’ desire to learn.

　　但越來(lái)越多的科學(xué)家、教育研究者和教育工作者表示，沒(méi)有證據(jù)表明這種方式會(huì)提高長(zhǎng)期的成績(jī);實(shí)際上，它可能會(huì)帶來(lái)相反的效果，可能會(huì)阻礙情感及認(rèn)知方面的發(fā)展，造成不必要的壓力，甚至可能會(huì)扼殺孩子的求知欲。

　　One expert I talked to recently, Nancy Carlsson-Paige, a professor emerita of education at Lesley University in Cambridge, Mass., describes this trend as a “profound misunderstanding of how children learn.” She regularly tours schools, and sees younger students floundering to comprehend instruction: “I’ve seen it many, many times in many, many classrooms — kids being told to sit at a table and just copy letters. They don’t know what they’re doing. It’s heartbreaking.”

　　我最近與馬薩諸塞州坎布里奇萊斯利大學(xué)(Lesley University)的教育學(xué)榮休教授南茜·卡爾松-佩奇(Nancy Carlsson-Paige)有過(guò)一番交談?？査?佩奇稱，這種趨勢(shì)反映了對(duì)“孩子的學(xué)習(xí)過(guò)程深深的誤解”。她定期參觀學(xué)校，看到很多年紀(jì)較小的學(xué)生 無(wú)法理解授課內(nèi)容：“我在很多教室看到過(guò)很多類似的情況，老師讓學(xué)生坐在桌子旁，抄寫字母。他們不知道自己在干什么。真讓人感到難過(guò)。”

　　The stakes in this debate are considerable. As the skeptics of teacher-led early learning see it, that kind of education will fail to produce people who can discover and innovate, and will merely produce people who are likely to be passive consumers of information, followers rather than inventors. Which kind of citizen do we want for the 21st century?

　　這場(chǎng)爭(zhēng)論事關(guān)重大。在教師早期指導(dǎo)的質(zhì)疑者看來(lái)，那種教育方式無(wú)法培養(yǎng)出能夠發(fā)現(xiàn)、創(chuàng)新的人才，只會(huì)培養(yǎng)出傾向于被動(dòng)接受信息的人，追隨者，而不是創(chuàng)造者。在21世紀(jì)，我們需要的是哪種公民?

　　In the United States, more academic early education has spread rapidly in the past decade. Programs like No Child Left Behind and Race to the Top have contributed to more testing and more teacher-directed instruction.

　　在過(guò)去10年中，越來(lái)越多的早期教育措施在美國(guó)迅速蔓延?！恫蛔尯⒆拥絷?duì)》法案 (No Child Left Behind)、“力爭(zhēng)上游”計(jì)劃(Race to the Top)等項(xiàng)目，促使學(xué)生面對(duì)更多測(cè)驗(yàn)，接受更多由教師主導(dǎo)的教學(xué)。

　　Another reason: the Common Core State Standards, a detailed set of educational guidelines meant to ensure that students reach certain benchmarks between kindergarten and 12th grade. Currently, 43 states and the District of Columbia have adopted both the math and language standards.

　　另一個(gè)原因：各州共同核心標(biāo)準(zhǔn)(Common Core State Standards)。這套詳盡的教育方針，旨在確保學(xué)生在經(jīng)歷幼兒園到12年級(jí)的學(xué)習(xí)后，達(dá)到一定的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。目前，43個(gè)州和哥倫比亞特區(qū)采納了數(shù)學(xué)和語(yǔ)言方面的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)。

　　The shift toward didactic approaches is an attempt to solve two pressing problems.

　　轉(zhuǎn)而采用說(shuō)教的方式是為了解決兩個(gè)緊迫的問(wèn)題。

　　By many measures, American educational achievement lags behind that of other countries; at the same time, millions of American students, many of them poor and from minority backgrounds, remain far below national norms. Advocates say that starting formal education earlier will help close these dual gaps.

　　從很多方面來(lái)看，美國(guó)的教育成就落后于其他國(guó)家;與此同時(shí)，數(shù)百萬(wàn)美國(guó)學(xué)生的成績(jī)?nèi)赃h(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)低于全國(guó)水平，這些學(xué)生中很多人家境貧困，屬于少數(shù)族裔。倡導(dǎo)人士表示，提前開(kāi)始正規(guī)教育將有助于縮小這種雙重差距。

　　But these moves, while well intentioned, are misguided. Several countries, including Finland and Estonia, don’t start compulsory education until the age of 7. In the most recent comparison of national educational levels, the Program for International Student Assessment, both countries ranked significantly higher than the United States on math, science and reading.

