通识教育模范教学奖2020
时间: 5:00-5:30pm
地点: 香港中文大学郑裕彤楼203室
本年度荣获提名的老师有七位。教务会通识教育委员会议决颁发「通识教育模范教学奖」予雅礼中国语文研习所的李兆麟博士、哲学系的郭柏年博士,以及人类学系的邓伟文博士。
程序李兆麟博士
郭柏年博士

郭柏年博士于香港中文大学哲学系完成其哲学学士、硕士及博士学位,毕业后先后于香港专上学院与中大通识教育部任教,并在2018年转任中大哲学系高级讲师。主要研究兴趣为伦理学、人生哲学、非形式逻辑与社会政治哲学。通识讲授科目包括GENA1113「通识学生为本教学与研讨」、UGED1111「逻辑」、UGED1112「逻辑与论辩」、UGED1810「批判思考」、UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」、UGED2901「死亡与不朽」等等。除哲学外,兴趣为电子游戏,观赏美剧和与家中爱猫玩耍。
我自2012年起任职大学通识教育部讲师,并于2018年度转任哲学系高级讲师。于2016年初首获通识教育模范教学奖时,我提出以「对话」作为教学理念与课程设计的重心。近年我致力于此基础上再加上「批判定见」与「兼备理论与现实」两个元素,使课程更符合通识教育的批判与实用的理想。以下将以UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」与UGED2901「死亡与不朽」两科本人重新设计的课程为例,说明两者的理念。
理念
「批判定见」:通识教育强调批判思考,但真正的批判思考绝不止于指出对方论据上的不足,更应持平地发掘和强化对手的论点与反驳,此为批判的态度。另一方面,批判思考的对象亦应重视,而「定见」似乎是个好的起始点。所谓「定见」,即人生中各种早已习以为常、看似理所当然的论断。我们希望透过反省生活定见,加深对自我以至人类的理解。选择从定见入手的原因有二: 首先,定见无处不在,影响深远。例如在UGED2901「死亡与不朽」有论及死亡与人生意义的关系,就此普遍意见认为死亡会令人生更有意义,我在课上会鼓励学生反省此说的不足,从而认真审视其自身对人生意义的立场。再者,定见往往是文化传统的具体呈现,因此是理解自身价值的上佳媒介。比方说, UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」一课会探讨人与动物的关系,其中华人传统普遍相信人类比动物优越,为什么呢? 因他们认为人有践行道德的能力,而动物没有。这种强调道德的「人禽之辨」,正是中国文化(或曰儒家)的要点之一。是以反省定见其实有助了解那些构成我们价值观的文化底蕴。由以上论点可见,对各种定见的反思,其实无异于重新审视构成自身价值观、人生观以至世界观的组成元素,以不同角度解构自我,认识自己,这些都与通识教育的理念不谋而合。
「兼备理论与现实」:通识教育强调理论与现实兼顾,旨在令同学准确分析现实生活议题,而不沦为泛泛而谈;并恰当运用前沿的理论,而免于张冠李戴。因此在课程的取材上理应有相应的安排: 就理论的选材而言,标准是难度适中、配合学界最新发展与多元化; 比方说在UGED2901「死亡与不朽」的课程上,除了古希腊的死亡哲学外,也谈到中国哲学关于不朽的观点,亦会提及新近神经科学对意识与机械身体的探索,务求扩展同学的眼界。从现实层面著眼,课程应找出迎年社会相关的生活议题,才能引起同学兴趣以及解惑。以UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」一课为例,探讨的除了素食主义与动物实验等常见的议题外,更包括导盲犬、宠物café和动物公民等新兴的社会文化现象与制度问题,希望令同学能反思生活种种。
课程设计
内容和结构:UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」与UGED2901「死亡与不朽」两个课程都按「跨学科背景-哲学理论-现实议题」分为三大部份,原因如下:
首先,通识课的一大目标,在于培养跨学科的触觉与多角度思考,因此课程的首部份旨在介绍不同学科的观点和沿革。UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」先从人类驯化动物的历史谈起,进而介绍社会制度与艺术和流行文化如何呈现动物的形象;UGED2901「死亡与不朽」则简述宗教、文化、心理、社会的角度对死亡的分析,由此为同学提供跨学科的知识。其次,既然课程强调「兼备理论与现实」,是以作为哲学系的通识课,课程第二部份将集中讨论相关的哲学理论。比方说,UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」会介绍效益主义、康德伦理学、能力进路与废除主义等主流的学说。而UGED2901「死亡与不朽」则从柏拉图、伊壁鸠鲁等古典哲学以至近代物理主义的心灵论分析死亡的本质与好坏。然后课程的第三部份将选取一系列的现实议题与同学探讨。UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」的现实议题包括素食主义、动物实验、工作动物、人兽恋、宠物饲养、动物的法律地位等社会问题;UGED2901「死亡与不朽」集中讨论永生的好坏、自杀与安乐死的考虑、人类灭亡是否坏事、死亡与人生意义的关系等等。最后,「批判定见」的理念亦体现于现实议题的选取之上。课程中不少题目如人兽恋,饲养宠物的道德、自杀、人类灭绝等等都是一般大众较少谈论或早已断案的议题,讨论此等问题当有助学生更能批判自身的价值观。
活动和评核:UGEC2858「动物与社会﹕哲学研究」与UGED2901「死亡与不朽」两个课程都加入「课堂讨论+集体辩论」活动,而在中期测验与期终论文的要求上亦会对应「兼备理论与现实」的要求:所谓「课堂讨论+集体辩论」,是指每堂都设一至两次的课堂讨论时间,让同学就特定问题分组交流。而在学期后段亦有两次大型的集体辩论,要求学生阅读特定议题的支持与反对文章,归纳和分析双方的想法,再分组申述自己的立场,最后与老师和其他组别的同学集体辩论,务求令学生有机会接触不同的想法,接受思想上的冲击,并学习据理力争。另一方面,期中测验以阅读理解和意见回应为主,旨在测试学生对不同学科理论的掌握与反思。期终论文则要求同学应用所学理论,就课程内的现实议题做资料搜集,撰写研究论文一篇,训练他们学以致用的能力。
结语
总括而言,以对话为骨干,辅以「批判定见」与「兼备理论与现实」的元素,是我近年教授通识时的原则,希望藉此培养学生多元、批判与应用的能力,并加深对自我与社会的了解。
邓伟文博士

Dr. Tang Wai Man received his PhD in Anthropology from The Chinese University of Hong Kong in 2013. His doctoral thesis is on the relationships between heroin use and transnational migration among the second and third generations of Nepalis in Hong Kong. His research interests include drugs, migration, sports and South Asian cultures. One of the General Education course that Dr. Tang taught, viz. UGEC1685 Drugs and Culture, is quite related to his research interests. He has also been teaching four other General Education courses, namely: GENA1113 Student-oriented Teaching and Seminar, UGEA1333 Multiculturalism and China, UGEC1681 Humans and Culture, and UGEC1835 Culture of Hong Kong. He is currently researching a South Asian sport, kabaddi, with the focus on two aspects: its cultural politics during the worlding process and its educative value when it is developed as a tool for intercultural education in Hong Kong.
