【2016-10-07】 #读过《教養的迷思》# 我的评分：★★★★★ 极好（虽然有些过头话），推荐给现在或未来有孩子的朋友。 Harris说的很好，不过，现代家长各种过度紧张兮兮的做法，依我看并不是白板轮/教养论/斯金纳主义或类似理论流行的结果，而是中产焦虑和能动性乐观主义两者结合的众多产物之一，那些理论只是恰好满足了焦虑者的需求而已。  

The schools that Katrina built 飓风建起来的学校 作者:Robert Colvile @ 2016-04-15 译者:小册子(@昵称被抢的小册子) 校对:pathto(@pathto) 来源:CapX,http://capx.co/the-schools-that-katrina-built/ “Hey, guy, tuck your shirt in, yeah?” The boy scurrying across the cafeteria of Samuel J Green Charter School mumbles an apology, and tidies away the trailing flap of his white shirt. Jay Altman gives a satisfied nod, bends to pick up a stray piece of litter on the floor, and then continues on his way. “嘿，伙计，把衣服束起来好吗？”在塞缪尔格林特许学校，一个小男生匆匆穿过餐厅，一边嘴上嘟哝着道了个歉，一边整理好白衬衫松出来的衣角。Jay Altman满意地点了点头，弯下腰捡起了地下的一片垃圾，然后继续往前走。 Samuel J Green feels like the kind of place you’d want to send your own children to. The pupils – ranging from the five-year-olds in kindergarten to 14-year-olds about to head off to high school – are bright, enthusiastic, neatly turned out in their dark green uniforms. The school’s red-brick facade is gleamingly clean. 塞缪尔格林让人感觉就是那种你想把自己孩子送去的地方。那里穿着墨绿色校服的学生——无论是那些才5岁的幼儿园学生，还是那些已经14岁快要上高中的学生——都显得那么聪明、整洁，而且充满活力。学校的那些红砖建筑外表都干净得发亮。 In the cafeteria, there are plastic compost buckets on every table, which will shortly be taken out to the “living playground” – the large garden that takes up much of the space behind the school, where the pupils learn to grow herbs and plants, or take lessons about nutrition in the shade of a vine-strewn canopy under the Louisiana sun. 餐厅里，每个餐桌旁都放着塑料有机堆肥桶，它们很快会被搬到“生活乐园”上去清空。“生活乐园”是一个占去学校后面大部分面积的大花园，学生在那儿学习种植各种香草和植物，在路易斯安那的阳光下藤曼遮蔽的树荫里了解植物营养学。 But there are several startling things about this school, one of five that Altman’s chain, FirstLine Schools, oversees. For one thing, there this used to be one of the worst schools, in one of the worst neighbourhoods, in one of the worst cities, in one of the worst states, in America. For another, 10 years ago Samuel J Green was underwater not just metaphorically but literally: on the cafeteria wall is a shoulder-high line, painted on to show where the waters reached their height in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. And its remarkable recovery – and that of the New Orleans school system as a whole – took place not despite that disaster, but largely because of it. 这所学校是Altman名为“前线学校”的学校联盟所监督的五所学校之一，在这里发生了一些令人惊讶的事。例如，它位于全美最糟糕的州里最糟糕的城市，曾经是全市最糟糕地段里最糟糕的学校之一。 另外，十年前这所学校还遭受了灭顶之灾，这不是一个比喻，而是一个事实——在学校餐厅的墙上，画了一条齐肩高的线，标示着在卡特里娜飓风肆虐后洪水达到的高度。而它令人瞩目的复兴——和整个新奥尔良校网的复兴——不仅是因为克服了巨大的困难，而且很大程度上是得益于这次灾难。

········

The story starts back in 1992, when Altman and his friend Tony Recasner, along with a group of other teachers, parents and activists, founded the James Lewis Extension school – a charter school (the equivalent of the UK’s free schools and academies) before such a thing even existed. It wasn’t meant to be the start of a movement: they just wanted to prove you could run a decent school without cherry-picking the pupils, and increase the life chances of some of the poorest families in New Orleans in the process. The key, Altman says, was to focus on the “middle school” years between 11 and 14, “because that’s where the big dip comes”, as rich students start to pull away from poor ones. 事情要回溯到1992年，那时Altman和朋友Tony Recasner联合了一班教师、家长和社会活动家，创立了詹姆斯刘易斯附属学校。这是一所特许学校（相当于英国的自由学校或自由学院），只是当时还没有这种说法。他们并没想开启一场运动，只是想证明，就算不对学生精挑细选，也一样可以办一所像样的学校，同时也可以为新奥尔良穷困家庭的孩子增加改变命运的机会。Altman说，其中的关键在于狠抓11岁到14岁这一段初中时期，“因为这是开始沉沦的年纪”，家庭富裕的学生开始甩下贫困的同学。 James Lewis was an enormous success: six years later, it became the first official charter school in New Orleans. In 2005, their group – then called Middle School Advocates, but now known as FirstLine Schools – was asked by the state to take over Samuel J Green. “It was out of control, it was chaotic,” recalls Altman. He actually advised Recasner to say no: “Don’t take over that school, that school will kill you.” But Recasner, who’d grown up in the neighbourhood, wanted to give something back. 詹姆斯刘易斯学校取得了巨大的成功，六年之后，它成为了新奥尔良第一所正式的特许学校。2005年，州政府邀请他们当时名为“剑指初中”的学校联盟（如今已更名为“前线学校”）， 接手萨缪尔格林。Altman回忆道，“那时候这学校失去了控制，简直乱作一团。”他实际上还建议Recasner回绝这一请求：“不要接那所学校，它会害死你的。”但在那一区长大的Rescasner，希望能对那里有所回馈。 By this stage, Altman was a hot commodity in education – and was recruited by the ARK charity to help bring the charter school ethos to its nascent network in the UK. But then fate intervened. “We moved in June 2005, and the levees broke here in August.” New Orleans essentially shut down: schools were boarded up with no idea of when, or whether, they would be reopened. James Lewis, by now renamed the New Orleans Charter Middle School, never was, because there was no longer a neighbourhood for it to serve. 那时候，Altman在教育界炙手可热——无保留援助儿童基金会邀请他，希望他能将特许学校的经验带到他们在英国的新兴校网去。但天意难料，“我们2005年6月进驻学校，洪水8月就来了。”新奥尔良基本上陷于瘫痪：学校被木板封门，也不知道何时能够重开，甚至还会否重开。当时已更名为新奥尔良特许初中的詹姆斯刘易斯中学，就再没有重开过，因为它所服务的社区已不复存在。 But amid this disaster, there was an opportunity. Back in 2003, Louisiana had passed a controversial law declaring New Orleans into a Recovery School District – essentially, an admission that the city’s education system was not fit for purpose. There were too many bad schools, bumping along at the bottom, and letting down their pupils in the process. 但灾难之中也有转机。在之前的2003年，路易斯安那州通过了一条有争议的法案，宣布新奥尔良为“学校重建区”——这实际上承认了该市的教育系统不如人意。糟糕的学校实在是太多了，它们把学生也拉进了泥潭，一同在底层挣扎。 Under the legislation, any school that did not meet basic standards could be taken over by those promising to do a better job: exactly what happened at Samuel J Green. Yet progress was glacial – until Katrina. 在这条法案下，那些达不到基本要求的学校，可以由那些承诺做得更好的人来接管：塞缪尔格林正是案例之一。但事情的进展极其缓慢，直到飓风卡特里娜的出现。 As it rebuilt, New Orleans decided to break with tradition. Instead of rebuilding the school system, it decided to set up what Altman calls “a system of schools”. Now, more than 95 per cent of public schools in the city are charter schools. Each has the freedom to specialise; each is open to any pupil in the city, with long yellow school buses ferrying them back and forth; and each is accountable for meeting those minimum standards. FirstLine now has 3,000 pupils at its four schools. 新奥尔良决定在重建中打破常规。与其重建单独的一所所学校，政府决定要像Altman所说的那样，重建一个有机结合的学校网络。如今，该市超过95%的公立学校是特许学校，每个学校都可以决定各自的特色，也可以在全市范围内招生，由黄色校巴负责每日接送，每个学校都需要就是否达到基本标准而接受问责。如今在“前线学校”属下的四所学校里已经有3,000学生。 If this sounds familiar to British readers, it’s because this was – consciously – the same recipe of choice, autonomy and accountability that powered the free schools and academies reforms in the UK, as well as other charter school movements in the US. The move was bitterly contested – but the results are impossible to argue with. 这对英国读者来说也许并不陌生，因为这有意识地借鉴了催生了自由学校与学院的英国教育改革的自由择校、自主办学与可问责三原则，而且同样的原则也推动了美国其他地方的特许学校热潮。这一举措本身充满争议，但其效果却无可辩驳。 As we sit in the shade of Samuel J Green’s “Living Playground” – on the exact spot where a powerboat washed up in the wake of Katrina – Altman shows me the figures. In 2005, 62 per cent of New Orleans schools were judged to be “failing”. Now, the figure is 7 per cent – even though the benchmarks for failure are tougher. A decade ago, 35 per cent of pupils were reaching basic standards, 23 per cent below the average across Louisiana as a whole. Now the figure is 62 per cent, and the gap is just six points. The proportion of disabled students hitting the same benchmarks has gone from 11 per cent to 39 per cent – and the gap with the state average has gone from 23 points to two. New Orleans has, in short, seen the most significant educational improvements of any city in America. 我们坐在塞缪尔格林那“生活乐园”的树荫下——当年有一艘快艇被卡特里娜一直冲到了这里——Altman让我看了一组数字。2005年，新奥尔良的学校里有62%被评定为“不及格”。现在，尽管标准比以前更严格，该百分比仍然降到了7%。十年前，只有35%的学生达到基本标准，比路易斯安那州整体平均水平要低23个百分点。如今达标的比例是62%，与全州差距仅剩6个百分点。残疾学生达到同样标准的比例从11%上升到39%，与全州平均水平的差距也从23个百分点降到了2个百分点。简而言之，新奥尔良的教育改善幅度在全美的城市中首屈一指。

········

The lessons of Samuel J Green are not just about exam results, however. What shines through above all is its devotion to character. Since 95 per cent of the pupils are African-American – and 95 per cent are on free school meals – the hallways are festooned with inspirational pictures of pioneering figures: the first black president, the first black senator, the first black ballet superstar. Banners dangle from the roof containing inspirational quotes, stressing the virtues of manners, self-discipline, ambition. The walls are decorated with the pennants of universities from across America, after which the classrooms are named. 塞缪尔格林的经验并不仅仅体现在考试成绩，其亮点在于对品格的追求。由于95%的学生是非洲裔——由学校提供免费膳食的学生也达到了95%——走廊上挂着前辈们的励志照片：第一位黑人总统、第一位黑人参议员、第一位黑人芭蕾巨星。屋顶上悬挂的标语也是励志的名言，宣扬着美德、自律与梦想。墙壁上点缀着全美各所大学的校旗，教室也以这些大学来命名。 Most pointedly, the year groups are labelled “2024”, “2025”, “2026” – the years that these children will graduate not from high school, but university. Everything about the place is designed to ram home the message that going to college is not a rarity for these kids (as, statistically, it still is) but their natural and inevitable destiny. 最引人瞩目的是，学校特意用“2024”、“2025”、“2026”来标识年级——那不是孩子们从高中毕业的年份，而是从大学毕业的年份。这里的所有东西都旨在让这些孩子们明白，上大学对于他们来说并不是小概率事件（尽管目前的统计数据仍然如此），而是很自然的，甚至是理所应当的。 