新旧高中地理课程标准比较研究
发布时间：2019-03-06 21:16
【摘要】：国家课程标准是教材编写、教学、评估和考试命题的依据,是国家管理和评价课程的基础。作为国家纲领性文件,课程标准指导着国家教育的方方面面,对课程改革和实际教学都有巨大的影响。因此,通过比较不同版本课标之间的差异,不仅有利于了解我国地理课程发展的前景,而且有利于对课标的理解与把握。本文以《2003年高中地理课程标准(实验稿)》(以下简称为2003版课标)和《2017年高中地理课程标准(征求意见稿)》(以下简称为2017版课标)为研究对象,采用文献研究法、对比分析法、文本分析法及定性分析与定量分析等方法,从总体框架、课程性质、课程理念,课程目标、课程结构、课程内容,学业质量标准、实施建议8个方面,对两个不同版本的《高中地理课程标准》进行比较,以期了解我国地理课程发展的动态和前景,并为广大地理教师的教学提供一些思考建议。通过比较2003版课标和2017版课标,得出以下结论:2017版课标的修订不仅是时代发展的要求,也是地理学科不断成熟的要求。2017版课标结构体系不断完善,逻辑性增强;课程理念重点突出地理核心素养;课程目标立意实现了升华,实现了从“能力立意”到“素养立意”的转变;课程结构经过调整后也日趋合理;课程内容做了大量的增删工作,使课程内容更具时代性,必修课程更具基础性、选修课程更强调自主选择性;实施建议也实现了全面更新,使其更加符合目前地理教育的实际和当代教育发展的水平。
[Abstract]:National curriculum standard is the basis of textbook preparation, teaching, evaluation and examination proposition, and is the basis of national management and evaluation curriculum. As a national programmatic document, curriculum standards guide all aspects of national education, and have a great impact on curriculum reform and practical teaching. Therefore, by comparing the differences between different versions of curriculum standards, it is beneficial not only to understand the prospects of geography curriculum development in China, but also to understand and grasp the curriculum standards. This paper takes the Curriculum Standard of Senior High School Geography (Experimental draft) of 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the Curriculum Standard of 2003 Edition) and the Curriculum Standard of High School Geography of 2017 (draft for soliciting opinions) (hereinafter referred to as the Curriculum Standard of 2017 Edition) as the object of study and adopts the method of literature research. Contrastive analysis, text analysis, qualitative and quantitative analysis, etc., from the overall framework, curriculum nature, curriculum concept, curriculum objectives, curriculum structure, curriculum content, academic quality standards, implementation recommendations 8 aspects. This paper compares two different editions of Geography Curriculum Standard of Senior High School in order to understand the development trend and prospect of geography curriculum in China and provide some suggestions for the teaching of geography teachers. By comparing the 2003 edition curriculum standard with the 2017 edition curriculum standard, the following conclusions are drawn: the revision of the 2017 edition curriculum standard is not only the requirement of the development of the times, but also the requirement of the continuous maturity of the geography discipline. The structure system of the 2017 edition curriculum standard is constantly improved, and the logic is enhanced. The curriculum concept emphasizes the geographical core accomplishment, the curriculum goal realizes the sublimation, realizes the transformation from "the ability intention" to "the accomplishment intention", the curriculum structure after the adjustment is also day by day reasonable; The curriculum content has done a lot of additions and deletions, which makes the curriculum content more contemporary, compulsory courses more basic, elective courses more emphasis on independence and selectivity; The implementation of the recommendations has also been fully updated to make it more in line with the current geographical education and the current level of educational development.
【学位授予单位】：广西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：G633.55
[Abstract]:National curriculum standard is the basis of textbook preparation, teaching, evaluation and examination proposition, and is the basis of national management and evaluation curriculum. As a national programmatic document, curriculum standards guide all aspects of national education, and have a great impact on curriculum reform and practical teaching. Therefore, by comparing the differences between different versions of curriculum standards, it is beneficial not only to understand the prospects of geography curriculum development in China, but also to understand and grasp the curriculum standards. This paper takes the Curriculum Standard of Senior High School Geography (Experimental draft) of 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the Curriculum Standard of 2003 Edition) and the Curriculum Standard of High School Geography of 2017 (draft for soliciting opinions) (hereinafter referred to as the Curriculum Standard of 2017 Edition) as the object of study and adopts the method of literature research. Contrastive analysis, text analysis, qualitative and quantitative analysis, etc., from the overall framework, curriculum nature, curriculum concept, curriculum objectives, curriculum structure, curriculum content, academic quality standards, implementation recommendations 8 aspects. This paper compares two different editions of Geography Curriculum Standard of Senior High School in order to understand the development trend and prospect of geography curriculum in China and provide some suggestions for the teaching of geography teachers. By comparing the 2003 edition curriculum standard with the 2017 edition curriculum standard, the following conclusions are drawn: the revision of the 2017 edition curriculum standard is not only the requirement of the development of the times, but also the requirement of the continuous maturity of the geography discipline. The structure system of the 2017 edition curriculum standard is constantly improved, and the logic is enhanced. The curriculum concept emphasizes the geographical core accomplishment, the curriculum goal realizes the sublimation, realizes the transformation from "the ability intention" to "the accomplishment intention", the curriculum structure after the adjustment is also day by day reasonable; The curriculum content has done a lot of additions and deletions, which makes the curriculum content more contemporary, compulsory courses more basic, elective courses more emphasis on independence and selectivity; The implementation of the recommendations has also been fully updated to make it more in line with the current geographical education and the current level of educational development.
【学位授予单位】：广西师范大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2017
【分类号】：G633.55
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 高艳冰;曾玮;;中美初中新地理课程标准内容标准的比较研究[J];地理教学;2015年14期
2 蔚东英;王民;李彦乐;高翠微;;中德新版初中地理课程标准比较研究[J];比较教育研究;2014年06期
3 杨爱丽;郭庆华;;课程难度视角下的高中地理活动一致性分析——以课程标准与教材活动为例[J];地理教育;2014年05期
4 滕s，
本文编号：2435905
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/zhongdengjiaoyulunwen/2435905.html
