Go homepage(回首页) Upload pictures (上传图片) Write articles (发文字帖)
The author:(作者)hpmailerpublished in(发表于) 2013/12/5 11:09:29 Teach textbook error apology refused to recall being irresponsible
Recently, Zhengzhou, Peng Banghuai pointed out that people's education Publishing House of Chinese teachers have more than more than 30 mistakes new beginning Chinese books, and place the people's education Publishing House, told the Court. Subsequently, the apology made by the people's education Publishing House on its website, recognition of which there are 6 errors. People's education society official says, in front of the teacher feedback, very early receive teacher feedback, except for "one-to-one" communication, direct exchange of revisions. As to whether it was possible, the materials are recalled, taught said it was impossible to recall all teaching materials, this is the press unprecedented things. (December 4, the Beijing Youth daily)
Criticism
Do not respond to false is not responsible for
"Due to the short notice, some editing problems", Guy teaches apologized in a letter to the wrong reasons already people can't calm down; it's textbook, how many students nationwide to learn, how "short" arising from lower-level error? Less time or less responsible? However, more surprising is that people's education society "had received some feedback from teachers"; in other words, before the teachers take them to court, who taught knows it's wrong but do not change, and feedback "one-to-one" communication, but no action was taken, don't even have on their official website, "Kwong told".
Don't change this is not typical of what's wrong with you? Which is responsible for the education on students ' attitudes? If it weren't for teachers to court this time, people will remain calm about this secret had to make one wonder, who teaches social apologize apologize, whether it's true, or just to prepare for litigation?
People's education society official said, "teachers also have a responsibility, if textbooks are clearly wrong, he should be corrected. "The problem is, the teacher does not replace the responsibility of teaching material responsibility of the. Since it is the Ministry of education designated material, the programmer should be in a highly responsible manner with full respect for those who picked the wrong, and timely corrective action; the interests of students and teachers using the right materials, publishing houses to show significant errors are supposed to take responsibility. Each manufacturer for the product in question has recalled the responsibility, not to mention is the designated textbook quality problems should strive for? Taught categorical response "cannot recall" is not a responsible attitude.
Knew it wrong, did not hesitate to students and teachers; teachers take them to court, which had correct the inherent problems; for bad teachers, neither welcome nor thanks; teaching material to the question stated clearly that "cannot recall" ... ... All this was "unparalleled arrogance." Just because material is designated by the Education Department, schools and teachers and students do not have the right to choose. If you have very smooth error-correction mechanisms, error correction to all sectors of the community to give teaching materials, like newspapers and magazines welcome reader error correction, not ignored but greeted with a smile and readily accept good advice and give incentives, teachers need to go to court to require a textbook correction?
Shu Shengxiang
Commending the
One true superpower in change
People's education publishing house wrong, and, in its official online public release. In the past, it is hard to see at the moment. Teach for not joining in Zhengzhou that secondary school teachers have pointed out that all errors, however, can admit that 6 of the mistake and apologized in the letter for the whole society is indeed commendable.
Taught, in the field of materials planning, publication and distribution, the boss is well deserved. In the past the oldest, still does not have his. "People's education publishing house" 7 words, has served as the most common Chinese characters on our desks, much more than on Lu Xun's desk "good" character, the more impressive. Moreover, regardless of age, from 50 to 00, nearly all grow up learning to teach material, these 7 words constitute the collective memory of all the people.
However, world without end, authoritative textbooks again there could be this kind of problem. Turns out, people's education publishing house textbook, does live up to the hopes of all people, reflected in: using articles without attribution, plagiarism of famous works of foreign authors, invented heroes story, bruising death to renzhang ... ... In recent years, is the leading national education oriented intent: deleting the Outlaws of the article, delete the LU Xun, and made the Chinese textbooks for an increasing lack of passion, and distasteful.