So what can others – such as the UK – learn from New Orleans? There are, obviously, special factors at play, from changes in the city’s demographics after Katrina to the determination, not just in New Orleans but more broadly, to build something better after the disaster. When FirstLine decided to tear up Samuel J Green’s concrete playground, Alice Waters, the gastro-goddess who created California’s Chez Panisse restaurant, helped plan the garden. The New Orleans Saints, the local football team, helped pay for the all-weather sports pitch in the other corner of the playground – and their star quarterback, Drew Brees, chipped in towards the kitchen classroom, as did celebrity chef Emeril Lagasse. 那么其他地方，比如英国，可以从新奥尔良学到什么呢？当然，很多特别的因素在这里起作用，从卡特里娜后这个城市的人口结构变化，到这城市内外希望灾后重建更胜以前的决心。当“前线学校”决定敲开塞缪尔格林的混凝土操场时，创建了加州Chez Panisse餐厅的女厨神Alice Waters帮忙规划花园。当地橄榄球队新奥尔良圣徒队捐助操场另一角的全天候运动场，而他们的明星四分卫Drew Brees则与名厨Emeril Lagasse共同资助了烹饪教室。 Some of the more general lessons have already been learned. For school reformers in the UK, New Orleans is further proof of the importance of autonomy, accountability and diversity: of giving schools the freedom to build themselves around a particular vision or specialism, but forcing them to meet certain standards at the same time. 人们已经从中得到某些更有普遍性的经验教训。对于英国的学校改革者来说，新奥尔良再次证明了自主权、问责制和多样性的重要性——给学校予自由空间，根据各自的愿景和特点建校，但同时要求他们达到某些标准。 FirstLine, for example, uses its Living Playground to teach kids about nutrition, biology and stewardship of the natural world, but other charters have another focus: the Bricolage Academy, says its head Josh Densen, is built around “creating innovators and creative problem solvers” – it has “an innovation classroom where we teach engineering and design and computer coding and electrical circuitry and robotics”, growing in complexity as the children advance from kindergarten. Teaching practices also vary: where FirstLine uses a split classroom, in which some kids talk to the teacher, others work on problems, and others work on computers to the side, Bricolage takes a workshop approach, “which we find drives learning better than traditional instruction”. 例如，前线学校利用生活乐园来向学生们教授营养学、生物学和园艺，但其它特许学校有别的侧重点：Bricolage 学院的校长Josh Densen说，他们学校的建校宗旨是“培养创造性解决问题的创新者”——学校“有一个创意课堂，在那里我们教授工程、设计、计算机编程、电子电路和机器人技术”，随着孩子们从幼儿园一路升学，课程的难度也随之加深。学校的教学方法也多种多样：前线学校采用分组学习的形式，一部分孩子与老师讨论，一部分孩子做题，其余的就可以使用旁边的电脑。而Bricolage 学院则采用讨论会的形式，“我们发现这种方式比传统授课更有助于学习。” Another lesson is the importance of finding – and developing – teaching talent. While he was in the UK, Altman worked with Sir Iain Hall, founder of the King’s Leadership Academy in Warrington, to set up Future Leaders, in order to train and promote the very best teachers, including those who have come in via direct-entry programmes such as Teach First, Schools Direct or Teach for America. Altman explains that “one of the things we’re trying this year – and this is really experimental – is giving our lead teachers a four-day week, so they can come together one day a week for shared planning and professional development”. 另一个经验是发掘和培养教育人才的重要性。当年在英国的时候，Altman就和沃灵顿英皇领导学院的创办人Iain Hall爵士共同设立了公益组织“未来领袖”，旨在培训和选拔最出色的教师，当中包括来自直接衔接项目“教育第一”“名校指导”以及“教育为美国”的教师。Altman解释道，“我们今年尝试的事情之一——这还只是实验性的——是让我们的骨干教师一周工作四天，以令他们每周能有一天聚在一起，学习共同规划，接受专业培训” The growth of diversity in the education system will also, its architects hope, lead to cross-fertilisation, as experiments such as Altman’s four-day week are evaluated by others. Even just spending a morning at Samuel J Green, it is easy to see ideas that could be profitably employed elsewhere: assessing the performance of each class every week, not every term, to enable regular course-correction and adapt to their needs; letting parents access their children’s computerised learning programmes from home; getting each class to do 10 minutes of exercise every few hours (done, as I see when I tour the classrooms, by getting them to dance along with pop videos); using education technology, which is finally starting to live up to its promise after years of wildly overstated claims for its effects. 它的设计者们希望，随着像Altman的每周四天授课的这类实验接受他人的评估，这个教育体系日趋多样，能够促进相互学习。哪怕只是在塞缪尔格林呆一个上午，也很容易观察到那些可以推广到别处的理念：每周评估各班的表现，而不是每个学期一次，以确保能及时纠正偏差，根据需要进行调整；让家长在家就可以了解孩子的电脑化的课程设置；让各个班级每几个小时就活动十分钟（确有做到，当我参观教室时，就看到学生们跟着流行曲的录像跳舞）；使用电子教学，这些高科技手段的效果多年来被过分地夸大，如今终于开始达到预期效果了。 Above all, however, Samuel J Green is tribute to the power of a single idea. 然而最重要的是，萨缪尔格林体现了一种简单理念的力量。 “People, whether they’re conscious of it or not, have these biases around low-income students and students from deprived areas,” says Altman. The guiding principle of FirstLine is “this real belief in the potential of all young people… a real sense of shared moral purpose”. “不管他们自己是否意识到，人们对低收入与来自贫困地区的学生总是存在着各种的偏见，”Altman说道。“前线学校”的办学原则就是“坚信所有年轻人的潜力……和共同的道德追求”。 In New Orleans, those problems are usually linked to race – but in Britain, the culprit is more often class, especially in the former industrial areas of the North. 在新奥尔良，那些问题通常会与种族联系起来。但在英国，问题的根源更多是社会阶层，尤其在北部的老工业区。 “In the whole of the OECD, there’s a bigger correlation between parental income and child aspiration and success in the UK than anywhere else,” says Sir Iain Hall, who is now CEO of the Great Schools Trust. “If you’re a young child in a three-generation household, where there’s been no employment for a long time, aspiration’s died. You have to break through that aspirational poverty to get the child to say ‘I can succeed despite these circumstances’.” “在经合组织内，英国的父母收入与子女的抱负和成就的相关性比其他国家更强，”现在担任伟大学校慈善信托CEO的 Iain Hall爵士说。“如果一个小孩子家里三代同堂，家人长期没有工作，他的志向就会消沉。你必须打破这种胸无大志，让孩子相信‘我能在逆境中成功’。” His work, like Altman’s, is driven by “an emerging understanding that if you can improve the character of young children, you can actually improve their educational outcomes. That’s what Jay and I have been doing, either side of the Atlantic – working on motivational messages and strong values that motivate these children and build resilience into them.” 他的事业，和Altman的一样，都被一个新兴理念驱动：“如果你能提升孩子们的品格，你就能改善他们受教育的效果。这就是我和Jay (Altman)在大西洋两岸一直做的——向孩子们灌输励志的信息和强大的信念，以激励他们奋发向上，坚韧不拔。” Hall claims that Nicky Morgan, the Education Secretary, is beginning to pick up on this. “She started to see, through the KIPP schools in US [another chain of charters], that a greater emphasis on character is starting to produce quite amazing outcomes,” he says. The concept of “high expectations and no excuses”, which was at the heart of Future Leaders, is now, he says, “on the website of almost every school. Whether they apply it or not is another matter…” Hall声称教育大臣Nicky Morgan已开始接受这一理念。“通过美国的KIPP【另一个特许学校联盟】，她开始发现对品格培养的重视会带来令人惊讶的收获，”他说。“未来领袖”的核心理念——“目标远大，不找借口”，如今已经“出现在几乎所有学校的官方网站上，至于他们是否真正实践这一理念是另一回事……” In many ways, Britain’s education reforms put it well ahead of the United States: the old New Orleans system was, says Altman, not just pre-Blair but pre-Thatcher in its lack of standards, inspection and accountability. But in other ways, says Hall, we have still much to learn. “There are more and more schools [in the UK] naming their classrooms after universities. But you’ve got to get it into teachers’ vocabularies – all day long they’ve got to talk about aspiration and endeavour.” That can come more naturally to Americans, with their can-do spirit and sense of manifest destiny, than hidebound Brits. 英国的教育改革在很多方面都领先于美国：如Altman所说，新奥尔良过去的教育系统，缺乏标准、监督和问责制度，不仅仅落后于英国的布莱尔时代，甚至是落后于撒切尔时代。但在另一些方面，Hall认为英国也有许多需要学习的地方。“（英国）越来越多的学校以大学校名来命名教室。但你还必须让老师们去配合——他们也要经常谈及个人抱负和不懈努力。”这些对美国人就比因循守旧的英国人来得更自然，因为他们有着万事皆可能的性格和明确的使命感。 Still, success stories such as New Orleans are, says Nick Timothy of the New Schools Network, “tremendously exciting”. It is a vindication of the idea that the best way to get schools is to give dedicated teachers and parents the power to control them – and set them up. The free schools built in Britain are, Timothy points out, “more likely to be rated outstanding than other state schools, more popular with parents, and more likely to teach the so-called facilitating subjects that get young people into top universities. We know that they are improving the quality of education and creating more opportunities for children whatever their background, just like charter schools are doing in the States.” 尽管如此，像新奥尔良那样的成功案例，用“新校网”的Nick Timothy的话来说，依然“令人欣喜若狂”。这也是该办校理念——最好让投身其中的老师和家长们有权参与学校的运营和建设——的一大佐证。Timothy指出，英国的自由学校“与其他公立学校相比更经常被评为表现优异，更受家长们欢迎，也更普遍设立所谓的提高课程以帮助年轻人考上顶尖大学。我们都能看到，它们和美国的特许学校一样，在不断地改善教育质量，为不同背景的学生创造更多的机会。” But there is still work to be done, on both sides of the Atlantic. “In all honesty, all that we’ve done in New Orleans is gone from an F to a D or a C,” says Altman. “The schools aren’t failing any more, but we’ve got to do more than ‘not failing’, right?” 然而在大西洋两岸，要做的事情都还有很多。“坦率的讲，我们在新奥尔良做到的，只是从‘不及格’进步到‘尚可’和‘中等’”Altman说，“这些学校都不再不及格了，但我们也不能只满足于‘及格’是吧？” Robert Colvile is the former comment editor of the Telegraph and news director of BuzzFeed UK. His new book, ‘The Great Acceleration: How Life is Getting Faster, Faster’, was published by Bloomsbury on April 7th. Robert Colvile是英国《电迅报》评论编辑，也是BuzzFeed英国版的新闻总监。他的新书《伟大的加速：生活如何变得越来越快》由Bloomsbury出版社在2016年4月7日出版。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

Entrepreneurship and American education 创业活动与美国教育 作者:Michael Q. McShane @ 2016-05-10 译者:Tankman 校对:混乱阈值(@混乱阈值) 来源:AEI,http://www.aei.org/publication/entrepreneurship-and-american-education/ Key Points 要点

• While educational entrepreneurship’s influence has been muted by policy and circumstance, this has nevertheless been a time of great growth for the field.
