从“倡导通才”到“通专并重”

doi:10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.CN33-6000/C.2021.03.311

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (1)

Download: PDF (689 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract As a pioneer and practitioner of modern education in China, Zhu Kezhen’s distinctive educational thought and practice have been valued and praised by the academic circles for a long time. In the eyes of quite a few scholars, Zhu Kezhen valued “liberal education” and believed that general knowledge was more important than special knowledge. This idea can be traced indeed to its roots but it is likely to ignore Zhu Kezhen’s ideological change.Zhu Kezhen received a systematic Chinese traditional education in his early years. Confucianism emphasizes erudition and social responsibility, which paved the way for Zhu Kezhen’s formation of the concept of liberal education. Zhu Kezhen was influenced during his study in America by the Western traditional notion of liberal education which emphasizes liberal education instead of the practicability of knowledge with the aim of nurturing cultured and erudite talents. Zhu Kezhen highly praised the notion of liberal education, which was popular at Harvard University at that time.With the deep influence of the notion, during his term as President of Zhejiang University, Zhu Kezhen promoted liberal education by following the example of Harvard University. He took a series of measures to strengthen liberal education, such as strengthening students’ basic education, implementing the major and minor system, encouraging students to select courses across colleges or departments, paying attention to cultivating students’ comprehensive quality, advocating the all-round development of morality, intelligence and physique, following Harvard University’s tutorial system, and trying to integrate it into the personality cultivation valued by Chinese traditional education. These measures did achieve some results but later some problems happened as well.Since 1940s, with the influence of the emphasis on the social function of science in Bernalism and the advocacy of “combination of liberal education and specialized education” in General Education in a Free Society (Report of Harvard Committee), considering the fact that professionals were in a huge and urgent demand in China, Zhu Kezhen had a deeper understanding on “general education” and “special education”. Recognizing the disadvantages of laying stress only on liberal education for erudite talents, which was not in line with China’s national conditions at that time, Zhu Kezhen gradually developed his educational ideology of integration between general and special education.Although he once advocated the notion of liberal education learned from Harvard University, Zhu Kezhen was constantly updating his educational ideas in China’s educational practice. He absorbed a variety of educational ideas, critically reflecting on them in practice. He combined the Confucian educational thought and the Western general education idea with the current educational practice, and finally put forward the educational concept of “paying equal attention to both general and professional” education in order to explore an educational model suitable for China at that time.An in-depth study of the transformation of Zhu Kezhen’s educational notion can help us acquire not only a more comprehensive and profound understanding of his educational thought, but also a deeper understanding of the relationship between “general education” and “special education” in today’s university education. Besides, his educational ideology also has important enlightenment significance for us to better promote the organic combination of general education and special education in the new era. First of all, although general education and special education are different types of talent cultivation mode, they are indispensable and should be paid equal attention to. Secondly, the idea of general education should not be opposed to the idea of special education, nor should they be separated. They should be combined. Thirdly, the development direction of general education in China today should adopt the concept of general education, not just liberal education. Eventually, Zhu Kezhen’s spirit of seeking truth from facts is particularly worth noting in exploring an educational model suitable for China.

Key words： Zhu Kezhen liberal education general education integration of general and special education educational ideology

Received: 31 March 2021

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Xu Weimin
	Pan Yixiao
	Zhang Li

TRENDMD:

Cite this article:

Xu Weimin,Pan Yixiao,Zhang Li. From Liberal Education to Integration of General and Special Education: The Evolution and Enlightenment of Zhu Kezhen’s Educational Ideology[J]. JOURNAL OF ZHEJIANG UNIVERSITY, 2021, 51(6): 157-166.