I majored in Anthropology for my Bachelor’s degree, and my first field experience was to visit a charismatic church that Filipino domestic workers in Hong Kong attended. During the Sunday service, the congregation cried vehemently as they said their prayers. I was somewhat taken aback. Prior to my visit, I had taken the liberty of reading an ethnography titled “Maid to Order in Hong Kong” authored by Nicole Constable, through which I gained a sense of the complicated relationships between Hong Kong employers and foreign domestic workers. However, this close encounter gave me firsthand experience of their plight and I was driven to further understand their precarious situation – some of them believe that their misery is caused by their sins; therefore, absolving them at church gives them hope in their everyday life.
Ethnographers spend years to carry out fieldwork in a community and writing ethnographies to show the complexities of human life. During the time that I was a student, I became fascinated by such attempts to delineate human life. Meanwhile, I found that this endeavor can be actually enriched through experiential learning; that is, providing field experience to students and encouraging them to conduct field research in their community. This learning approach is called participatory action research (PAR), which I have included in my teaching of General Education courses.
PAR has three basic areas: knowledge, practice and research. Students first acquire the basic knowledge of a specific topic. Then, they partake in arranged fieldtrips, in which they conduct participant observation and interviews. After the fieldtrip, the students write a fieldtrip report, which synthesizes the collected field data and academic knowledge. Since the teacher arranges the field visits, some of the ethnographic field components are determined beforehand. After acquiring the necessary integrative skills for research work, the students are expected to carry out independent research, which means that they have to learn how to formulate a research question, arrange for the field visits, contact the informants, collect the field data, and write an ethnographic report.
Based on student feedback, this step-by-step approach in PAR facilitates a better understanding of some of the more abstract academic knowledge through concrete examples and increases their confidence when they carry out their own research work. From the perspective of a teacher, PAR is impactful in at least three different areas, namely knowledge, social relations, and affectional affiliation. For example, students learn through PAR on how to develop a systematic way to understand their everyday life, become more receptive to communicating with people of different cultural backgrounds, and intervene more in the affairs of their communities. In some cases, the students would even take action to address the problems that they identified in their research.
In this ever-changing world, students need to have a wide scope of knowledge, and general education attempts to fulfill this need. Yet, many imagine that this ever-changing world is only associated with high-end globalization with a focus on the development of the latest technologies and the growth of international regulatory institutions. However, marginalized encounters, like a Filipino domestic worker attending a church service, a Nepali drug user staying at a residential drug rehab center, and an African asylum seeker organizing a cultural tour in the Chungking Mansions, are also reflective of larger issues across multiple realms in Hong Kong, from the local to the global. Thus, teaching and learning should not be restricted by space; society can also be the classroom.