• 尽管政策和政治氛围已经压制了教育业中创业活动的影响，这个领域还是有了一段时间的显著增长。
• Over the next two decades, educational entrepreneurs will encounter a funding community, policy environment, and changing educational landscape that will profoundly affect the types of ventures and the ability of those ventures to scale, grow, and meet children’s needs.
• 在接下来二十年里，教育业的创业者会受到融资界，政策环境，教育业整体面貌变化等因素的冲击。这些因素会深刻影响风险投资的类型以及这些风险投资发起，壮大和满足孩子需求的能力。
• Entrepreneurship does not guarantee success. If anything, it ensures that there will be failure. For all its imperfections though, it offers a degree of imagination and natural winnowing well-suited to our sprawling, diverse, and pluralistic nation, and it creates an opportunity for truly world-changing products to emerge.
• 创业并不一定会成功。如果要说什么是确定的话，那就是一定会有失败产生。虽然有各种不完美，它提供了一定程度的想象空间和自然筛选，很好的适应了我们这个参差多元，分权共治的国家，而且创造机会让真正改变世界的成果得以涌现。

I have two adorable dogs who I love like children. Georgie is a precocious, 10-pound fur ball Bichon Frise I bought from an Amish man in rural Maryland. Beau is a seven-pound Maltese and silky terrier mix who spent the first five years of his life in a meth den in Missouri before my wife and I rescued him. When we travel, we have to find a place to board them. For years, we used kennels or “open-play” dog boarding facilities. By and large, we were pleased with the care that the dogs received, but boy, was it expensive. 我有两条可爱的狗，我像爱孩子那样爱他们。Georgie是只早熟的，10磅重的圆滚滚毛茸茸的比熊犬。我把它从马里兰州农村的一位阿米绪人那里买来。Beau有七磅，是一只的玛尔济斯犬和澳洲丝毛梗的后代。它生命的前五年在密苏里州的一个毒窝里度过，直到被我和我太太救了出来。当我们旅行时，我们必须为它们找个寄宿的地方。许多年以来，我们使用狗窝或者是“敞开”式宠物狗寄存设施。总体来说，我们对狗狗们受到的照顾感到满意。但这种服务很贵。 That is why it was great when my wife discovered the app Rover. Rover is kind of like Airbnb for dog sitters. Prospective sitters (or walkers or groomers) create profiles, post their rates, and have a space for customers to review them. People can find options that are convenient, in their price range, and the kind of environment they want for their dogs. We use the app whenever we travel and get what I think is far superior care for substantially less than we paid a kennel. It has been a big win for us and our dogs. 因此当我太太发现手机应用Rover时，一切实在太棒了。Rover像是宠物狗看护领域的Airbnb。潜在的看护们（或是遛狗者，或狗美容师）创建了个人简介，贴上他们的要价，留下一个给客户写评论的地方。人们能够在自己满意的价格区间，选择合适的选项，给宠物狗他们觉得合宜的环境。我们每次旅行都要使用这个应用，用明显比狗窝更低的价钱，换来一个更好的服务。这对狗狗和人都大有好处。 Rover illustrates disruptive innovation at work. Its founders identified a practical problem, leveraged knowledge and technology to devise a better solution, and then provided that solution in a way that upends old routines and assumptions. Rover体现了破坏性创新是如何工作的。它的创始人确定了一个实际问题，利用知识和技术来提供一个更好的解决方案，而后那个方案在某种意义上颠覆了旧的常规和假设。 I am of the opinion that it would be good for K–12 schooling if more teachers, school leaders, and entrepreneurs took a Rover-like approach to challenges that plague education. How can we better use school facilities? How can we help children find schools that are a good match for them? How can we help teachers identify the best strategies to address specific learning challenges? The list of vexing problems goes on and on. But what does it take for entrepreneurial problem solving to actually help students, and how do we think about the obstacles it faces and the problems it may create? 我有一种看法：如果更多教师、学校领导和企业家提供一个Rover式的解决方案来挑战如今重疾缠身的教育业，对基础教育将会产生积极影响。如何能更好的使用学校设施？如何能帮助孩子发现适合他们的学校？如何能帮助教师发现应对特定教学挑战的最优策略？令人头痛的问题的清单越拉越长。但是需要什么条件，才能用企业家解决问题的思维来帮助学生？这一途径面临的障碍是什么呢？这种方法又会带来什么问题呢？ Look, Rover is no panacea, but it is a great improvement. I would be the first to admit that in some cities it is probably impractical. There might not be enough supply for great potential dog sitters to want to get involved, or there might not be enough demand to keep prices attractive to sitters. For many dog owners, it is still too expensive. That said, Rover does help solve a particular problem for a lot of people, while opening the door to newer and better solutions. This is what entrepreneurial activity can do. 看，Rover不是一个万灵药，但却是一个巨大的改进。我可以爽快地承认，在某些城市，它很可能不现实。那里可能没有足够多的潜在宠物狗看护者想加入该平台，或是需求量不够大，价格也就无法吸引看护者加入。对很多狗主人来说，价格仍然太高。尽管如此，Rover的确帮很多人解决了一个特殊的问题，也给更新更好的方案留出了机会。这正是创活动所能作的。 In May 2016, Harvard Education Press is releasing a volume called Educational Entrepreneurship Today, which Frederick Hess and I edited.[1] Its content arose during a conference we hosted at AEI during the summer of 2015, where we brought together leading educational entrepreneurs, researchers in the field, and people with experience funding entrepreneurial ventures. What follows are a couple of big ideas that are circulating in the educational entrepreneurship world today and some of the tensions that will define educational entrepreneurship in the future. Will education be a place where Rover- (or Uber- or Airbnb-) like innovation takes place? Do we want it to be? 在2016年五月，哈佛教育出版社发布了一卷Frederick Hess和我编辑的文集，题为《今日教育行业创投》。[1]文集的内容形成于2015年夏季我们在美国企业研究所主持的一个讨论会。在这个会议上，我们把一流的教育业创业者，该领域的研究者和有创投经验的人士召集在了一起。随之而来的则是一些在今日教育业创业界流行的非凡创意，同时还有一些争论将在未来定义教育行业的创投活动。教育业会是一个产生类似Rover（或优步，或Airbnb）那样的创新的领域吗？我们希望如此吗？ Trends in Educational Entrepreneurship 教育业创业的趋势 The first and most important idea that those observing educational entrepreneurship should know is that while its influence over the past decade or so has been muted by policy and circumstance, this has nevertheless been a time of great growth for the field. Sure, it is true that school procurement systems (how schools and teachers shop for and purchase new materials) are stifling and outdated. Teachers and principals have limited flexibility to redesign schools or put new tools to work in ambitious ways. 教育行业创投的观察人士应该知道的第一个也是最重要的一个概念就是：教育行业创投在过去十多年一直在发挥作用，尽管目前已被政策和环境压制，该领域仍然有过一段显著增长期。当然，学校采购平台系统（学校和教师采购新材料的方式）是压抑创新且过时的。老师和校长们重新设计学校，或积极使用新的工作工具的灵活性是有限的。 But there have been many bright spots. Enrollment in charter schools doubled, and then doubled again. Venture capital investments grew from almost nothing to hundreds of millions’ worth. Companies such as Wireless Generation and SchoolNet thrived and then were sold at a handsome rate of return, emboldening more entrepreneurs and investors who seek to emulate those efforts. 但这一行业已然有很多闪光点。特许学校的录取数翻倍，又再翻倍。风险投资额从接近于零，变成几亿美元。如无线世代（Wireless Generation)或学校网（SchoolNet）这样的公司茁壮成长然后再以可观的回报率被收购，这鼓励了更多企业家和投资者去尝试复制上述成果。 The second thing worth noting is that what gets measured gets valued. The No Child Left Behind era heavily emphasized how students perform on state tests in reading and math. In the modern era, there has also been far less appetite or room for entrepreneurs who are not focused on closing reading and math “gaps” for low-income, African American, or Latino youth. Teachers are increasingly evaluated based on these metrics, district schools are at risk of being sanctioned if their students do not perform adequately, and charter schools know their existence depends largely on their test scores. 第二个值得注意的事情是，能被衡量比较的方面才是被认为有价值的。这个“不让一个孩子落后”的时代特别重视学生在州统考中的阅读和数学成绩。在如今这个时代，那些不重视为低收入群体、非裔和拉丁裔青少年缩小阅读和数学成绩差距的企业家很少受到青睐或者得到发展空间。教师评估越来越基于这些指标，如果学生表现不够好，学区的学校可能面临被制裁的风险。而特许学校也知道其生存很大程度上依赖于测试分数。 Test scores tend to define the ways in which schools are judged and compared, and they also mean that new providers can really only demonstrate their mettle in terms of reading and math. When policy and philanthropy treat reading and math tests as the coin of the realm, it creates problems for entrepreneurs who are not offering “whole school” models, focusing on tested grades or subjects, or tackling English Language Arts and math in ways that do not map onto tests. The metrics used to measure success shape the types of solutions that will be offered. 州统考测试分数倾向于被拿来作为评判和比较学校的标准。这也意味着新的教育供应者只能通过阅读和数学成绩来彰显他们的能力。政策和慈善业把分数当作教育业的法定货币，这给一些企业家带来了麻烦。比如有些企业家不提供“完整学校”的模式，他们只关注学校课堂成绩或科目而非州统考成绩或科目；还有些企业家用来促进英语文学和数学教育的方法，无法反映在考试分数上。衡量成功的指标影响了哪些类型的解决方案将被提供。 Finally, the field of educational entrepreneurship needs to take a hard look in the mirror and realize it has suffered from its insularity. As New Schools Venture Fund President Stacey Childress points out in her chapter in Educational Entrepreneurship Today, Teach For America (TFA) alumni were key founders of nearly one in five education ventures launched in the past 20 years.[2] That data point reflects the larger reality that educational entrepreneurs are likely to share common formative experiences and worldviews. This has produced a community that has tended to share certain assumptions (such as the importance of reading and math tests) and embrace a certain set of policies (such as test-based teacher evaluation and charter schooling). 最后，教育行业创投这一领域自身需要被仔细审视，并意识到该领域已经被其孤立性深深伤害。教育行业创投会议上，新学校风险基金的主席Stacey Childress在其专题演讲中指出，过去20年发起的教育业风险投资中，五分之一的创业公司由“为美国而教书”(TFA)组织的前成员作为关键创始人。[2]这数据反映出一个更广泛的现实：教育业创业者很可能有着共同的成长经历或世界观。这就创造了一个倾向于分享特定假设的共同体（例如阅读和数学的重要性），并且支持某特定的政策集（如基于统考测试的教师评估和特许学校教学）。 This insularity has contributed to a simmering tension in several cities with an abundance of entrepreneurial activity and new school formation, such as Detroit, Newark, and New Orleans. Activists, politicians, and community members charge that these ventures are being done to marginalized communities, not with them. Part of this tension is stoked by conflating entrepreneurship and “education reform” more generally (a phenomenon that we will tackle momentarily), but another comes from a genuine fear of snake-oil salesmen and carpetbaggers with agendas of their own. 这种偏狭性在几个创业活动和新式学校丰富的城市导致了沸腾的矛盾，如底特律，纽瓦克和新奥尔良。活动家、政客和社区成员指责这些创业公司让社区边缘化，而不是和社区相伴。更广泛的来说，把创业和“教育改革”结合起来的尝试，激化了部分矛盾（这现象我们很快会谈到）。而另外的激化则来自于对于兜售冒牌货的奸商和有着自己小盘算、想趁机渔利的外来政客的真实恐惧。 