Boss bow that I'm wrong, is sometimes a difficult thing. Because, admit mistakes of fact, sometimes it's a cheapening of things. Sometimes may also incur the teachers and students of cursing and bricks. However, presentation, publication and distribution of teaching materials, couldn't have been monopolies, between publishing houses, eventually spell power, spell attitude. Teaching materials in the form of publications and ordering the release of already broke the monopoly.
In a market environment of fair competition, only a sincere attitude, searching to get a better relationship with only the better reputation, for larger orders. People's education society for errors and inherent problems in Chinese teaching material on the Web made the wrong letter of apology, is a valuable step forward. Not only does not drop, and a very long face. This embodies China's primary and middle school textbook publishing, printing and distribution, and ongoing market-oriented reforms, "one true superpower" situation is changing, and the mistake will be corrected after, reducing the chances of fraught belongs to "educate" plan for the future.
Wang Chuantao
Recommended
After the apology needs to do three things
To tell the truth, recognized by the people's education society 6 errors, technical content is quite low, there is no academic difference. For example, "Shu-bath" and "bathe" the mistake such as punctuation mistake is sloppy. Can say, teach error is about attitude, not related to academic. This sloppy attitude, although subtle, but have a great impact. Lu Xun once said, "the responsibility of proofreading and writing is as significant. "Sloppy mistake can affect students ' learning attitude and creative approach. Textbooks should be sacred, in the face of a disrespectful to myself teaching, readers say about respect. Therefore, I would like to teach's apology is sincere, heartfelt, aware of these errors is their shame; instead of red tape, the superficial, just to appease public opinion.
How to authenticate people's education society is it sincere? We don't see someone teaching staff even the owner's heart, only to see them in their actions. In my opinion, want to establish their position of authority, people, community, students believed that teaching materials, they need to do the following three things:
First, intensify proofreading. Each academic year prior to the printing of teaching materials, the materials are released to the community, and to society sought "architect", the establishment of "a single word is worth a thousand pieces of gold" award. Second, social proof, while article material to the original author commissioned was alive, inviting them to proofread your article. Lu Xun said, "than proofreading by myself. How do even cursory, typo is no worse than others. "At the same time, the author proofreading can best avoid problems with textbook article will be changed beyond recognition. As Lu Xun said, "printed by the school staff and terrifying. He felt wrong, probably to change hosting, do not check the manuscript, so sometimes there is a world of. "Thirdly, the most important thing, apology letter printed on the materials. This is an avid reader of an account is on a spur of its own, is also vigilant for posterity – "we made naive mistakes. "Once during the Republican period in the Education Act:" taught book printing error in the attached errata and, Second Edition, corrected. "This would be very helpful for us to learn from and improve, I may as well try on apology letter printed educational materials.
Jiang Bojing
Extended
Textbooks must be "authoritative"
Zhengzhou, the teacher, will spearhead the textbooks "Woodpecker", relentlessly searching for errors, purification of textbooks for the children, admirable; admit mistakes and accept criticism with an open mind, and apologize to all persons, including children, people's education press is also admirable, at least, I am in favour of what they're doing.
In the view of most users, textbooks should be perfect, otherwise, it would mislead children. It should be said that this is a more mainstream view. However, the author of this did not fully endorse-the textbook does not have to be perfect, "the most authoritative". Everybody says, no one is perfect, any problems, textbooks, too, when Tiger Snooze, there is textbook editing without omissions. Moreover, the old saying says: believe you than no book. If the textbook is not wrongly written or mispronounced characters, no punctuation errors, no errors of grammar and common sense without errors, everything is so perfect, no challenge, so, this textbook will nurture talent who dare to question it? Open to question.
Concern was expressed, textbook errors or misleading students. Considered opinion, such fears need not have. Just like in Chinese textbooks on the seven-year "bathe", written "Shu bath", a "dot" difference is a difference, however, how many students are there because the textbook to mislead "bathe", written typos? It can be said that few and far between, even negligible. Now, I have a strange idea of textbooks may wish to set some wrong, for elementary school students in the country to do "Woodpecker", finding these bugs, publishing house and then get the error for the first child a small gift, can stimulate children's interest in learning, but also to question the mental training.