URL:

https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/EN/10.3785/j.issn.1008-942X.CN33-6000/C.2021.03.311 OR https://www.zjujournals.com/soc/EN/Y2021/V51/I6/157

田正平：《一位大学校长的理念与情操——〈竺可桢日记〉阅读札记》，《教育研究》2015年第12期，第105-112页。2 竺可桢：《思想自传》，见《竺可桢全集》第4卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第87-102页。3 英］约翰·亨利·纽曼：《大学的理念》，北京：中国人民大学出版社，2012年。4 竺可桢：《1945年日记》，见《竺可桢全集》第9卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2006年。5 竺可桢：《入党申请书》，见《竺可桢全集》第4卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第82-83页。6 美］威廉·本廷克-史密斯编：《哈佛读本》，张旭霞、许德金、申迎丽等译，北京：人民文学出版社，2010年。7 夏承枫：《现代教育行政》，北京：中华书局，1932年。8 《大学组织法》，见宋恩荣、章咸主编：《中华民国教育法规选编（1912—1949）》，南京：江苏教育出版社，1990年，第415-416页。9 梅贻琦：《大学一解》，见刘述礼、黄延复编：《梅贻琦教育论著选》，北京：人民教育出版社，1993年，第99-109页。10 潘光旦：《自由、民主、教育》，见潘乃谷、潘乃和选编：《潘光旦选集》第3集，北京：光明日报出版社，1999年，第69-76页。11 竺可桢：《王阳明先生与大学生的典范》，见《竺可桢全集》第2卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第451-456页。12 竺可桢：《我国大学教育之前途》，见《竺可桢全集》第2卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第638-641页。13 竺可桢：《毕业后要做什么样的人》，见《竺可桢全集》第2卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第371-373页。14 浙江大学校史编写组编：《浙江大学简史》，杭州：浙江大学出版社，1996年。15 杨士林：《竺可桢的教育思想与实践》，见浙江大学校友总会、浙江大学电教新闻中心编：《竺可桢诞辰百周年纪念文集》，杭州：浙江大学出版社，1990年，第121-137页。16 竺可桢：《学校开运动会的目的》，见《竺可桢全集》第23卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2013年，第256页。17 竺可桢：《在就任浙江大学校长后补行宣誓典礼上的答词》，见《竺可桢全集》第2卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第350-352页。18 竺可桢：《科学院研究人员思想改造学习期中的自我检讨》，见《竺可桢全集》第3卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第86-90页。19 竺可桢：《大学生之责任》，见《竺可桢全集》第2卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第441页。20 王玉芝主编：《求是之光——浙江大学文化研究》，北京：高等教育出版社，2011年。21 杜祥锋、何亚平：《竺可桢与浙江大学导师制》，《现代大学教育》2003年第6期，第95-97页。22 J. D.贝尔纳：《科学的社会功能》，陈体芳译，北京：商务印书馆，1982年。23 Polanyi M.， “The Planning of Science，” The Political Quarterly， Vol. 16， No. 4 （1945）， pp. 316-328.24 竺可桢：《1941年日记》，见《竺可桢全集》第8卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2006年。25 竺可桢：《1947年日记》，见《竺可桢全集》第10卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2006年。26 哈佛委员会：《哈佛通识教育红皮书》，李曼丽译，北京：北京大学出版社，2010年。27 竺可桢：《读书笔记》，见《竺可桢全集》第9卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2006年，第614-639页。28 教育部教育年鉴编纂委员会编：《第二次中国教育年鉴》，北京：商务印书馆，1948年。29 竺可桢：《1946年日记》，见《竺可桢全集》第10卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2006年。30 竺可桢：《对1948年应届新生的训话》，见《竺可桢全集》第2卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第689-690页。31 竺可桢：《科学研究和大学教育》，见《竺可桢全集》第3卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第41-44页。32 竺可桢：《培养人才与开展科学研究》，见《竺可桢全集》第3卷，上海：上海科技教育出版社，2004年，第365-367页。33 周谷平、张丽：《我国大学通识教育的回顾与展望》，《教育研究》2019年第3期，第107-116页。34 《国务院关于印发国家教育事业发展“十三五”规划的通知》，2017年1月10日，http：//www.moe.gov.cn/jyb_xxgk/moe_1777/moe_1778/201701/t20170119_295319.html，2020年3月22日。