Two Dynamics That Will Shape the Next Two Decades of Educational Entrepreneurship 未来20年塑造教育行业创投的两个机制 The “what” of educational entrepreneurship is exciting. The “how” is a lot tougher. Over the next two decades, educational entrepreneurs will encounter a funding community, a policy environment, and a changing educational landscape that will profoundly affect the types of ventures they are able to create and the ability of those ventures to scale, grow, and meet children’s needs. How these dynamics will play out remains to be seen. In fact, there are several key dynamics in educational entrepreneurship that are worth exploring. 教育行业创投的概念是令人激动的。而其实现途径则要困难多了。在接下来二十年，教育业的创业者会受到融资界、政策环境、变化的教育界等因素的冲击。这些因素会深刻影响风险投资以及这些风险投资发起、壮大和满足孩子需求的能力。这些机制如何运作还有待观察。事实上，教育创业有几个关键机制值得探索。 The first dynamic is the tension between big bets and small bets. Because the outcomes of new ventures are uncertain, it makes sense to make a large number of small bets and winnow them over time. This reduces risk for everyone involved and accelerates the rate at which new models can be tried. But this approach flies in the face of much of the thinking that has characterized educational innovation and entrepreneurship during the past decade. Philanthropists and investors have been eager to find “what works” and invest in scaling it up. Proponents of the scale-up approach point to the need nationwide, the slow pace of change, and the messiness of a small-bet strategy. 第一个机制是大额投资和小额投资之间的张力。因为新的风险投资的结果不确定，下很多的小赌注然后再不断筛选它们是有道理的。这减少了每个人涉及的风险，加速了尝试新模式的速率。但是过去十年，教育行业创新、创业的特色思维很大程度上与这一思路相悖。慈善家和投资者渴望发现可行的方案，并加大投资。加大投资这一做法的支持者，提到了全国性的需求、变革的慢节奏以及小赌注方案无序混乱等理由。 Fundamentally, this tension highlights the competing visions of educational improvement in America today. Some see experimentation as eventually converging on a single or small number of “best” models, practices, or programs that should ultimately be adopted everywhere. Others see a far more fluid world, with “best” answers being highly contingent and context dependent. This is not a simple story of entrepreneurs versus bureaucrats, but of good-faith disagreements on the approaches most likely to serve the needs of schools and schooling. 基本上，这种张力突显了在今日的美国教育改进中的竞争理念。有些人把实验看作是最终会收敛的过程。他们认为最后发现的一个或少数几个最优模式、做法或项目应当被用于全国。另一些人则看到一个更加多变的世界，最优答案是高度机缘性且情境依赖的。这不是一个企业家和官僚相争的简单故事，而是一个关于最大可能有助于学校和教学的需要的方法上的善意争执。 The second dynamic—a tension that actually poses a serious risk to current and future entrepreneurial ventures—is the simultaneous desire for experimentation and uniformly positive results. In the world of educational entrepreneurship, there are calls for experimentation, the need to “think outside the box,” and a need to “fundamentally change” American schools. However, in the next breath, the same leaders and advocates who have preached the Innovation Gospel insist on “no excuses” accountability systems aiming for 100 percent proficiency and charter-authorizing systems that require all schools and offerings to prioritize performance on state tests. While it is hypothetically possible to square this circle, the reality is that educational entrepreneurs are whipsawed between an appetite for risk-taking and a strong aversion to it. 第二种机制——实际上给现在和未来的创业风投带来了严重风险——即同时渴望实验和始终如一的正面结果。在教育业创投的世界，有对实验的呼唤，有“跳出盒子思考”的需求，也有对美国学校进行“根本变革”的需求。但同时，同样这些鼓吹创新思维福音的领袖和支持者坚持毫不妥协的系统可靠性，一定要向100%的师资能力水平看齐，而特许学校系统的学校和方案都必须优先考虑州统考的表现。两者兼顾在假想中是可能的，但现实中，教育业创投者则卡在冒险冲动和强烈的风险厌恶之间左右为难。 The casual observer can easily imagine that all the expertise and money involved in venture capital and startups must deliver a high rate of success. The truth is quite different. Ninety percent of all new enterprises fail. Failure is most of what new ventures actually do. That Darwinian process of figuring things out or learning from others’ mistakes is essential to entrepreneurial success. 漫不经心的观察者很容易觉得：风险资本和创业公司配置了所有这些专家技能和资金，回报率一定很高。真相则十分不同。90%的创业公司会失败。失败是大多数新的创投公司实际所做的事。以达尔文过程找到解决方案，或是从别人的错误中学习，对创业公司的成功至关重要。 While the idea of “failure” is disquieting when it comes to children and schools, the value of failure has an important place in classrooms and learning. Students have to feel free to try something new and learn from the experience, whether or not it works out. In American education today, however, there is little tolerance for failure—in classrooms, schools, or the larger landscape. 也许一旦涉及到孩子或者学校，“失败”这个词就让人心神不宁。学生必须有尝试新东西和从经验中学习的自由，无论最后结果成功与否。然而在今日的美国教育领域，失败一点都不被容忍——在教室，学校，或者更大的范围。 This tension is particularly evident in the inclination to support large, established “entrepreneurial” ventures such as TFA or the KIPP Academies. These ventures show track records of success, have proven leaders, and constitute a well-known quantity. At the same time, these are the very things that tend to produce rigidity and routine in any organization. 这种矛盾在支持大型的、发展完备的所谓“创业”风投企业的倾向中显得特别明显，如对TFA或KIPP学院。这些企业有一系列成功的记录，有资质的领袖，规模也广为人知。与此同时，任何这样的组织都倾向产生僵化和陈规。 Organizations such as TFA and KIPP, with more than two decades of experience, records of accomplishment, alumni networks, and stakeholders, are no longer positioned to pioneer wholly new approaches. Rather, they become attractive to funders, policymakers, and education officials as they become less and less the entrepreneurial upstart and more and more a familiar piece of the new education establishment. Rather than think about new ways of preparing teachers, people keep supporting TFA. The consequence is that these organizations are asked to do more and more, stretching their ability to excel while potentially crowding out interest in unproven ventures. TFA和KIPP这样的组织拥有20多年经验、一系列的成就、会友网络和利益相关者，它们不再站在新方法的先驱位置。因为当它们变得越来越不像创业新星而越来越像人们熟悉的新的教育既得利益集团时，它们对投资人、政策制定者和教育官员都变得具有吸引力。人们一直支持TFA，而不是思考培训教师的新方法。后果就是，这些机构被要求做得更多，拓展了其卓越能力的同时也潜在地挤出了那些尚未被认可的创业公司的利益。 Questions about the importance of entrepreneurship and our tolerance for uncertainty are also central to policy debates over entrepreneur-friendly reforms such as education savings accounts, online learning, and expanded school choice programs. After all, such programs are, by their very nature, unproven. 在就对创投友好的各种改革进行政策辩论，如教育储蓄账户、线上课程和范围更宽的择校程序时，创投的重要性和我们对不确定性的容忍度等问题也居于中心。无论如何，这些项目在其最根本性质上尚未证明自己。 So What Can We Do? 那么我们能做什么呢？ If you, like me, appreciate the entrepreneurial impulse and think that it has something to offer the nation’s education system, then there are steps that can be taken to try and advance the cause. 如果你像我一样欣赏创业精神的脉动并认为这可以给这个国家的教育系统带来些什么，那么有以下策略可以尝试和推进这项事业。 Funders can make small bets, as well as large ones. This can help address both the fear of “failing big” and the sense that so much of education reform today is imposed by outsiders on local communities. Insofar as the groups receiving the majority of funding are outsiders that come to town with their already-baked models, well-intentioned philanthropy can unwittingly exacerbate this divide. 投资者可以进行小额投资，就像大投资一样。这可以帮助处理对“大失败”的恐惧，也缓和了如下事实所带来的隔阂感：今日如此之多的教育改革是本地社区的外来者强制推行的。目前的情况是，当拿到大笔投资的团体是来到镇上的外来人，并带着他们已备好的模式时，好心的慈善可以无意中加剧这一隔阂。 An easy rule of thumb here is for funders to be sure they are devoting some modest percentage of their investment giving—whether that is 5 percent or 20 percent—to new ventures. Fortunately, the resources to support the developing, prototyping, and testing process tend to be only a fraction of what it costs to contribute meaningfully to an established operation. 在这里，对投资人来说一个易于施行的拇指规则是，保证他们把投资的一些小额部分，不管是5%还是20%，捐给新的创新公司。幸运的是，用来支持开发，原型制作，和测试过程的资源往往只是有效地捐助一个已建成项目的所需的一小部分。 Entrepreneurs can start with “tiny schools.” Given varying tolerance for risk and limited resources for experimentation, prospective entrepreneurs should take a good look at New Orleans’ 4.0 Schools and their idea of “tiny schools” (described by 4.0 CEO Matt Candler in his chapter).[3] Creating a new charter school typically entails a dozen or more employees, scores or even hundreds of students, and a budget north of $1 million—meaning that failure is slow, expensive, and enormously disruptive. 创业者可以从“小微学校”开始。给定不同的风险容忍度和有限的实验资源，潜在的企业家可以好好审视一下新奥尔良的4.0学校和他们的“小微学校”理念（引自4.0的首席执行官Matt Candler的专题讲座）[3]。创建一所新的特许学校通常需要十几个或者更多雇员，几十甚至几百个学生，一个一百万美元以上的预算——这意味着失败是缓慢、昂贵和极其麻烦的。 Tiny schools mean that educators with a promising idea can start with 5 to 10 kids on Saturday mornings in a public library or school cafeteria. Such a model allows entrepreneurs to experiment, fail, improve, and iterate over the course of several sessions at very low cost and next to zero risk to students. Just as evolutionary change accelerates when new generations are born more often, so entrepreneurial invention benefits from shortened time horizons and more rapid iteration. 小微学校意味着带着有潜质创意的教育者可以从周六上午在公共图书馆或学校食堂以五到十个孩子的规模开始。这种模式允许创业者以一个很低的费用和对学生来说几乎为零的风险，来对课程环节进行实验、失败、改进和试错。就如同新世代出生得更频繁时进化会加速一样。这样，创业型发明就从更短的周期和更快的试错中获益。 Tiny schools accomplish two central tasks. First, they lower the risk of starting a new school. If the idea bears fruit, it can be ramped up. If the teaching methods do not connect with students, at worst, students have lost a couple of Saturdays. Even if the transition cannot be made to a whole-year model, only a few students are affected. 小微学校完成了两个核心任务。第一，他们降低了创立一个新学校的风险。如果创业有成果，它就可以壮大。如果教学方法对学生不起作用，最差也不过就是学生损失几个星期六。即使这一过渡模式无法变为一个全年模式，也只有几个学生会受影响。 Second, they lower the cost of experimentation. In starting an entire charter school, substantial philanthropic and then public dollars are spent on an experiment. It might work out; it might not. While over time there is reason to believe that this will lead to better schools, it is an expensive way to get there. By bridging the gap between nothing and a whole school, tiny schools create space for rapid iteration and improvement. 