孩子的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，上學前班、幼兒園、甚至一二年級的孩子們，大部分時間都在玩：堆積木、畫畫、創作想象的世界，在腦瓜裏想這些事，或和同學一起玩。但這些活動越來越多地被老師的教學所替代，而這種教育方式過去通常用於年級較高的學生。在很多學校，正規教育現在是從4或5歲開始的。人們認爲，如果不提早開始接受教育，孩子們在閱讀、數學等關鍵科目上恐怕會落後，或許永遠都無法再趕回來。

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

這個想法似乎是顯而易見的：越早開始意味着學到的越多：早起的鳥兒有蟲吃。

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.

但越來越多的科學家、教育研究者和教育工作者表示，沒有證據表明這種方式會提高長期的成績；實際上，它可能會帶來相反的效果，可能會阻礙情感及認知方面的發展，造成不必要的壓力，甚至可能會扼殺孩子的求知慾。

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(Lesley University)的教育學榮休教授南茜·卡爾鬆-佩奇(Nancy Carlsson-Paige)有過一番交談。卡爾鬆-佩奇稱，這種趨勢反映了對“孩子的學習過程深深的誤解”。她定期參觀學校，看到很多年紀較小的學生無法理解授課內容：“我在很多教室看到過很多類似的情況，老師讓學生坐在桌子旁，抄寫字母。他們不知道自己在幹什麼。真讓人感到難過。”

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?

這場爭論事關重大。在教師早期指導的質疑者看來，那種教育方式無法培養出能夠發現、創新的人才，只會培養出傾向於被動接受信息的人，追隨者，而不是創造者。在21世紀，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.

在過去10年中，越來越多的早期教育措施在美國迅速蔓延。《不讓孩子掉隊》法案 (No Child Left Behind)、“力爭上游”計劃(Race to the Top)等項目，促使學生面對更多測驗，接受更多由教師主導的教學。

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.

另一個原因：各州共同核心標準(Common Core State Standards)。這套詳盡的教育方針，旨在確保學生在經歷幼兒園到12年級的學習後，達到一定的標準。目前，43個州和哥倫比亞特區採納了數學和語言方面的標準。

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

轉而採用說教的方式是爲了解決兩個緊迫的問題。

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.

從很多方面來看，美國的教育成就落後於其他國家；與此同時，數百萬美國學生的成績仍遠遠低於全國水平，這些學生中很多人家境貧困，屬於少數族裔。倡導人士表示，提前開始正規教育將有助於縮小這種雙重差距。

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。包括芬蘭和愛沙尼亞在內的幾個國家的義務教育都是從7歲纔開始。國際學生評估項目(Program for International Student Assessment)對各個國家的教育水平做出的最新對比顯示，這兩個國家在數學、科學及閱讀能力上的排名都比美國高。

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.

當然，這些國家比美國小，不平等和多樣性的程度也較低。在這樣的情況下，教育構成的挑戰較少。7歲開始上學的政策在美國不太可能行得通：那會導致太多小孩——無論貧困與否——可能一天會看幾個小時的電視，而不是參加提升未來教育成績的活動。在美國，教育的任務非常複雜，但這也沒有消除一個基本事實，即課堂組織過於死板對許多兒童沒有好處。

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，可能會幫助一些學生，但這種幫助似乎是暫時的。德國阿蘭努斯大學(Alanus University)的教育研究者塞巴斯蒂安·P·薩蓋特(Sebastian P. Suggate)在2009年開展了一項研究，對50多個國家的40萬名15歲學生進行調查，發現早上學並沒有帶來優勢。薩蓋特在2012年發表的另一項研究，在幾年的時間裏對83名學生開展了調查，結果發現那些5歲開始學習的學生，閱讀理解能力不如晚些開始學習的學生。

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.

其他研究發現，早期教學實際上可能會使學業表現變得更糟。北佛羅里達大學(University of North Florida)心理學教授麗貝卡·A·馬爾孔(Rebecca A. Marcon)對343名參加學前教育的兒童進行了研究，其中有的學前班“以學業爲導向”，有的鼓勵“兒童自發”學習，或者介於兩者之間。她在幾年之後查看這些已經升入三或四年級的學生的表現，發現四年級的學習結束後，那些接受教學式指導的學生的成績遠低於那些有更多機會通過玩來學習的孩子的成績。馬爾孔寫道，“學前班促使兒童接觸正式的學習經歷，這對於大多數兒童的成長階段來說都是過早的，而這種過多的學前班學習經歷可能會阻礙”兒童的進步。

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習期間的玩耍時間。“玩通常被認爲是一種不成熟的行爲，不會成就任何事情，”劍橋大學(Cambridge University)心理學家戴維·瓦特佈雷(David Whitebread)說。“但這在他們的成長過程中是必不可少的。他們需要學會堅持、控制注意力，控制感情。孩子通過玩耍學會這些事情。”瓦特佈雷研究該課題已有數十年時間。

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.

在過去20年中，科學家已經對孩子的學習過程有了更多瞭解。加州大學聖迭戈分校(University of California, San Diego)神經系統學家傑伊·吉德(Jay Giedd)的專業領域是研究人類大腦從出生到青春期的發育過程；他表示，與說教式的解釋相比，大多數不到7或8歲的孩子更適合主動探索。他說，“過於死板的教學會阻礙探索。”

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，不能急於求成。閱讀只有大約6000年的歷史，因此大腦並不先天具備將紙上的符號轉化爲複雜含義的能力。與走路等複雜技能不同，閱讀能力不是“天生的”；這種能力可以培養，但不能強迫掌握。而學校現在常常迫使學生掌握這種能力。這不是說，我們不應該增加接受學前教育的機會，改善貧困兒童的早期教育。但無論其社會經濟背景如何，孩子們接受的早期教育應該真正幫助他們發展。我們希望教育政策制定者會開始關注這方面的科學研究。