[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-591390-105":59,"doc-detail-591390-en":134},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":127,"head_meta":129,"extra_data":131,"updated_unix":133},105,"en","what-doesand-what-shouldp21-advocate","What Does—and What Should—P21 Advocate?","","讨论21世纪技能（P21）倡议在教育改革中的作用，分析其可能推动真实进步的潜力与在课堂实施建议上被批评的不足。文章强调“技能与内容”的辩论关键在于内容本身：学生要进行批判性思考必须直接学习与主题相关的内容，而非仅依赖技能迁移的假设。并引入Common Core相关讨论，比较不同国家更严谨的内容取向与P21的教学建议，探讨改革能否避免沦为短暂时尚。",{"@graph":69,"@context":126},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/what-doesand-what-shouldp21-advocate/591390/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/what-doesand-what-shouldp21-advocate/591390.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"eBook King","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-09","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":14},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118,122],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"文章如何看待21世纪技能（P21）运动的潜在价值？","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"文章认为该运动可能推动真实进步，尤其是P21在机构与影响力方面已取得初步成功，但学生层面的效果并不必然得到保障。","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"文章指出P21支持的教学建议受到哪些主要批评？",{"text":117,"@type":113},"批评集中在课堂建议“学术内容偏轻、技能权重过高”，且所强调的部分技能价值被认为存疑。",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"为什么文章强调内容选择对培养批判性思维至关重要？",{"text":121,"@type":113},"文章认为除非达到真正的专业专长，否则技能难以从一个内容领域迁移到另一个领域；因此要思考某个主题，学生必须直接学习与该主题相关的内容。",{"name":123,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":124},"文章提到Common Core如何与P21形成讨论或对照？",{"text":125,"@type":113},"文章说明Munson与Bornfreund在侧栏中批评P21部分令人担忧的课程建议，并在另一部分提出可提升学术内容学习的P21课程想法。","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":128,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":130,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":132,"site_id":62},591390,1792071757,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":135},{"doc_id":132,"user_id":136,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":137,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":138,"file_id":139,"file_url":140,"file_type":141,"file_size":142,"view_count":14,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":19,"language":143,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":144,"faqs":145,"seo_title":146,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":133,"read_time":52,"preview_page_count":4},962088006270,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_085a072bc5b1113ac321206ff7593b45","the present should be controlling.”6 The mantra of the “claims of the present” has been repeated so often that we must ask: Is it perhaps in the nature of a good education tobe slightly out of step with the present? Could it be that in order to endure, an education must be unfettered by the times? Is it possible that the claims of the present—which we often cannot accurately identify—should not be controlling?  \nPerhaps so. Efforts over the decades to bring schools up to date have not worked as intended. They have met with resistance or obstacles; they have caused losses; they have missed the mark. Of course schools should teach critical thinking, problem solving, and other skills; they should help students master new technologies that can further their intellectual development. But they cannot do any of this without a foundation. When hyperbole goes unchecked, the reform loses sight of the complements it needs.  \nReformers forget, for instance, that knowledge enhances the very learning process in a number of ways, as Daniel T. Willingham and other cognitive scientists have found.7 They forget that fluency in the fundamentals allows students to engage in inquiry. They forget that content is not simply dry matter; it has shape and meaning; it is the result of centuries of critical thought and the basis for future critical thought. To neglect to teach our intellectual and cultural traditions is to limit the kind of thinking that students will be able to do throughout their lives.  \nhat would our schools gain by embracing 21st  \nWcelourythatskdse,arvne whspiwoulal atthetioynl,oasest?Ihis th21ste  \ncentury reformers, in their euphoria, have seen only gain in their plans. The gain is possible, but only if we put the  \nWhat Does—and What Should—P21 Advocate?  \nAs Diana Senechal explains (see page 4), the education field is replete with faddish reform ideas. Of course, change is essential. Without it, we can’t make progress. But not all change is progress—and some changes hinder progress. This is the reality that the 21st-century-skills movement must face head-on. When we look back 5 or 10 years from now, will this movement be a faint memory, another fad that temporarily got in the way of serious educational improvement? Or will it be remembered as the catalyst for tackling tough issues like the achievement gap?  \nThis movement does have the potential to spur real progress. Look at the initial success of the Partnership for 21st Century Skills (P21). It has the backing of several major corporations  \nas well as influential politicians and educators. But success with students is far from guaranteed. P21 has vocal critics concerned not with the organization’s rhetoric, which includes plenty of calls for content plus skills, but with its actual lesson suggestions for teachers. By and large, the critics say, these lessons are much too light on academic content and much too heavy on skills of questionable value.  \nSo the real debate seems to be not about skills versus content, but about the content itself. For example, everyone acknowledges that to develop critical thinking (which seems to be the most sought-after ability), students must have something to think about. What they don’t agree on is this: should the content be traditional liberal arts content, or just anything that makes students think? Fortunately, over the past several decades, in hundreds of studies, cognitive scientists have answered this  \nquestion. Simply put, unless one reaches true expertise (which comes after many years of intensive, post  \ngraduate study and experience),  \nskills do not transfer from one content area to the next. So, in order to think critically about a particular topic, students must study content directly related to that topic. (For more on this, see page 17.)  \nThis doesn’t resolve the debate, but it should shift our discussion. Clearly, just any  \ncontent that makes students think  \nwill not do. If students can only think critically about topics","cbCairfL7cSboeAZ","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCairfL7cSboeAZ","pdf",950768,"English","# What Does—and What Should—P21 Advocate?\n## 21st-century-skills movement面对的现实\n## 技能与内容：争论焦点为何\n## Common Core与P21建议的对照与讨论","[{\"question\":\"文章如何看待21世纪技能（P21）运动的潜在价值？\",\"answer\":\"文章认为该运动可能推动真实进步，尤其是P21在机构与影响力方面已取得初步成功，但学生层面的效果并不必然得到保障。\"},{\"question\":\"文章指出P21支持的教学建议受到哪些主要批评？\",\"answer\":\"批评集中在课堂建议“学术内容偏轻、技能权重过高”，且所强调的部分技能价值被认为存疑。\"},{\"question\":\"为什么文章强调内容选择对培养批判性思维至关重要？\",\"answer\":\"文章认为除非达到真正的专业专长，否则技能难以从一个内容领域迁移到另一个领域；因此要思考某个主题，学生必须直接学习与该主题相关的内容。\"},{\"question\":\"文章提到Common Core如何与P21形成讨论或对照？\",\"answer\":\"文章说明Munson与Bornfreund在侧栏中批评P21部分令人担忧的课程建议，并在另一部分提出可提升学术内容学习的P21课程想法。\"}]","What Does—and What Should—P21 Advocate? | PDF"]