第二，它们降低了实验成本。为了启动一个完备的特许学校，大笔慈善和财政资金会被用于一次实验。也许有好结果，也许不成功。虽然一直以来这方法被认为会产生好学校，这仍是一个昂贵的手段。通过跨越从一无所有到完备学校的鸿沟，小微学校为快速试错和改进提供了一个空间。 State leaders can complete a comprehensive regulatory review. Although mundane, rules regarding subjects such as procurement, teacher preparation, new school creation, reporting, facilities, special education, online provision, staff development, and charter school authorization can create huge, counterproductive hurdles to new providers and new models of provision. Although these regulations may have made sense at one time, many no longer do. 州政府的领袖可以完成一个综合性规制评议。虽然平凡庸常，但在采购、教师培训、新学校创设、报告、设施、特殊教育、在线授课、雇员培训和特许学校授权机构等诸方面，各种规制能够产生巨大的消极作用，阻碍新的提供者和新的模式投入使用。虽然这些规制过去可能有意义，但也许现在很多已并非如此了。 State leaders would do well to put together a blue-ribbon panel of experts to scour the state education code for outdated and ill-suited statutes and regulations that may be stymieing entrepreneurial solutions. They can also encourage districts, charter authorizers, and schools of education to conduct similar surveys of their own operations and publicly report on where and what they are streamlining. 州政府的领导们能做得更好的方面，也许是推动组成专家委员会来革新州的教育法规并去除那些过时和适应性差并可能阻碍创投方案的法律和规章。他们也可以鼓励学区、特许学校授权机构和学校对其自身的运作进行类似的调查，并公布它们在何处采取了何种加强效率的措施。 Don’t Go Gaga for Entrepreneurs; Foster Entrepreneurship 不要迷信企业家；要鼓励创业精神 The exciting source of dynamism that created everything from Rover to the next cool app to teach students to read is entrepreneurialism, not any particular entrepreneur or entrepreneurial venture. Exciting new entrants age, grow, and evolve. Some succeed and some fail. Those that succeed, with time and success, tend to become members in good standing of the stodgy old establishment. That is the cycle of entrepreneurial life. 企业家精神而不是某个企业家或者创投企业才是令人振奋的动力源。这动力可以创造从Rover到下一个很酷的手机应用，也可以教学生阅读。令人振奋的参与者变得成熟，成长，并且进化。一些成功了，一些失败了。那些成功者，随着它们的年岁和成功，变成了乏味沉闷的老既得利益集团的一部分。这就是创业生命体的周期。 Entrepreneurship does not guarantee success. If anything, it ensures that there will be failure. Of course, if a half century of school reform has taught us anything, it is that system reform is also sure to produce failure—except on a much larger scale and without the dynamism, inventiveness, and self-correction that characterizes vibrant entrepreneurial sectors. 创业不能保证成功。如果说能保证什么的话，它保证这里将会有失败。当然，如果半个世纪的学校改革教会了我们什么的话，那就是系统改革也当然会产生失败--只不过这失败的规模更大，而且没有活力、激励、自我修正等这些有生命力的创业部门所拥有的特征。 For all its imperfections though, educational entrepreneurship offers a degree of imagination and natural winnowing that seems especially well-suited to the sprawling, diverse, and pluralistic nation that we live in, and it creates an opportunity for truly world-changing products to emerge. Those who believe in the power of the entrepreneurial impulse would do well never to cling to any particular venture. The social good is best served by creating the conditions in which entrepreneurs can thrive if—and only if—they are serving the best interests of students. 虽然有种种不完美，教育行业创投活动提供着某种程度的想象力和自然筛选，这些看来对于我们所生活的这个分散，多元和分权共治的国家特别合适。并且创投创造了机会，使得真正改变世界的产品可能涌现。那些相信创业冲劲的人应该避免一成不变地支持某个特定的创投公司。创造条件，让并且只让那些最能为学生利益服务的企业茁壮成长，才是服务社会的最好途径。 Notes 注记

1. Frederick M. Hess and Michael Q. McShane, Educational Entrepreneurship Today (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press, 2016).
2. Stacy Childress, “From Generation to Generation: Fifteen Years of Education Entrepreneurship,” in Educational Entrepreneurship Today, ed. Frederick M. Hess and Michael Q. McShane (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press, 2016).
3. Matt Candler, “Go Small or Go Home: Innovation in Schooling,” in Educational Entrepreneurship Today, ed. Frederick M. Hess and Michael Q. McShane (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard Education Press, 2016).

（编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

Why are we so afraid to leave children alone? 为什么我们害怕让孩子独处？ 作者:Pat Harriman & Heather Ashbach, UC Irvine @ 2016-08-23 译者:明珠(@老茄爱天一爱亨亨更爱楚楚) 校对:babyface_claire(@许你疯不许你傻) 来源:UC, http://universityofcalifornia.edu/news/why-are-we-so-afraid-leave-children-alone Leaving a child unattended is considered taboo in today’s intensive parenting atmosphere, despite evidence that American children are safer than ever. So why are parents denying their children the same freedom and independence that they themselves enjoyed as children? 在今天这种强化父母责任的社会氛围中，留下孩子无人照看被视为禁忌，虽然有证据表明美国孩子比以往任何时候都更安全。那么，为什么父母拒绝孩子拥有从前他们自己是孩子时享受的同样的自由和独立呢？ A new study by University of California, Irvine social scientists suggests that our fears of leaving children alone have become systematically exaggerated in recent decades – not because the practice has become more dangerous, but because it has become socially unacceptable. 加州大学尔湾分校社会学家们的一项新研究认为，近几十年，我们对单独留下孩子的恐惧被系统性地放大了——不是因为这种做法更危险，而是它对社会已变得不可接受。 “Without realizing it, we have consistently increased our estimates of the amount of danger facing children left alone in order to better justify or rationalize the moral disapproval we feel toward parents who violate this relatively new social norm,” said Ashley Thomas, cognitive sciences graduate student and lead author of the work, published online this month in the open-access journal Collabra. “我们没有意识到这一点，所以不断提高对孩子被留下独处时所面临危险的估值，并以此更好地为我们对违反这个相对较新的社会规范的家长所做出的道义谴责加以正当化或合理化，”Ashley Thomas说。他是一名认知科学研究生，也是本月在开放获取期刊COLLABRA上在线发表的相关研究的第一作者。 The survey-based study found that children whose parents left them alone on purpose – to go to work, help out a charity, relax or meet an illicit lover – were perceived to be in greater danger than those whose parents were involuntarily separated from them. 一项基于调查的研究结果发现，（人们对被单独留下的孩子所面临危险的评估，和父母离开的原因有关，）比起情非得已的离开，因自己有事而离开，比如上班、助阵慈善、放松或与非法情人幽会，人们感知到的危险更大。 The researchers presented survey participants with five different scenarios in which a child was left alone for less than an hour. Situations ranged from a 10-month-old who was left asleep for 15 minutes in a cool car parked in a gym’s underground garage to an 8-year-old reading a book alone at a coffee shop a block from home for 45-minutes. 研究者为被调查者提供了五种不同场景，每个场景里有一个孩子独处不超过1小时。情景从10个月的婴儿独自躺在停于体育馆地下车库的凉爽小汽车里熟睡15分钟，到8岁孩子独自在离家一个街区的咖啡店看书45分钟。 “Within a given scenario, the only thing that varied was the reason for the parent’s absence,” said Kyle Stanford, professor and chair of logic & philosophy of science. “These included an unintentional absence – caused by a fictitious accident in which the mother was hit by a car and briefly knocked unconscious – and four that were planned: leaving for work, volunteering for a charity, relaxing or meeting an illicit lover. After reading each scenario and the reason behind each child being left alone, the participants ranked on a scale of 1 to 10 how much estimated danger the child was in while the parent was gone, 10 being the most risk.” “在每个给定场景中，唯一变量是父母离开的原因，”逻辑学和科学哲学教授Kyle Stanford说。“这些场景包括一个不得已的离开，比如虚构一个事故导致母亲被车撞暂时昏迷，另外四个是有计划的：工作，到慈善机构志愿服务，放松和与非法情人见面。了解每个场景和孩子被单独留下的原因后，被调查者从1到10给父母不在期间孩子独处的危险性评分排序，10最危险。” Moral disapproval inflates estimate of risk 道义谴责放大了风险评估 Overall, survey participants saw all of these situations as quite dangerous for children: The average risk estimate was 6.99, and the most common ranking in all scenarios was 10. Despite identical descriptions of each set of circumstances in which children were alone, those left alone on purpose were estimated to be in greater danger than those whose parents left them alone unintentionally. 总体上，被调查者认为所有场景对孩子都相当危险：平均危险值是6.99，而在所有场景中最常见值是10。尽管孩子独处的每个场景描述相同，但父母有意离开留孩子独处的危险评估比无意留下他们的情况更大。 “In fact, children left alone on purpose are almost certainly safer than those left alone by accident, because parents can take steps to make the situation safer, like giving the child a phone or reviewing safety rules,” said Barbara Sarnecka, study co-author and associate professor of cognitive sciences. “The fact that people make the opposite judgment strongly suggests that they morally disapprove of parents who leave their children alone, and that disapproval inflates their estimate of the risk.” “其实，有意让孩子单独留家几乎肯定比因意外让孩子单独留家更安全，因为父母可以采取措施让情况变得更安全，比如给孩子一个电话或重申安全准则，”认知科学副教授和研究共同作者Barbara Sarnecka说。“人们坚定做出相反判断的事实表明，他们在道德上不赞成父母离开让孩子独处，这种谴责放大了对风险的评估。” This is also born out in participants’ view of children left alone by a parent meeting an illicit lover as being in significantly more danger than children left alone in precisely the same circumstances by a parent who leaves in order to work, volunteer for charity or just relax. 这也是为何在完全相同的环境背景下，受调查者认为家长约会非法情人而把儿童留家独处比起父母因工作、参加慈善志愿服务或放松而离开让儿童留家独处更危险。 In scenarios where participants were asked to judge not only how much danger the child was facing, but also whether the mother had done something morally wrong, researchers expected the perceived risk ranking to be lower. 当受调查者不仅被要求判断孩子面临多少危险，还要判断母亲是否有失德行为时，研究人员预计在这些场景下所感知的风险排名会降低。 “We thought giving people an alternative way to express their disapproval of the parent’s action would reduce the extent to which moral judgments influenced perceptions of risk,” Thomas said. “But just the opposite happened. When people gave an explicit judgment about the parent’s conduct, estimates of risk to the child were even more inflated by moral disapproval of the parent’s reason for leaving.” “我们认为，给人们一种不喜欢父母行为的替代表达方式，能减少影响感知风险的道德评判程度。”Thomas说。“然而事实正好相反。当人们对父母行为给出明确评判后，对孩子的风险估计会因对父母离开原因的道义谴责而更加被放大。” In fact, people’s risk estimates closely followed their judgments of whether mothers in the scenarios had done something morally wrong. Even parents who left children alone involuntarily were not held morally blameless, receiving an average “moral wrongness” judgment of 3.05 on a 10-point scale. 