What is this "channel"? How to "dock"? Over the years, we have often talked about the combination of theory and practice, but people pay less attention to the problem of how to combine, mainly staying in the formulation, and there are many "slogans", which seriously restrict the implementation of theory. This also shows that not everyone can fully understand this. To understand this problem, I think we should start from two angles. One angle is the understanding of "theory and practice". First of all, what is the relationship between theory and practice? This is the first problem that must be solved. ◇ There is this situation. So this is the level of understanding? I think it is the relationship between input and output. Or the relationship between guidance and research? ◆ It can also be understood in this way. Theory can effectively guide practice, and practice can verify the feasibility of theory. At present, we are engaged in modern education, which has certain theoretical support and guidance. If any teacher refuses theory, he actually refuses to make progress. Therefore, some experts put forward that "practice without theoretical guidance is blind practice" and pointed out the importance of theory and the relationship between theory and practice. However, in practice, although everyone emphasizes that theory guides practice, in fact, theory and practice are often separated, and many practices are not guided by theory, resulting in "two skins" of theory and practice, which are largely not combined. In this case, it is necessary to effectively link theory with practice. Here's the thing. Sometimes there is no connection between theory and practice. What should I do if there is a deviation in implementation? How to solve this situation in teaching? What you said above is another angle I want to talk about next. In practical work, it often happens that practice is not guided by theory and theory cannot guide practice. The reason is not that the theory is wrong, nor that practice does not need theoretical guidance, but that at the operational level, theory and practice are artificially pulled far away, and despite the desire of theory to guide practice, it is counterproductive. That is to say, we who practice theory should improve our comprehensive ability and let the power of theory blossom and bear fruit in practice. ◆ The above is only a phenomenon analysis. In fact, the theory is far from acceptable to teachers. What should I do if this happens? At this time, it is necessary to think about the effective docking of theory and practice. If we divide it into different levels, we will explain the theory effectively and thoroughly, and even decompose it, so that the theory can be formed at another level close to teachers' teaching practice. Just like appreciating literary and artistic works, we should analyze the connotation, explore the theme, enhance understanding, and let more people have a voice. Is to shorten the distance between theory and practice, which should be the intersection of docking? ◆ Yes. Moreover, the guidance and guidance given by experts at present is far from acceptable to ordinary teachers. After listening to the expert's lecture, there is often a phenomenon of "it sounds very moving, it is very exciting to say, but it is not moving". Why? It is not that the expert-led approach is wrong, but that many experts are not very clear about how high the professionalism of ordinary teachers at the grass-roots level is, and their judgment on teachers' professionalism is idealistic. Therefore, the professional guidance of experts often cannot find the combination point with our teacher's practice, so it can't be combined. The teacher didn't find a combination point corresponding to his actual situation. This is the actual situation. Experts may have the feeling of standing high and seeing far. ◆ There is another situation. When we are training, we often read a lot of theories from books, which makes people see clearly. Of course, the theory we passed on is greatly discounted, not to mention the combination of theory and practice. At this time, we can't wait and see, we must find a level suitable for the combination of theory and practice. ◇ Idealization can be not only a pursuit, but also a way to find a combination quickly, otherwise it will become a distant goal to realize productism? You understand correctly. It can be inferred from what you said that we are studying Scientific Outlook on Development now, so what we are doing is using Scientific Outlook on Development? Actually, it is. If it is applied stiffly in accordance with the regulations, there will also be a phenomenon that theory is out of touch with practice. When they have two skins, there are more problems. The analysis and expression I made in my blog is actually a second interpretation of some theories, which lowers the level, is closer to teaching practice and is convenient for teachers to understand and apply. I think so too. Seeing those blog posts completely pointed out the direction for the teacher's teaching practice. ◆ So who will carry out this "docking"? I think it should be interpreted, decomposed and refined by the personnel of education and teaching management. Only in this way can we be closer to the actual level of teachers. At this level, if teachers can understand and use it, they will realize the "effective docking" between theory and practice. Conversely, will the effect of "docking" definitely appear? That's not necessarily true. Teachers need to internalize and transform into their own teaching practice and work behavior. Therefore, teachers need to actively participate in order to really complete. I see. As you said before, you can't complain, knowing the conditions and the actual situation, you can only try your best to solve the problem. ◆ Yes. In fact, many concepts and requirements are not really understood by teachers. For example, "reading the text with emotion" is interpreted by many teachers as reading the text fluently, or reading the text rhythmically, or reading the text "out of tune", so that the emotion is separated from the text and only pays attention to reading skills, and the emotion is extremely pale. Actually, it is not. This requirement is to let students integrate their emotions into the text and promote reading with emotion. There are requirements in the curriculum standards, but teachers are far from the requirements in understanding, and similar problems need to be reinterpreted. Let me make an analogy to understand this matter, just like a singer should not only know the tune of music, but also have a surging sense of true feelings, so that his singing can be touching. * * * Ming from here? ◆ Yes. Singing pays attention to both sound and emotion, so does reading the text. * * * Ming is the kind of experience that the connotation of literary works is consistent with the understanding of the appreciator, and there is a very strong feeling. ◇ Shouldn't there be * * * in teaching? I think a good teaching atmosphere can also appear. Yes, you can say that. Dialogue with words will be the best if it produces * * *. In my opinion, only by deeply understanding some theories and concepts, cracking the prescriptive expressions and allowing teachers to fully decompose into teaching practice can we achieve effective docking. Otherwise, it's just a copy of the theory. So, this is what I call "the effective connection between theory and practice". This docking work is mainly done by managers, and it is done by managers at different levels. That's a profound understanding. The effect of plagiarism is worthless. Everything can really benefit from deep thinking. Thank you for your philosophical explanation. I see. ◆ Yes. I once told some people that when it comes to theoretical expression, it seems that everyone can understand it, because everyone knows words. But in fact, not everyone can understand the connotation. What is understood is often superficial. Without profundity, we can't understand the connotation. Understanding-understanding-understanding-comprehension-mastery-application should be a step-by-step thinking process and link. Therefore, from the analysis of these links, many people's understanding and grasp of some theories and concepts only stay in the first few links, and do not go deep into the last few links. Today, I told my students, "there is a great copy of world literature, and the best part is copied." Where is the beauty? " I explained what you said, that is, internalize and derive your own new things, and others can't take them away. ◆ That makes sense. Just like the recitation of the ancients, it is actually an internalization process. There are too many things to recite, so I naturally write them. ◇ Indeed.