From a certain point of view, education is to develop students ' consciousness of asking questions, the civilization and progress of mankind, is straightened one question mark, exclamation point. A perfect textbook, unable to motivate students dared to question ideas, when the students ' textbooks only worship and does not dare to challenge, that isn't education a tragedy?
Huang Qichao
"People's education" 6 error recognition
1.P20 "reading a reading and writing about", "Shu-bath" should be "bath".
2.P33 "reading a reading and writing about", "authority" should be "comfort".
3.P53 the third line "... ... Do not pass the acquisition? "After the lack of quotation marks, should be added.
4.P117 fossil yin, a poem, between 4th and 5th line should be empty.
5. the sixth row of the PostScript "the compulsory education curriculum standards (2011)", after a short book titles should be added.
6. the print version of the color (March 2013) in addition to the above corrections, but otherwise: P105 notes 3rd row, "good, good, beautiful" should be ", well, beautiful."
-A few words
Should be recalled.
--Wang Er
People's education press is best, we gave in geography and history textbooks, not the people's education press, couldn't see.
--Kyuhei too
So many mistakes! Department of education audit?
-The ningjin
Early known Chinese textbook errors are not correct! What is a fraught, what is writing about, what is executive power, what is called authorities. What's wrong is not actively declare correction, wait for the next version to correct. Your child can read grade 7, please? My head.
--Haiyuxuan
Social attitudes are very different! But as teaching material, if your editing and proofreading too sloppy, too? --Liu Xin
See this news as a businessman first reaction is not to reprint is for economic reasons? Business is business, nothing wrong with this. But if education is treated then what hope do we have?!
--Zhao Wei