事实上，人们的风险评估与母亲在场景中是否做了失德的事的判断密切相关。在10分制评价里，即便不得已导致孩子单独在家的父母也并非被认为在道德上无可指责，他们也要接受平均3.05分的“失德”判断。 Fathers given more leeway than mothers 父亲的回旋余地比母亲更多 The authors found another interesting pattern when they replaced mothers in the stories with fathers: For fathers – but not mothers – a work-related absence was treated more like an involuntary absence. This difference could stem from the view that work is more obligatory and less of a voluntary choice for men. 作者把故事里的母亲替换成父亲时，发现另一个有趣的现象：对于父亲——而不是母亲——因为工作离开更容易被当作不得已的情况对待。这种差异源于一种观念，认为工作对男人而言更义不容辞，是更不得已的选择。 “Exaggerating the risks of allowing children some unsupervised time has significant costs besides the loss of children’s independence, freedom and opportunity to learn how to solve problems on their own,” Sarnecka said. “As people have adopted the idea that children must never be alone, parents increasingly face the possibility of arrest, charges of abuse or neglect, and even incarceration for allowing their children to play in parks, walk to school or wait in a car for a few minutes without them.” “除了在孩子的独立性、自由和学习自己解决问题的机会方面的损失之外，夸大给孩子些无人看管时间的风险，有很大的代价。”Sarnecka说。“当人们都认为孩子们绝对不能独处的时候，家长越来越多面临逮捕，被指控虐待或疏忽的可能性，甚至因为允许孩子在公园玩，步行到学校或独自在车里待几分钟而被监禁。” “At a minimum,” she continued, “these findings should caution those who make and enforce the law to distinguish evidence-based and rational assessments of risk to children from intuitive moral judgments about parents – and to avoid investing the latter with the force of law.” “至少，”她继续说，“这些发现应该提醒那些制定和执行法律的人，把依据证据与理性地评估孩子的风险从对家长的直觉道德评判中区分出来——并避免因为法律的力量而将判断权交给后者。” The study involved survey responses by 1,328 participants on Amazon Mechanical Turk ranging in age from 18 to 75, with a fairly even split of men and women and those with and without children. Females accounted for 52 percent of respondents, while 48 percent were male; and 56.43 percent had children, while 43.57 percent did not. More than 80 percent of the participants were white, and two-thirds had completed at least some college. 本研究在Amazon Mechanical Turk网站上调查了从18岁至75岁的1328人，男性与女性，有孩子与没孩子人的回答有相当差异甚至泾渭分明。受调查者中，女性占52％，男性48％；有孩子的占56.43％，没有的占43.57％。超过80％是白人，三分之二有大学文凭。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

The sobering evidence of social science 来自社会科学的证据发人深省 作者:George F. Will @ 2016-07 译者:鳗鱼禅(@鳗鱼禅) 校对:龙泉(@L_Stellar) 来源:The Washington Post,https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-sobering-evidence-of-social-science/2016/07/06/4a3831f8-42dd-11e6-bc99-7d269f8719b1_story.html The report was so “seismic” — Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s word — that Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration released it on Fourth of July weekend, 1966, hoping it would not be noticed. But the Coleman Report did disturb various dogmatic slumbers and vested interests. And 50 years on, it is pertinent to today’s political debates about class and social mobility. So, let us now praise an insufficiently famous man, sociologist James Coleman, author of the study “Equality of Educational Opportunity.” 这份报告如此‘有震撼力’，用Daniel Patrick Moynihan的话来说，以至Lyndon B. Johnson政府选择在1966年独立日前的周末发布这份报告，冀望无人留意【编注：7月4日为美国独立日，乃公共假日，Fourth of July weekend就是恰好与独立日连上的那个周末，1966年7月4日为星期一，故此周末为独立日前之周末】。但“Coleman报告”确实惊扰了教条主义者的昏睡和既得利益团体的算盘。50年后，这份报告和眼下关于阶层和社会流动性的政治辩论仍息息相关。那么，让我们赞誉一位名气还不够大的男士，研究著作《教育机会的平等》的作者，社会学家James Coleman。 In 1966, postwar liberalism’s confidence reached its apogee. From 1938, when the electorate rebuked Franklin Roosevelt for his plan to “pack” the Supreme Court, through 1964, congressional Republicans and conservative Democrats prevented a liberal legislating majority. But Johnson’s 44-state victory that year gave Democrats 68 Senate seats and a majority of 155 in the House. 1966年，战后自由主义者的自信心膨胀到最高峰。1938年，选民严厉抨击了富兰克林·罗斯福“填充最高法院”的计划。自那时至1964年，多亏国会中的共和党议员和保守派民主党议员，自由主义者未能掌握立法机构多数议席。然而，1966年，约翰逊拿下来44个联邦州，民主党人在参议院占有68席，在众议院以155席拿下多数席位。 Effortless and uninterrupted prosperity seemed assured as the economy grew in 1965 and 1966 by 10.7 percent and 7.99 percent, respectively. So, a gusher of tax revenue coincided with liberalism’s pent-up demand for large projects. It hoped to meld two American traits — egalitarian aspirations and faith in education’s transformative power. 1965年和1966年的经济增长率分别为10.7%和7.99%，唾手可得且无间断的繁荣看似已不在话下。于是，井喷式的税入增长恰逢自由派对大项目压抑已久的热情，如同干柴烈火。自由派希望将两大美国特色融为一体——追求人人平等的志向和教育推动变革的信念。 The consensus then was that the best predictor of a school’s performance was the amount of money spent on it: Increase financial inputs, and cognitive outputs would increase proportionately. As the postwar baby boom moved through public schools like a pig through a python, almost everything improved — school buildings, teachers’ salaries, class sizes, per-pupil expenditures — except outcomes measured by standardized tests. 那时的共识是，学校经费数目是预测该校学生表现的最佳指标：增加经费投入，学生的认知水平会成比例地上升。二战后婴儿潮横扫公立学校，如同一头猪通过巨蟒体内，公立学校的任一方面几乎都比以往更上一层楼——校舍、教师薪资、班级规模、平均每个学生的经费投入——唯一的例外是由标准化考试衡量的学生表现。 Enter Coleman, and the colleagues he directed, to puncture complacency with the dagger of evidence — data from more than 3,000 schools and 600,000 primary and secondary school students. His report vindicated the axiom that social science cannot tell us what to do, it can tell us the results of what we are doing. He found that the best predictor of a school’s outcomes was the quality of the children’s families. And students’ achievements are influenced by the social capital (habits, mores, educational ambitions) their classmates bring to school: 让Coleman和受其指导的同僚上台，用证据之匕首——从3000所学校和60万名小学、初中生处收集的数据 —— 刺破自满的气球吧。Coleman的报告印证了一个公理：社会科学无法指导我们行事，它能告诉我们的是行动的后果。Coleman发现，预测某校学生表现的最佳指标是学生家庭的素质。学生的学业表现受其同学带到学校的社会资本（习惯、规矩、教育方面的进取心）的影响： “One implication stands out above all: That schools bring little influence to bear on a child’s achievement that is independent of his background and general social context; and that this very lack of an independent effect means that the inequalities imposed on children by their home, neighborhood, and peer environment are carried along to become the inequalities with which they confront adult life at the end of school.” “一个暗含推论尤为突出：将学生的家庭背景和社交圈子的影响排除后，学校教育对学生的学业成就影响极小；这意味着由家庭、社区和同侪环境带来的水平不均等，将一路伴随他们毕业，成为他们开启成人生活时面临的不均等。” Coleman’s report came exactly one year after — and as an explosive coda to — what is known as the Moynihan Report, which was leaked in July 1965. Moynihan, then a 37-year-old social scientist in Johnson’s Labor Department, presented in “The Negro Family: The Case for National Action” what then counted as shocking news: 23.6 percent of African American births were to unmarried women. Coleman的报告恰好于“Moynihan报告” 发表一年后面世，为后者燃起之火添柴加薪。 Moynihan在1965年7月被人泄露于众。当年Moynihan 37岁，是约翰逊执政下劳工部的一名社会学者,他的研究《黑人家庭：国家行动的案例》，成为令时人震惊的新闻：23.6%的非裔美籍婴儿由未婚女性所生。 Today 71 percent are. Almost 47 percent of all first births are to unmarried women, and a majority of all mothers under 30 are not living with the fathers of their children. 如今这个数字为71%。将近47%的头胎新生儿由未婚女性所生，大多数30岁以下的母亲和孩子的父亲分居。 The causes of family disintegration remain unclear, but 51 years ago Moynihan and then Coleman foresaw the consequences. Moynihan said the “tangle” of pathologies associated with the absence of fathers produces a continually renewed cohort of inadequately socialized adolescent males. Socializing them is society’s urgent business if it is to avoid chaotic neighborhoods and schools where maintaining discipline displaces teaching. Coleman documented how schools are reflections of, rather than cures for, the failure of families to function as the primary transmitters of social capital. 家庭解体的原因尚未明朗，但51年前Moynihan和Coleman先后预见到家庭解体的后果。Moynihan称，父亲缺位造成的种种困扰，源源不断地产生了一代社会化不充足的青春期男性。使他们充分社会化是社会的当务之急，否则难以避免产生混乱的社区和学校，在那里维持纪律取代了正常教学。学校本应是首要的社会资本传递途径，现在却成了家庭溃败的倒影，而非家庭溃败的解药，这一切都被Coleman记在笔下。 The extraordinary synergy between Moynihan and Coleman was serendipitous. Today, their baton of brave and useful sociology has passed to Charles Murray of the American Enterprise Institute. His “Losing Ground” (1984) was an autopsy of 1960s aspirations. His “Coming Apart” (2012) explores the social consequences — we are wallowing in the political consequences — of a bifurcated society in which many do very well while many others are unable to reach even the lowest rungs on the ladder of upward mobility. Moynihan和Coleman两项研究的协同增强效应，纯属意外。如今，他们勇敢、实用的社会学接力棒，传到了美国企业研究所的Charles Murray手上。Murray《站不住脚》（1984年出版）一书解剖了1960年代那场失败的壮举。他的《四分五裂》（2012年出版）一书探索了社会两极分化带来的社会后果。社会两极分化的表现是，许多人非常出色，而另外的很多人甚至连社会爬升阶梯的最低梯级都够不着，我们正在两极分化的政治后果中打滚。 Coleman’s evidence that cultural rather than financial variables matter most was not welcomed by education bureaucracies and unions. Similarly, we now have more than half a century of awkward, and often ignored, evidence about the mostly small and evanescent effects of early-childhood education. Today’s Democratic Party fancies itself “the party of science”; Barack Obama pledged, in his first inaugural address, to “restore science to its rightful place.” Social science, however, is respected by Democrats only when it validates policies congenial to the interests of favored factions. 比起经费投入，文化因素是最重要的影响变量，教育官僚机构和工会并不青睐Coleman提出的证据。与此情况相仿，早期儿童教育效果微弱，转瞬即逝，这方面令人尴尬、常被忽略的证据，我们已经积累了50多年了。如今民主党幻想自身为“科学之党”；贝拉克·奥巴马在他首个总统任期的就职演讲中，誓言“恢复科学理应占有的地位。”然而，仅在社会科学论证支持的政策有利于民主党所偏袒的利益团体时，民主党人才会尊重社会科学。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

