【正文】 cities. 我們怎樣對待這些天才呢？我堅信我們應按興趣和能力(天賦多少的程度)盡可能接近地把他們分在一組，用能夠幫助他們盡可能充分發(fā)揮他們的能力和才華的教學計劃給他們考驗、刺激。 4 This grouping could take the form of special subject arrangements in the elementary grades, a situation in which a class is heterogeneously grouped most of the day but is divided at times into special interest or ability class groups for special instruction. In high school, it may take the form of grouping students in regular classes according to any number of criteria but basically those of interest and proficiency (or lack of proficiency) in various subject areas.在低年級可安排特別課程加以組班，即在一天中的大部分時間里學生在多元化的班級學習，而在一些時間內(nèi)，只按特別興趣和能力分類組班，專門施教。在中學，可任意規(guī)定標準組織普通班，但基本上可按照對不同科目的興趣和水平(或缺乏水平)為標準來分班。5 One of the basic arguments against grouping the gifted is the fear of creating a caste of intellectual snobs. Similarly, some educators fear that the average and slow students would e to regard themselves as inferior. 反對將天才學生集中起來的基本論點之一是唯恐這樣會造就一群自以為很有知識，高人一等的人，同樣地，一些教育工作者擔憂那些智力平平、反應遲鈍的學生會認為自己低人一等。6 If my definition of the gifted is accepted, then these fears are groundless. After all, the schools have grouped gifted athletes for years. Yet how many athletes regard themselves as part of an elite? Do varsity athletes look down upon other pupils as inferior? The vast majority apparently do not.如果我對天才的定義能夠被接受，那么這些憂慮都是沒有根據(jù)的，畢竟多年來許多學校已經(jīng)將天才的運動員集中在一起，但又有多少運動員認為他們自己是精英名流的一部分呢？大學體育代表隊的運動員們將別的學生視為低能嗎?絕大多數(shù)顯然不是這樣的。7 Consider also the amount of “gifted grouping” in speech, music, art, and journalism. Schools have readily grouped the gifted in these areas without any apparent ill effect. To the extent of my observation, encouraging gifted debaters, musicians, artists, and writers to develop their special talents does not create envy or feelings of inferiority among less talented students. 再看一下在演講、音樂、美術(shù)和寫字等方面將天才集中在一起的情況吧。許多學校已經(jīng)集中這些方面的天才而無任何明顯的不良影響。僅就我的觀察來說，鼓勵天才的辯論家、音樂家和作家，發(fā)展他們的特別才能并不會產(chǎn)生妒忌或在才能較低的學生中產(chǎn)生自卑感。 8 If educators sincerely desire to promote individual growth and selfrespect, they have no grounds, as far as I can see, to fear any kind of grouping. The teacher, not the manner in which a class is organized, determines students39。 attitudes toward individual differences. Before he can hope to instill the proper attitude, however, the teacher needs to make a critical analysis of his own attitudes toward such differences. 如果教育者真心希望促進個人成長和自尊心，那么至少在我看來，他們沒有理由為任何形式的分班集中而憂慮。決定學生對個人差異的態(tài)度是教師而不是班級的組織形式，在向?qū)W生灌輸正確態(tài)度之前，教師應首先恰當分析自己對這種差異的態(tài)度?！　? If a group of gifted or nongifted students form the wrong concept about themselves, the fault probably lies with the teachers, parents, or administrators. I have confidence that if teachers accept and respect individual worth, that if they challenge and spark interests in young people, the individual student will mature and grow successfully along the lines of his interests and abilities. I say, let those with similar “gifts” associate, plan, and enjoy being together. 如果一群有天賦的或沒天賦的學生對于自身有錯誤概念，其錯誤在于教師、家長或管理人員。我有信心說，如果教師接受并尊重個人價值，如果他們激發(fā)和啟迪年輕人的興趣，那么每個學生都將成功地沿著興趣和能力的方向長大成熟。讓那些具有相似才能的人互相交往、共同計劃，享受在一起的歡樂。10 Many educators disagree with the idea of gifted grouping because they believe that it does not affect achievement significantly. They cite pilot studies which indicate that no significant change in achievement results when children are separated into slow and accelerated classes. 許多教育者不同意將天才者集中在一起，因為他們認為這樣做對成功沒有顯著影響。他們以試點研究為例，說明學生在被分為慢、快班時在成績方面沒有顯著的變化。 11 The fact is, however, that in a vast majority of pilot studies the children have been grouped only according to IQ scores, which are far from reliable, and the conclusions have been based on achievement scores which measure only mastery of factual detail. 然而，事實是，在絕大多數(shù)的試點研究中，孩子們只按智商高低分班，很不可靠，而結(jié)論又僅以掌握事實細節(jié)的分數(shù)為基礎(chǔ)12 Unfortunately, there are no reliable devices for measuring growth in such areas as creativity, attitudes, personal adjustment, latent interest and talent, and innate capacity. 不幸的是，在創(chuàng)造性、態(tài)度、自我調(diào)節(jié)能力、潛在的興趣和才能，以及天賦的能力等方面還沒有可靠的手段來衡量其長進。13 My opinion, which is based on more than a decade in the classroom, is that learning skyrockets when individuals are grouped according to interest and ability and are motivated, challenged, and inspired by a type of schoolwork that will yield some measure of success to them. 基于十余年的課堂教學經(jīng)驗，我的觀點是：當學生按照個人的興趣和能力組班，給他以能產(chǎn)生某種程度成功感的學校作業(yè)，予以鼓舞、激發(fā)和啟迪，其學識將會猛增。14 Heterogeneous classrooms frequently produce frustration in children who are persistently unable to do the same work that most of the other children do. Frustration is also produced when bright children are not properly challenged by their school work, as is too often the case in heterogeneous classrooms. 多元化課堂常使一些孩子產(chǎn)生困惑，他們總是不能完成其他孩子中多數(shù)人能完成的同樣功課。在多元化課堂里常見的另一種困惑,則出現(xiàn)在聰明的學生身上，因為他們沒有受到學校作業(yè)的適當激勵。 15 I have little fear of gifted students39。 being pushed beyond their endurance, for I have faith in the ability of most teachers to recognize the limits to which any student should be pushed. On the other hand, I don39。t believe giftedness should be wasted away simply because a bright or talented student is content to proceed at what is? for him? a snail39。s pace or to stand at the top of a class of students with less ability. 我絲毫不懼怕天才學生會被推到超出他們承受力的地步，因為我相信大多數(shù)教師有能力識別某一學生應被推至的極限；但我相信天賦不應該僅僅只是因為某一聰明或有才能的學生滿足于對他來講簡直是蝸牛爬行的前進速度、或處于一個能力較差的學生班的最前列而被浪費。16 Several schools with which I am familiar have experimented with grouping the gifted in a reading program. (Their regular procedure had been to have three or four reading groups in one classroom under one teacher. The teacher39。s time was divided among several small groups.) 我熟悉的幾所學校已經(jīng)試驗在閱讀課中將有天才者集中起來的分班做法。(過去其常規(guī)程式是一個老師教授一個班級中的三至四個閱讀小組，老師的時間平均分給這幾個小組。) 17 The experiment involved putting slow readers from different classrooms in one classroom, average readers from different classrooms in another class, and fast readers in still another class. Each classroom still had one teacher, but he no longer had to divide his time among several different groups. The control