"Shu bath" when "bath". Materials with this type of clerical error, change typos offers the best samples for students. Students are no longer superstitious authority: textbooks can make mistakes, not to mention, develop students ' consciousness of asking questions. Thanks to teach its good intentions. --Banana Sun rain
近日，郑州语文教师彭帮怀指出人教版新版初一语文书上有30多处错误，并将人民教育出版社告上法院。其后，人民教育出版社在官网发致歉信，承认该教材的确存在6处错误。人教社相关负责人表示，在这位老师反馈前，很早就收到一些老师反馈，只不过此前为“一对一”沟通，直接交流订正。对是否有可能把教材召回，人教社表示，不可能把所有教材召回，这是出版界史无前例的事情。(12月4日《北京青年报》)
批评
不回应实乃不负责
“由于时间仓促，出现一些编校问题”，人教社致歉信给出的出错理由，已经让人很不能淡定了；这可是教材啊，全国多少学生要学的，怎么会因“时间仓促”而出现低级错误呢？到底是少了时间，还是少了责任心？然而，更让人吃惊的是，人教社竟然表示“早就收到了一些教师的反馈”；换言之，在彭老师将其告上法庭之前，人教社明知有错却一直不改，只与反馈者“一对一”沟通，而没有采取任何行动，甚至都没在官网上“广而告知”一下。
这不就是典型的知错不改吗？这算是对教育对学生负责的态度吗？如果不是彭老师这次告到法院，人教社是否仍将继续对此淡定地秘而不宣不得不让人怀疑，人教社的道歉究竟是真道歉，还是只为应诉做准备？
人教社负责人表示，“老师其实也有责任，如果教科书有明显错误，他也应该纠正过来。”问题是，教师的责任并不能代替教材编写者的责任。既然是教育部指定教材，编写者理应以高度负责的态度充分尊重挑错者，并及时整改；学生和教师有使用正确教材的权益，出版社对出现明显错误理应承担责任。各类厂商对问题产品都有召回责任，更何况是最应精益求精的指定教材出现质量问题？人教社断然回应“不可能召回”，实在不是负责的态度。
早就知道有错，却不及时告知师生；被教师告上法庭，才勉强更正硬伤；对挑错教师，既不欢迎也不感谢；对问题教材，明确表示“不可能召回”……凡此种种，简直就是“无与伦比的傲慢”。就是因为教材是教育部门指定的，学校和师生并没有选择权。如果有非常畅通的纠错机制，对社会各界给教材纠错，就像报纸杂志欢迎读者纠错那样，不是置之不理而是笑脸相迎、从善如流并给出奖励，彭老师还用得着去法院起诉，以要求教材编写者纠错吗？
舒圣祥
赞扬
一家独大的局面在改变
人民教育出版社认错了，而且，在其官网上公开发布。在以往，这是很难见到的一幕。虽然人教社并没有认同郑州那位中学教师指出的全部错误，但是，能够承认其中的6处错误并且向全社会发表致歉信已经实属难能可贵。
人教社，在教材编排、出版和发行领域，是当之无愧的老大。在过去是老大，在现在仍然无所出其右。“人民教育出版社”这7个字，一直作为我们书桌上的最常见汉字，远远比鲁迅书桌上的“早”字，更加印象深刻。而且，不分年龄，从50后到00后，几乎都是学着人教社的教材长大的，这7个字构成了全体国人的集体回忆。
然而，世无完物，再权威的教材也可能会存在这样那样的问题。事实证明，人教版的各门教材，确实有些辜负全体国民的希望，具体表现在：使用外国作者的文章不署名、抄袭名家作品、捏造英模故事、存在硬伤死不认账……近些年来，更是有主导国民教育导向的意图：删除《水浒传》文章、删除鲁迅，搞得语文教材越来越缺少激情，味同嚼蜡。
让老大低头认错，有时是很难的事。因为，承认事实上的错误，有时候是很掉价儿的事。有时还可能招来广大师生的骂声和板砖。但是，教材的编排、出版和发行，不可能一直垄断下去，出版社之间，最终还是要拼实力、拼态度。我国教材的发行出版和订购早已在形式上打破了垄断。
公平竞争的市场环境中，只有诚恳的态度，才能换来更好的口碑；只有更好的口碑，才能换来更大的订单。人教社针对语文教材中的错误和硬伤在网络上发表认错致歉信，是可贵的进步。不仅不掉价儿，而且，非常长面子。这既体现了我国中小学教材的出版、印刷及发行，正在进行市场化改革，“一家独大”的局面正在发生着改变，而且，认错之后会改错，减少误人子弟的几率是属于“百年树人”的大计。
王传涛
建议
道歉后还需做三件事