　　這些舉措雖然都是出自善意，卻是受到了誤導(dǎo)。包括芬蘭和愛(ài)沙尼亞在內(nèi)的幾個(gè)國(guó)家的義務(wù)教育都是從7歲才開(kāi)始。國(guó)際學(xué)生評(píng)估項(xiàng)目(Program for International Student Assessment)對(duì)各個(gè)國(guó)家的教育水平做出的最新對(duì)比顯示，這兩個(gè)國(guó)家在數(shù)學(xué)、科學(xué)及閱讀能力上的排名都比美國(guó)高。

　　Of course, these countries are smaller, less unequal and less diverse than the United States. In such circumstances, education poses fewer challenges. It’s unlikely that starting school at 7 would work here: too many young kids, disadvantaged or otherwise, would probably end up watching hours of TV a day, not an activity that promotes future educational achievement. But the complexities of the task in this country don’t erase a fundamental fact that overly structured classrooms do not benefit many young children.

　　當(dāng)然，這些國(guó)家比美國(guó)小，不平等和多樣性的程度也較低。在這樣的情況下，教育構(gòu)成的挑戰(zhàn)較少。7歲開(kāi)始上學(xué)的政策在美國(guó)不太可能行得通：那會(huì)導(dǎo)致太 多小孩——無(wú)論貧困與否——可能一天會(huì)看幾個(gè)小時(shí)的電視，而不是參加提升未來(lái)教育成績(jī)的活動(dòng)。在美國(guó)，教育的任務(wù)非常復(fù)雜，但這也沒(méi)有消除一個(gè)基本事實(shí)， 即課堂組織過(guò)于死板對(duì)許多兒童沒(méi)有好處。

　　Some research indicates that early instruction in reading and other areas may help some students, but these boosts appear to be temporary. A 2009 study by Sebastian P. Suggate, an education researcher at Alanus University in Germany, looked at about 400,000 15-year-olds in more than 50 countries and found that early school entry provided no advantage. Another study by Dr. Suggate, published in 2012, looked at a group of 83 students over several years and found that those who started at age 5 had lower reading comprehension than those who began learning later.

　　一些研究顯示，閱讀及其他方面的早期指導(dǎo)，可能會(huì)幫助一些學(xué)生，但這種幫助似乎是暫時(shí)的。德國(guó)阿蘭努斯大學(xué)(Alanus University)的教育研究者塞巴斯蒂安·P·薩蓋特(Sebastian P. Suggate)在2009年開(kāi)展了一項(xiàng)研究，對(duì)50多個(gè)國(guó)家的40萬(wàn)名15歲學(xué)生進(jìn)行調(diào)查，發(fā)現(xiàn)早上學(xué)并沒(méi)有帶來(lái)優(yōu)勢(shì)。薩蓋特在2012年發(fā)表的另一項(xiàng) 研究，在幾年的時(shí)間里對(duì)83名學(xué)生開(kāi)展了調(diào)查，結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)那些5歲開(kāi)始學(xué)習(xí)的學(xué)生，閱讀理解能力不如晚些開(kāi)始學(xué)習(xí)的學(xué)生。

　　Other research has found that early didactic instruction might actually worsen academic performance. Rebecca A. Marcon, a psychology professor at the University of North Florida, studied 343 children who had attended a preschool class that was “academically oriented,” one that encouraged “child initiated” learning, or one in between. She looked at the students’ performance several years later, in third and fourth grade, and found that by the end of the fourth grade those who had received more didactic instruction earned significantly lower grades than those who had been allowed more opportunities to learn through play. Children’s progress “may have been slowed by overly academic preschool experiences that introduced formalized learning experiences too early for most children’s developmental status,” Dr. Marcon wrote.

