Software professional teaching reform three principles
Ok, it's three principles, tired? No way, now I am in this, I don't have a three, and I have no amount, I have to have a lot.
I. Practice first principle
The student's back book is an atmosphere, which professional is like this (except for the professional reading of the book). However, it is particularly harmful in software profession, as expected values are different. Other majors don't expect you to do anything after graduation, young people, slowly exercise. The software is not working. If you can't do anything, you will go to the blue collar, just follow the workshop. Students have stared at the high-pay positions, and they will fill in it. Such a high expectation value, it is afraid of the back. Some people really make good back, no matter what they don't understand, it is hard to make a high score. But then I can't eat, I didn't understand anything, and I went to the work unit. So talk about practical first principle. The so-called practice is to force the hand to do, and you can understand the problem. Walking far, it is the so-called teaching: starting with application development, what need to learn again. Of course, you can't take the extreme, what lesson is a research object. The basic class like mathematics, foreign languages can only be imposed from the beginning, can't wait for everyone to understand its "great meaning". However, it is actually another extreme: I have too much thing to give students. Students do not have much sense of sensibility to software design, facing a lot of concepts to deal with. They really don't understand what the concept is all, but I have to pass the exam, I can only rely on hard back. A relatively spiritual student can fade in the meaning of the meaning and is in the mind. They will slowly understand the problem later. Such students are often the best students, but unfortunately this kind of student is not much. Many students didn't understand those things to graduate. Of course, you can't expect students to eat everything, and many things can only experience in work practice. There is a measure of a metrics here: Most of the understanding is basically paste, this is the difference between essence. Practice is not to say that the basic principles are not learned, and the students will do the topic all over the day. "Data Structure" is a basic principle, and the algorithm is explained by a mathematical abstraction method (but unfortunately "data structure" is not taste, I don't know when someone can throw more about mathematics "data structure".). However, only the algorithm is not to be implemented, and the sky knows that there are several students to understand what the algorithm is busy with. The relationship between the layer of the Internet Agreement is clear enough, but some students will ask: I don't do so many layers, why not implement all the first floor? In the face of students who have no design experience, teachers are really speechless. If the teacher does not design experience, you can only find a ready-made answer on the book, or the king takes about him. In fact, students have to do a little network communication, even if it is a simple serial communication practice, it will win thousands of words. Therefore, the basic principles must be learned, but when starting classes, what is the basics, and there is room for explore. The class has been early, and the students lack sensation and practice; the practice of students will lack the theoretical and methods of guidance. In all aspects of experience, students can master a programming tool earlier, the sooner. But the programming tool is not equal to the programming language. The content of the language in the modern programming tool is less and less, more is the design method outside the language, but these things seem to have not received the summary of the IT industry, and have not yet formed the theoretical framework of the system. The so-called structured design method and OOP can only be summarized. Many things are only implicit in design practices as scattered experience. Students spend a stack of grammar, and can only be used to play a small program, but they are not really used to do it. In fact, it is related to the design gate, lost valuable practical opportunities. From this point of view, students should master a design tool for easy-to-use and powerful and theoretical connotation as soon as possible. The biggest problem for students to do design practices is to encounter problems and I don't know how to go down.
In fact, there are many small problems, but the students have never seen it, and they have spent a lot of time, and some people lose their confidence. At this time, you need to have an experienced instructor to dial. Therefore, the speaker needs to have design experience, and the experimental guidance also needs to have design experience. In a sense, the latter is more important than the former. Some somewhere is not a small college, and there are almost no one in the teacher, so that the teachers do not do it yourself. I really don't know how this college is going. The education system is limited, I am afraid this kind of problem can't be solved for a while. Second, self-study is the principle
Entering the university is in class, this is like the meaning of the sky (at least the following is the following). What kind of teacher class is good, it is how the lecture is vivid. A little bit, the student will say that the teacher is okay, at least everyone is awake, so this is. The school inspection teacher is also reading classroom teaching. In short, it is all around the classroom, and the traditional concept is not good. I remember that I have read a real joke before, saying that Westerners come to China to investigate education reform, and ask how to arrange the elimination of teachers, answer is: This is good, go to the library. The people are eye-catching because they are the best people to go to the library. From here, you can also see the characteristics of our university. In fact, some very good teachers are not good at classroom performances, but they are good at promoting students' extracurricular learning and teaching a lot of good students. Such people should be more suitable for teachers than those who will only perform. Of course, the teacher is better than that of all aspects, but it is required to be unrealistic, especially the computer class, and the knowledge is updated so fast. If you have a disease, you will find a bunch of new terms in front of it. A line. Coupled with institutional reasons, many people are busy all day to join the paper, and they are not interested in and engage in research. Such a group of people, I am afraid that I am not in the classroom. In this case, why not simply put the kung fu in encouraging students to learn? Encourage students to learn from school to become a self-study exam. If you have to be on, just a little less, fine, give students more free disposal time. Some people may feel that this will be able to open the game to play games. In fact, the