说实话，人教社承认的6处错误，技术含量相当低，并没有学术分歧。比如“沭浴”和“沐浴”之误，比如标点之误，纯属马虎所致。可以这样说，人教社的错误，事关态度，与学术无关。这种马虎态度，虽然细微，却影响甚大。鲁迅曾经说过，“校对和创作的责任是一样重大的。”马虎的错误，会影响学生的学习态度和创作态度。教材应该是神圣的，面对一本对自己都不尊重的教材，读者谈何尊重。所以，我希望人教社的道歉是真诚的、发自内心的，认识到这些错误是自己的耻辱；而不是做官样文章，浮光掠影，仅仅为了平息舆论。
如何能验证人教社是否诚恳呢？我们窥不到人教社工作人员甚至负责人的内心，只有看他们今后的所作所为。在笔者看来，想要树立自己的权威地位，让民众、社会、学生相信人教社的教材，他们需要做好以下三点：
第一，把校对工作推向社会。每学年的教材印刷之前，把教材向社会公布，向社会寻求“一字师”，设立“一字千金”的奖励。第二，社会校对的同时，委托在世的教材选文原作者，请他们校对自己的选文。鲁迅说过，“校稿还不如仍由我自己校。即使怎样草草，错字也不会比别人所校的多也。”同时，作者校稿也可以最大限度避免教材将选文改得面目全非的问题。就如鲁迅所言，“印刷局的校员，可怕之至。他于觉得错误处，大抵以意改令通顺，并不查对原稿，所以有时简直有天渊之别。”第三，最重要的一点，把道歉信印在教材上。这是对热心读者的一个交代，是对自己的一个鞭策，也是对后人的警醒——“我们曾经犯过这样幼稚的错误。”民国时期曾经有过这样的教育法令：“教科用书印刷错误须一律于书后附勘误表并于再版时更正。”这种做法很值得我们借鉴和改进，把道歉信印在教材上不妨一试。
姜伯静
延伸
教科书一定要“最权威”吗
郑州这位教师，甘当教科书的“啄木鸟”，锲而不舍地寻找错误，为孩子们净化教科书，令人钦佩；勇于承认错误，虚心接受批评，并表示向包括孩子们在内的所有人道歉，人民教育出版社也令人敬佩，至少，我很赞成他们的做法。
在多数网友看来，教科书应当完美无缺，否则，就会误导孩子。应该说，这是较为主流的观点。不过，笔者对此并不完全赞同——教科书不必做完美无缺的“最权威”。大家都说，人无完人，金无足赤，教科书也是如此，老虎也有打盹的时候，难保教科书的编审没有遗漏之处。再者，古语曰：尽信书则不如无书。如果教科书没有错别字，没有错误的标点，没有错误的语法，没有错误的常识，一切都是那么完美无缺，不可挑战，那么，这样的教科书能培养出敢于质疑的人才吗？值得商榷。
有人担忧，教科书上的错误或将误导学生。窃以为，这样的担忧大可不必有。就像七年级上册语文教材中把“沐浴”写成了“沭浴”，一“点”之差，固然谬之千里，但是，有多少学生是因为教科书上的误导把“沐浴”写成了错别字？可以说，少之又少，甚至可以忽略不计。现在，我倒有个奇怪的想法，教科书不妨故意设置一些错误，让全国的小学生来做“啄木鸟”，找到这些错误，出版社再给首个找到错误的孩子一个小礼物，更能激发孩子的学习兴趣，也有利于敢于质疑精神的培养。
从某个角度看，教育就是培养学生的质疑精神，人类的文明与进步，就是把一个个问号拉直，成了感叹号。一本完美无缺的教科书，无法激发学生敢于质疑的思想火花，当学生对教科书唯有崇拜，而不敢质疑时，那何尝不是教育的一种悲哀？
黄齐超
“人教社”承认的6处错误
1.P20“读一读 写一写”中，“沭浴”应为“沐浴”。
2.P33 “读一读 写一写”中，“权威”应为“劝慰”。
3.P53第三行 “……传不习乎？”，缺后引号，应加上。
4.P117 《化石吟》一诗，第4行和第5行之间应该空行。
5.《后记》倒数第六行“《义务教育语文课程标准(2011年)版》”，缺后书名号，应加上。
6.该册教材彩色本(2013年3月第2版)除上述更正外，另有：P105注释第3行，“佳、好、美”应为“嘉、好、美”。
-三言两语
●理应召回。
——王耳
●人教版算最好的了，我们当年用的地理历史教材，不是人教版的，简直没法看。
——久平太
●这么多错误！教育部怎么审核的？
——宁晋
●早知晓语文教材出错却不改！什么叫是误人子弟，什么叫文章千古事，什么叫行政权，什么叫主管单位。知错不主动声明校正，等下一版改正。你家小孩会重读7年级吗？我的负责人。
——海宇轩
●大社的态度就是不一样！但作为教材，你们的编校是不是也太马虎了？——刘心喜
●作为一个生意人看到这个新闻第一反应是不重印是出于经济考虑吗？在商言商，本没有错。但如果连教育都如此对待那咱们还有什么希望？！
——赵为
●“沭浴”当为“沐浴”。教材出现此类笔误，为学生改错别字提供了最好的样本。让学生不再迷信权威：教材也可能出错，别的更不用说了，培养了学生的质疑精神。感谢人教社的良苦用心。——孙蕉雨
赞