Dunbar High School After 100 Years 百年后的Dunbar 高中 作者:Thomas Sowell @ 2016-10-04 译者:鳗鱼禅(@鳗鱼禅) 校对:龙泉(@L_Stellar) 来源:RealClearPolitics,http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2016/10/04/dunbar_high_school_after_100_years_131956.html One hundred years ago, on October 2, 1916, a new public high school building for black youngsters was opened in Washington, D.C. and named for black poet Paul Laurence Dunbar. Its history is a story inspiring in many ways and appalling in many other ways. 一百年前，1916年10月2日，一座为年轻黑人而设的公立高中教学楼在华盛顿特区投入使用。这座教学楼以非洲诗人 Paul Laurence Dunbar 的姓氏命名，它的历史是个令人既振奋又惊骇的故事。 Prior to 1916, the same high school had existed under other names, housed in other buildings -- and with a remarkable academic record. 在1916年前，这所高中以其它名字运营，在另外的建筑中教学，教学成果显著。 In 1899, when it was called "the M Street School," a test was given in Washington's four academic public high schools, three white and one black. The black high school scored higher than two of the three white high schools. Today, it would be considered Utopian even to set that as a goal, much less expect to see it happen. 1899年，当时学校还叫“ M 街学校”，华盛顿特区四所公立高中进行学业测试，三所白人高中，一所黑人高中。黑人高中的成绩高于其中两所白人高中。如今，人们会认为设立这样的目标本身就是做白日梦，更别说指望其变为现实。 The M Street School had neither of two so-called "prerequisites" for quality education. There was no "diversity." It was an all-black school from its beginning, and on through its life as a high quality institution under the name Dunbar High School. 优质教育所需的两项所谓“前提条件”，M街学校通通没有。没有“多样性”。一开始就是全黑人学校，直到保持高质量教学水平的Dunbar高中时期，依然如此。 But its days as a high quality institution ended abruptly in the middle of the 1950s. After that, it became just another failing ghetto school. 然而，这首优质教学之歌在1950年代中期戛然而止。之后，Dunbar 高中沦为又一所溃败的贫民窟学校。 The other so-called "prerequisite" that the M Street School lacked was an adequate building. Its student body was 50 percent larger than the building's capacity, a fact that led eventually to the new Dunbar High School building. But its students excelled even in their overcrowded building. 另一项所谓的“前提条件”——一座适宜教学的大楼——M街学校也没有。全校学生数量超过建筑物设计容纳人数50%，因此才兴建新的Dunbar高中教学楼。尽管如此，学生成绩依然优秀。 Some students at the M Street School began going to some of the leading colleges in the country in the late 19th century. The first of its graduates to go to Harvard did so in 1903. Over the years from 1892 to 1954, thirty-four of the graduates from the M Street School and Dunbar went on to Amherst. 在19世纪晚期，M街学校开始有学生考上国内顶尖大学。1903年，该校首次有学生考入哈佛大学。1892至1954年间，M街学校和Dunbar高中合共有34名毕业生考入 Amherst 学院【译注：位于马萨诸塞州的一所精英男校】 Of these, 74 percent graduated from Amherst and 28 percent of these graduates were Phi Beta Kappas. Other graduates from M Street High School and Dunbar became Phi Beta Kappas at Harvard, Yale, Dartmouth and other elite institutions. 这些学生中，74%顺利从Amherst 学院毕业，其中28%毕业生为最高荣誉优等生。其他M街学校和Dunbar 高中的一些毕业生，在哈佛、耶鲁、达特茅斯和其它精英院校成为最高荣誉优等生。 Graduates of this same high school pioneered as the first black in many places. These included the first black man to graduate from Annapolis, the first black woman to receive a Ph.D. from an American institution, the first black federal judge, the first black general, the first black Cabinet member and, among other notables, a doctor who became internationally renowned for his pioneering work in developing the use of blood plasma. 这一所高中的毕业生在多个领域都是首次取得杰出成就的黑人。包括第一名从美国海军学院毕业的黑人男生，第一名从美国高等院校获得博士学位的黑人女性，第一名黑人联邦法官，第一名黑人将军，第一名黑人内阁成员。在众多取得不凡成就的黑人中，特别值得一提的是，在保存血浆以供使用方面做出开拓性工作的一名享誉全球的黑人医生【译注：Charles Drew】 How could all of this come to an abrupt end in the 1950s? Like many other disasters, it began with good intentions and arbitrary assumptions. 这一切怎么会在1950年代突然完结？跟很多灾难一样，一切以善意和武断的假设前提开始。 When Chief Justice Earl Warren declared in the landmark 1954 case of "Brown v. Board of Education" that racially separate schools were "inherently unequal," Dunbar High School was a living refutation of that assumption. And it was within walking distance of the Supreme Court. 1954年里程碑式的“ 布朗诉教育委员会” 一案宣判，Earl Warren大法官代表的多数判词称种族隔离的学校‘ 在本性上就是不平等的’，Dunbar高中是对这一假设前提活生生的反驳。学校就位于最高法院的步行距离之内。 A higher percentage of Dunbar graduates went on to college than the percentage at any white public high school in Washington. But what do facts matter when there is heady rhetoric and crusading zeal? Dunbar高中毕业生考入大学的比例高于华盛顿特区内任何一所白人公立高中。但在令人头脑发热的修辞和运动式的热情面前，事实又有什么用呢？ There is no question that racially segregated schools in the South provided an inadequate education for blacks. But the assumption that racial "integration" was the answer led to years of racial polarization and turmoil over busing, with little, if any, educational improvement. 毋庸置疑，南部各州的种族隔离学校未能为黑人提供足够的教育。但种族“融合”才是解决之道的假设导致连年的种族极化和骚乱，用几近于无的教育成果提升来代替种族隔离的校巴。 For Washington, the end of racial segregation led to a political compromise, in which all schools became neighborhood schools. Dunbar, which had been accepting outstanding black students from anywhere in the city, could now accept only students from the rough ghetto neighborhood in which it was located. 对华盛顿特区而言，种族隔离的结束导致一项政治让步。所有学校都转为就近入学的学区学校。Dunbar 高中此前一直在全市范围内招收学业突出的黑人学生，现在只能从学校周边的贫民窟社区招收学生。 Virtually overnight, Dunbar became a typical ghetto school. As unmotivated, unruly and disruptive students flooded in, Dunbar teachers began moving out and many retired. More than 80 years of academic excellence simply vanished into thin air. 几乎一夜之间，Dunbar高中变为一所典型的贫民窟学校。没有学习动力、没有规矩和爱捣蛋的学生涌入学校后，原先的教师开始离开、退休。80多年的教学成果随风飘逝。 Nobody, black or white, mounted any serious opposition. "Integration" was the cry of the moment, and it drowned out everything else. That is what happens in politics. 不论黑人或白人，没有人提出任何严肃的反对意见。“融合”是当红的口号，让其它都沉没于海底。这就是政治领域正在发生的事情。 Today, there is a new Dunbar High School building, costing more than $100 million. But its graduates go on to college at only about half the rate of Dunbar graduates in earlier and poorer times. Politics can deliver costly "favors," even when it cannot deliver quality education. 如今，Dunbar新高中教学楼耗资超过1亿美元。但学校毕业生的大学入学率仅为早期贫穷世代的一半。哪怕政治无法提供优质的教育，一样可以提供昂贵的“惠泽”。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

‘When life hands you a lemon, just bite in’ “如果生活递给你一个柠檬，那就去咬它吧” 作者:Judith Rich Harris @ 2016-09 译者:明珠(@老茄爱天一爱亨亨更爱楚楚) 校对:辉格(@whigzhou) 来源:The Psychologist, http://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-29/september/when-life-hands-you-lemon-just-bite Judith Rich Harris takes Lance Workman through her extraordinary fightback against entrenched views of child development. Judith Rich Harris对话Lance Workman，对已被深深认同的儿童发展心理学观点作出了非同寻常的回击。 Judith Rich Harris is a psychologist and author. Judith Rich Harris是一位心理学家和作家。 【译注：粗体字是Workman的提问，常字体是Harris的回答】 I first become aware of you when I read The Nurture Assumption in 1998. In it you proposed that a child’s peer group has greater influence on development than her parents. Can we begin by outlining this theory? 我第一次认识你是读到你1998年出版的《教养的迷思》。在书中你提到，同龄人群体对孩子成长的影响大于父母。我们从简要概括这个理论开始，好吗？ Group socialisation theory was my attempt to solve a puzzle I had encountered while writing child development textbooks for college students. My textbooks endorsed the conventional view of child development – that what makes children turn out the way they do is ‘nature’ (their genes) and ‘nurture’ (the way their parents bring them up). But after a while it dawned on me that there just wasn’t enough solid evidence to support that view, and there was a growing pile of evidence against it. 群体社会化理论是我在撰写儿童发展心理学的大学教材时试图解决的难题。我的教材赞同儿童发展心理学的传统观点——是‘先天本性’（基因）和‘后天培养’（父母养育他们的方式）共同使孩子们形成他们的做事方式。但一段时间后我明白了，并没有足够确凿的证据支持这个观点，同时，反对证据却越来越多。 The problem was not with the ‘nature’ part – genes were having their expected effect. But ‘nurture’ wasn’t working the way it was supposed to. In studies that provided some way of controlling for or eliminating the effects of heredity, the environment provided by parents had little or no effect on how the children turned out. 问题不在于‘天性’部分——基因有其预期效果。不过‘培养’并未如大家所认为的方式发生作用。在一些以某种方式控制或消除了遗传作用的研究中，父母提供的环境对孩子如何变成后来的样子很少或者没有影响。 And yet, genes accounted for only about 50 per cent of the variation in personality and social behaviour. The environment must be playing some role. But it wasn’t the home environment. So I proposed that the environment that has lasting effects on personality and social behaviour is the one the child encounters outside the home. 然而，基因改变个性和社会行为的作用大约只占50%。环境肯定发挥着一定的作用。但这不是家庭环境。因此我认为，持久影响孩子个性和社交行为的环境是其面对的家庭之外的环境。 This makes sense if you think about the purpose of childhood. What do children have to accomplish while they’re growing up? They have to learn how to behave in a way that is acceptable to the other members of their society. How do they do this? Not by imitating their parents! Parents are adults, and every society prescribes different behaviours for children and adults. 如果想想童年的目标，你会发现这是有道理的。随着孩子长大他们不得不做什么呢？他们不得不学习他们的社交圈里其他成员可以接受的行为方式。他们如何做到这一点？不是通过模仿父母！父母是成年人，社会给孩子和成人规定了不同的行为。 A child who behaved like his or her parents (in any context other than a game) would be seen as impertinent, unruly or weird. So the first step in becoming socialised must be to figure out what sort of person you are. Are you a child or an adult? A male or a female? In complex societies there are more categories, but age and gender were probably enough for the small groups of hunter-gatherers of our ancestors. 在除游戏之外的任何情境下，孩子若像父母那样行事，会被视为不得体、任性或怪异。因此，社会化的第一步是弄清楚你属于哪类人。是孩子还是成人？男人还是女人？复杂社会分类更多，但年龄和性别对于我们祖先的狩猎采集小团体可能足够了。 Once a child had identified with a particular social category – let’s say, female child – her next job would be to learn how to behave like the others in her category. A social category is an abstract concept, not necessarily an actual group of children. My use of the term ‘peer group’ turned out to be misleading. I should have said ‘social category’ or perhaps ‘reference group’. 一旦一个孩子明确了自己属于某个特定社会类别——比方说，女童——她接下来的工作将是学会如何像她这个类别的其他人一样行事。一个社会类别是一个抽象概念，并非儿童的实际群体。