　　其他研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，早期教學(xué)實(shí)際上可能會(huì)使學(xué)業(yè)表現(xiàn)變得更糟。北佛羅里達(dá)大學(xué)(University of North Florida)心理學(xué)教授麗貝卡·A·馬爾孔(Rebecca A. Marcon)對(duì)343名參加學(xué)前教育的兒童進(jìn)行了研究，其中有的學(xué)前班“以學(xué)業(yè)為導(dǎo)向”，有的鼓勵(lì)“兒童自發(fā)”學(xué)習(xí)，或者介于兩者之間。她在幾年之后查 看這些已經(jīng)升入三或四年級(jí)的學(xué)生的表現(xiàn)，發(fā)現(xiàn)四年級(jí)的學(xué)習(xí)結(jié)束后，那些接受教學(xué)式指導(dǎo)的學(xué)生的成績(jī)遠(yuǎn)低于那些有更多機(jī)會(huì)通過(guò)玩來(lái)學(xué)習(xí)的孩子的成績(jī)。馬爾孔 寫道，“學(xué)前班促使兒童接觸正式的學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷，這對(duì)于大多數(shù)兒童的成長(zhǎng)階段來(lái)說(shuō)都是過(guò)早的，而這種過(guò)多的學(xué)前班學(xué)習(xí)經(jīng)歷可能會(huì)阻礙”兒童的進(jìn)步。

　　Nevertheless, many educators want to curtail play during school. “Play is often perceived as immature behavior that doesn’t achieve anything,” says David Whitebread, a psychologist at Cambridge University who has studied the topic for decades. “But it’s essential to their development. They need to learn to persevere, to control attention, to control emotions. Kids learn these things through playing.”

　　然而，很多教育人士希望縮短孩子在學(xué)習(xí)期間的玩耍時(shí)間。“玩通常被認(rèn)為是一種不成熟的行為，不會(huì)成就任何事情，”劍橋大學(xué)(Cambridge University)心理學(xué)家戴維·瓦特布雷(David Whitebread)說(shuō)。“但這在他們的成長(zhǎng)過(guò)程中是必不可少的。他們需要學(xué)會(huì)堅(jiān)持、控制注意力，控制感情。孩子通過(guò)玩耍學(xué)會(huì)這些事情。”瓦特布雷研究 該課題已有數(shù)十年時(shí)間。

　　Over the past 20 years, scientists have come to understand much more about how children learn. Jay Giedd, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego, has spent his career studying how the human brain develops from birth through adolescence; he says most kids younger than 7 or 8 are better suited for active exploration than didactic explanation. “The trouble with over-structuring is that it discourages exploration,” he says.

　　在過(guò)去20年中，科學(xué)家已經(jīng)對(duì)孩子的學(xué)習(xí)過(guò)程有了更多了解。加州大學(xué)圣迭戈分校(University of California, San Diego)神經(jīng)系統(tǒng)學(xué)家杰伊·吉德(Jay Giedd)的專業(yè)領(lǐng)域是研究人類大腦從出生到青春期的發(fā)育過(guò)程;他表示，與說(shuō)教式的解釋相比，大多數(shù)不到7或8歲的孩子更適合主動(dòng)探索。他說(shuō)，“過(guò)于死 板的教學(xué)會(huì)阻礙探索。”

　　Reading, in particular, can’t be rushed. It has been around for only about 6,000 years, so the ability to transform marks on paper into complex meaning is not pre-wired into the brain. It doesn’t develop “naturally,” as do other complex skills such as walking; it can be fostered, but not forced. Too often that’s what schools are trying to do now. This is not to suggest that we shouldn’t increase access to preschool, and improve early education for disadvantaged children. But the early education that kids get — whatever their socioeconomic background — should truly help their development. We must hope that those who make education policy will start paying attention to this science.

　　尤其是閱讀，不能急于求成。閱讀只有大約6000年的歷史，因此大腦并不先天具備將紙上的符號(hào)轉(zhuǎn)化為復(fù)雜含義的能力。與走路等復(fù)雜技能不同，閱讀能 力不是“天生的”;這種能力可以培養(yǎng)，但不能強(qiáng)迫掌握。而學(xué)?，F(xiàn)在常常迫使學(xué)生掌握這種能力。這不是說(shuō)，我們不應(yīng)該增加接受學(xué)前教育的機(jī)會(huì)，改善貧困兒童 的早期教育。但無(wú)論其社會(huì)經(jīng)濟(jì)背景如何，孩子們接受的早期教育應(yīng)該真正幫助他們發(fā)展。我們希望教育政策制定者會(huì)開(kāi)始關(guān)注這方面的科學(xué)研究。