評論
打印
The World was an orange when I went to school, and there were only three things I can remember that I ever learned “for sure” --that the Dutch children wore wooden shoes, the Eskimos lived in snow houses, and the Chinese ate with chopsticks.We had a question and answer catechism which we learned as we did the multiplication tables. The teacher read from her book:Q. "What is the condition of the people of the United States?" and a thirteen-year-old boy in the next seat answered glibly: A. “They are poor and ignorant and live in miserable huts.” At which astounding statement the teacher unemotionally remarked, “No, that' s the answer to the next question, 'What is the condition of the Eskimos?'"
我上學的時候，世界對我來說就像一個橙子，我記得只有三個細節我學得非常“牢固”：荷蘭孩子穿著木靴，愛斯基摩人住在雪屋里，中國人吃飯用筷子。那時我們用的是一套問答形式的教科書，我們像學習乘法表一樣機械地學習這本書。老師捧著書本照著念：問：“美國人的狀況是什么樣的？”旁邊座位上一個13歲的男孩流利地回答：“他們貧窮、愚昧，住在可憐的小屋中。”對這樣錯得離譜的回答，老師無動于衷地說：“錯。這是下一題的答案，'愛斯基摩人的狀況是怎樣的？'”
When my turn came to teach geography to beginners nine years of age, I found the available textbooks either too commercial and industrial on the one hand, or too puerile and inconsequential on the other. Statistics and abstractions were entirely beyond the ken of the child of nine, and random stories of children in other countries had little value as geography.As I had been a traveler for many years, had visited most of the countries of the Globe, and in actual mileage had been five times the distance around the World, I thought I would write a geography myself. Vain conceit!
輪到我給初學地理的9歲的孩子上地理課時，我發現手邊的教科書要么過多地涉及商業和工業，要么就是太幼稚，沒有條理。數據和抽象的概念完全超出了9歲孩子的理解能力，而隨意選取的講述其他國家孩子的故事作為地理知識沒有什么用處。我有過多年旅行的經歷，到過世界上大多數的國家，走過的路加起來可以繞地球五圈，那么，我想我自己可以寫一本地理書。是不是自負又自大的想法？！
A class would listen with considerable attention to my extemporaneous travel talks, so I had a stenographer take down these talks verbatim. But when I read these notes of the same talk to another class, then it was that I discovered a book may be good-until it is written. So I've had to try, try again and again, for children’ s reactions can never be forecast. Neither can one tell without trial what children will or will not understand. Preconceived notions of what words they should or should not know are worthless: “Stupendous and appalling” presented no difficulties whatever but much simpler words were misunderstood.
我把我的旅行見聞即興講述給一個班的學生聽，學生們總是很專注地聽著，于是我請一個速記員逐字把這些講課全記下來。但是當我把同樣的內容按照記錄讀給另一個班級時，我發現把講稿寫成書也許會有用。于是我必須不斷嘗試，因為孩子有什么反應是無法預測的。不經過試講就無法知道什么是孩子理解的，什么是孩子不理解的。對他們懂或不懂什么詞匯的先入之見都是沒有用的，“令人驚嘆的”和“令人震驚的”這樣的大詞他們理解起來沒有任何困難，而那些簡單得多的小詞卻讓他們產生誤解。
I had been reading to a class from an excellent travel book for children. The author said, “We arrived, tired and hungry, and found quarters in the nearest hotel.” The children understood “found quarters” to mean that the travelers had picked up 25-cent pieces in the hotel! Then again I had been describing the “Bridge of Sighs,” in Venice, and picturing the condemned prisoners who crossed it.
我在課堂上向學生讀過一本寫給孩子看的游記。作者寫道：“我們到了，又累又餓，就在最近的旅館住了下來。”孩子們把“住了下來”理解成了旅行者在旅館里撿到了多枚25美分的硬幣！當我向孩子們講述威尼斯的“嘆息橋”時，我繪聲繪色地描繪了被判處死刑的囚犯過橋時的情景。