key is how to examine how students' achievements. There is no role in the test that can cope with it. Instead, it is better to regulate a book to let students go, the exam only examines this book, not read, not read. Our universities are very concerned about the cultivation of cultivation. Almost every lesson requires students to learn to understand, but also remember the details of the 旮旮 旯旯, or it is difficult to get good results. Doing school needs to understand the problem, but this requires a certain knowledge. Good reading, don't ask for it, the result is what you know, you don't know anything; a number of details of death diamonds don't go wide reading, I only see the trees, I don't see the forest, and I will also do it. Our university generally does not require students to read, some school libraries don't even have many books (this is very different from Western universities). Some teachers have recommended their own books to students. Some students can expose group books. Most of them are spontaneous, generally not reflected in the academic performance. Therefore, the general student only smashed the designated textbook. Foreign teachers have asked students to read this reading, making many students not suitable. This difference is probably one of the reasons why we can't enter the world-level university. The design practice is also the case, and it seems that it is very important to pay attention to it. Students can pass the homework, how do you know that the homework is not downloaded or copied? If each student must pass the defense, talk about how his design is ideal, and the situation is very different. The author has done a similar test. As a result, some students have a half-dead, and finally, I will actually make an elephant pattern like something. Some students have never thought of such a big matter, this is probably the release of the potential. Of course, so that teachers should pay a lot of heart, but their effect is far more than paying, whether it can be implemented is in the education management system. Teachers don't necessarily know more than students, this is common sense. There are always some students who have worked hard and love their brains, and they don't think they know. Let students communicate with each other, better than the teacher.
The class can also make students exchange, but after all, the time is limited, coupled with the feelings of the students in front of teachers, and classroom exchange can only be used as a demonstration, and it is impossible to solve fundamental problems. This requires teaching managers and teachers to cooperate with each other to create an atmosphere and opportunity to exchange extracurricular exchanges. Third, the principle of the river
The more it, the more spectrum, how is higher education crossing the river? Sorry, I can't find the right words. It is probably: the current teaching method is basically "planning", from the syllabus, textbooks to teaching methods, everything is planned, but many planning is really not dare Compliment, it is better to relax the plan, let the teacher tested forward. Computer science is still a child compared to mathematics, physics, whether it is theory or method is very tender. Software disciplines are not in young children, and they are more babies. The textbook of the big head, it looks quite scary, in fact, there is not much mature thing. Take the software project, telling a set of sets, I really feel how to use it. Students have learned software engineering, thinking that in order to master a tool, can design software according to scientific methods, but after graduation, it is discovered that everyone does not comply with the design principles, so far from the industrial system. There is a problem in the system, but software engineering itself has problems. The biggest problem is to try to guide complex engineering designs with unripe design methods. Many people now realize that complex software is growing, not planned. Software engineering also needs great effort to study the law of software growth, can't always be around how to plan design and circle. This example is to explain that a young discipline, its teaching method should be different from mature traditional disciplines, should give teachers more choice, should not look too heavy. Originally, my country's education system has the disadvantages of being too dead, and traditional disciplines are also deeply harmful, and young disciplines that are rapidly developed are more likely to know. The management always tends to "guilty premises", always feel that no matter what kind of teacher will make a self-flow, it is not responsible, and the students will share a piece of sand and cannot be cleaned. However, this management method is exactly in violation of the basic principles of teaching schools, and the true knowledge of teachers and the spirit of the creation of students are killed. Which student wants to have the starting point and teaching progress suitable for yourself, and it is difficult for teachers to do this. Not only a problem that is difficult (unless the information revolution has made true special education, this problem may never solve it). The bigger problem is that teaching planning and student do not meet, teachers will continue to follow the plan. Teaching plan can only be developed in accordance with general experience, it often does not meet students' truth, and often behind IT development. However, teachers have no right to change the teaching plan developed by the top, knowing that this is very disadvantageous to the students, and can only walk forward. Many schools are fashionable by students to score for teachers, and some schools are even a month. The author has also been "fortunate" to participate in the design of such evaluation management software. Looking at those who have a discrete project, I really don't know what the teacher dares to do. I believe that most students want to judge their own teacher, but students do not understand the details of the teaching, and can only fill in the evaluation card according to the fixed format, and the statistical average of the formed is a unified framework, and the teachers are formatted. . This model is easily forcing teachers to move towards mediocrity, become a thin thinking, and even forcing teachers who have creating courage to choose to abandon their teachings. The ultimate victim is still a student. College students should have the right to choose to learn content and learning. The same truth, university teachers should also have the right to choose teaching content and teaching. Of course, this right is not absolute, need to be negotiated with the management and student, but the final decision maker should be the teacher himself. The university teacher is not a nanny, does not need to be a "nanny" to see and move the students. The basic task of teachers is to learn and help students do learning. Teachers should be good at independent thinking, unique teaching style, with their own scientific spirit to influence and drive students.