我后来发现使用‘同龄人群体’这个术语是个误导。我应该说‘社会类别’或者‘参照群体’。 Why?  为什么？ The problem with ‘peer group’ was that it made people think ‘friends’. Group socialisation theory is not about the influence of friends. Friendships are relationships. Socialisation is not a product of relationships. ‘同龄人群体’这个词的问题在于，它让人想到‘朋友’。群体社会化理论无关朋友的影响。友谊是关系。社会化不是关系的产物。 The expanded theory presented in my second book, No Two Alike, explains why. The theory is based on the idea, put forth by evolutionary psychologists such as Leda Cosmides and John Tooby, that the human mind is modular, a collection of specialised devices which each evolved as a solution to a specific problem or need. 我在第二本书《没有两个人是一样》中提出的扩展理论解释了其中缘由。这个理论基于如进化心理学家Leda Cosmides和John Tooby所提出的思想，即人类大脑是模块化的，是一套随着解决某个特定问题或需要而进化出的专门化元件的集合。 I proposed that there are three such devices involved in social development – the relationship system, the socialisation system and the status system. These systems work more or less independently; sometimes they even issue contradictory commands. They collect different kinds of information from the environment and process it in different ways. Friendships – like parent–child relationships – are in the purview of the relationship system, which collects data on specific individuals and makes fine distinctions among them. The socialisation system, in contrast, doesn’t bother with individuals – it computes means. It forms a prototype for each social category. The child is influenced by the norms of the social category she identifies with, even if she never interacts personally with any of its members. 我提出三种元件参与社会发展——关系系统、社会化系统和身份系统。这些系统或多或少独立工作；有时他们甚至发出相互矛盾的命令。它们从环境中收集不同种类信息并以不同方式进行处理。友谊——如亲子关系——属于关系系统范畴，它收集特定个体的数据，并在它们之间做出精准区别。相反，社会化系统与个体无关，它计算的是平均情况。它构成了每种社会类别的原型范式。孩子是被其身份认同的社会类别的规范所影响，即便她从未亲自与群体其他成员发生互动。 The Nurture Assumption completely split the field. People either said it was a serious step forward in our understanding of child development or they just weren’t having any of it. I’m in the first camp – it changed my view of child development. But why do you think there was so much hostility? 《教养的迷思》彻底分裂了这个研究领域。要么有人说这是我们理解儿童发展心理向前迈进的重要一步，要么就说它什么也不是。我是前者，它改变了我关于儿童发展心理学的看法。但是，为什么对它有这么多敌意呢？ Part of the problem was the media coverage, which was often headlined ‘Do parents matter?’. Parents were understandably irked by the question. (My answer, by the way, is: Of course parents matter!) 部分问题出在媒体报道，它们常用‘父母重要吗？’这样的标题。可以理解家长们被这样的问题搞得苦恼不已。（顺便说一句，我的回答是：当然，父母重要！） But the real opposition to my work came from the academic world – from professors of developmental psychology. Some of these people had spent their entire careers doing studies designed to support the traditional view of child development. Then some troublemaker pops up – a complete nobody, with no PhD and no academic affiliation – and announces that the professors are wrong and their studies are worthless. You wouldn’t expect them to greet me with open arms, would you? 但是对我工作的真正反对来自学术世界——发展心理学的教授们。他们中的一些人毕其全部职业生涯做研究，旨在支持儿童发展心理学的传统观点。然后一些捣乱者冒了出来——不知何方人士，没有博士学位，没有学术任职——就胆敢声称教授们是错误的，他们的研究毫无价值。你不会指望他们张开双臂欢迎我，对吗？ You were particularly critical of their correlational studies of development.  你对于发展心理学相关研究表现的特别有批判性。 I still see those worthless studies all the time – they get a lot of publicity. I see them as a shameful waste of time and research money. I see them as reminders that I failed in my goal of reforming the methodology of developmental psychology. 我总是仍然看到那些毫无价值的研究——他们获得大量宣传。我认为这是时间和研究经费的可耻浪费。我将这些视为对我改革发展心理学之方法论的雄心所受挫折的提醒。 The studies are worthless because the results they produce are ambiguous, so the researchers can interpret them any way they please. Let’s say they find a correlation between how often a family eats dinner together and how well their teenager manages to stay out of trouble. Such results are presented as evidence that eating dinner with their parents has ‘protective’ effects on teenagers. 这些研究毫无价值，因为其结果模棱两可，研究者以他们乐意的任何方式解释之。比方说，他们找到了一家人多久一起共进晚餐和青少年多大程度上努力不出乱子之间的相关性。这个结果作为与父母共进晚餐对青少年有‘保护’作用的证据呈现出来。 But the research method provides no way of controlling for, or estimating, the effects of inherited genes on the teenagers’ behaviour. (Conscientious parents tend to have conscientious children.) No way of controlling for what I call ‘child-to-parent effects.’ (Parents are more likely to enjoy eating dinner with well-behaved teenagers.) No way of controlling for the teenagers’ own willingness to show up at dinnertime. (Teenagers are less likely to enjoy eating dinner with their parents if they are doing things their parents don’t approve of.) The researchers assume that, even though these other factors might play a role, some of the correlation must be due to the beneficial effects of family dinners. That is a logically indefensible assumption, not supported by studies that do provide the necessary controls. 但是研究方法却没有提供任何控制或者估计遗传基因影响青少年行为的方法（有责任心的父母的孩子往往有责任心）。没有控制我所说的‘从孩子到父母的影响’（父母更乐意与举止礼貌的孩子共进晚餐）。没有控制青少年自己乐意露面的晩餐时间（如果青少年正在做父母不认可的事情，他们不大可能喜欢与父母共进晚餐）。研究者认为，尽管其他因素可能有一定作用，但一些相关肯定是由于家庭晚餐的正面作用。这是一个逻辑上站不住脚的假设，并且没有得到那些确实控制了其他因素的研究的支持。 I don’t think it’s an exaggeration to state that The Nurture Assumption pretty much made you famous almost overnight. It’s not only a radical alternative to traditional ideas, but also a real ‘page-turner’. Was it your intention to write in that style? 我不觉得《教养的迷思》几乎让你一夜之间出名是夸张的措词。这本书不仅对传统观点来说是激进的，也是真正的‘新篇章开启者’。用这种风格写作是你的目的吗？ Actually, I started out by writing a traditional article and publishing it in a traditional journal, the Psychological Review. No one called it a page-turner. In fact, though it did get some favourable responses from people in other areas of psychology, it was completely ignored by the audience I was hoping to reach – those professors of developmental psychology. 实际上，我一开始是要写篇传统文章发表在传统期刊《心理学评论》上。没有人把它称为新篇章开启者。事实上，尽管它确实得到了其他心理学领域的积极反响，但却被我希望能看到它的观众——发展心理学领域的教授们——完全忽略了。 So I decided to go over their heads, as it were, and take my message directly to the general public. If you’re writing a book on a complex topic and you want people to read it, you have to make it interesting. It also helps if you can give your readers an occasional laugh. My model for how to write a book for the general public was Steven Pinker’s The Language Instinct. 因此我决定，这么说吧，越过他们，直接把我的研究呈现在广大公众面前。假如你正在写一本复杂话题的书，还希望有人读它，那你就要让它有趣起来。如果读者时而笑出声来，那也有所帮助。我所借鉴的如何为广大公众写书的模本，是Steven Pinker的《语言本能》一书。 Pinker of course went on to write several more books for the public – all page turners, and in many cases game changers. I noticed that he dedicated The Blank Slate to ‘Don, Judy, Leda and John’. I would assume that three of these are Don Symons, Leda Cosmides and John Tooby. Would I be right in thinking you are the Judy?  当然，Pinker为大众写了不少书——全都是新篇章开启者，许多情况下还是游戏改变者。我注意到他把《白板论》一书献给‘Don, Judy, Leda and John’。我猜其中三个是Don Symons, Leda Cosmides和John Tooby。你是Judy，对吗？ Yes. Steve and I became e-mail friends after I sent him a copy of my Psych Review paper and some comments on The Language Instinct. After we had exchanged a few e-mails, he asked, ‘Have you ever thought of writing a book?’ It wasn’t exactly a new idea to me, but it was nice to have the encouragement. 是的。在我给他寄送了我写的《心理学评论》论文拷贝和对《语言本能》一书的个人见解后，Steve和我成了电邮笔友。后来，我们互通了一些电子邮件，他问我：“你有没有想过写一本书？”这对我实在不是新想法，但它是很好的鼓励。 I think Steve was particularly receptive to my arguments because he’s a psycholinguist. I often use examples from psycholinguistics in explaining my theory, for two reasons. First, the outcome is usually obvious. You don’t need fancy statistical tests to decide whether or not someone has a foreign accent. Second, language and accent are among the very few social behaviours in which genetic differences play no role at all. Whether you speak Japanese or Swahili, whether your accent is Oxbridge or Liverpudlian, has nothing to do with heredity. But it does have a great deal to do with social context. The children of immigrants have the same accent as the other kids in the neighbourhood, even if they use their parents’ native language at home. Around the world, it is quite common for children to use one language at home and a different one outside the home, or one language with Mummy and a different one with Daddy. 我感觉Steve特别能接受我的观点，因为他是心理语言学家。我经常使用心理语言学例子解释我的理论，有两个原因。首先，结果通常显而易见。不需要花哨的统计学计算来确定某人是否有外国口音。其次，语言和口音是极少数遗传基因差异不起作用的社会行为之一。无论你说日语或者斯瓦希里语，无论你操牛津剑桥口音或者利物浦口音，均与遗传无关。而它确实与社会背景有很大关系。即便在家说父母亲的母语，移民孩子的口音与其他邻居孩子也一样。在世界各地，常常可见孩子在家使用一种语言而出门使用另外一种，或者和妈咪说一种语言而和爹地说另一种。 A central tenet of my theory is that social behaviours are tightly linked to the context in which they were acquired. It’s a mistake – one that’s incorporated into all the major theories of child development – to assume that children automatically generalise what they learn, from one context or person to another: Mummy is nice to them so they expect everyone to be nice to them. But discrimination, not generalisation, is the default setting of the baby’s mind. 我的理论的核心要义是，社会性行为与从中习得它的社会情境紧密相连。假设孩子自动将所学内容一般化，从一种情境或一个人推及另外一种或另一个人：就像妈咪善待他们，因此期待人人善待他们——这个假定被植入了儿童发展学的所有重要理论中，但它是错误的。相反，区别对待而非一般化处理，是婴儿心理的默认设置。 Many of the behaviours that children acquire at home would be counterproductive elsewhere. Children who dominate their younger siblings at home would be making a mistake if they tried to treat their schoolmates the same way, especially if they happen to be small for their age. Fortunately, children don’t make that mistake. Firstborns are no more likely than laterborns to try to dominate their peers. 孩子在家习得的许多行为在别处则是有害无益的。在家对弟妹指手划脚的孩子，如果试图以同样方式对待同学，就犯错了，尤其如果他们碰巧在同龄人中个头偏小。幸运的是，孩子不会犯类似错误。排行高的孩子不比排行低的孩子有更多可能性对同龄人指手划脚。 Of course, some of the things children learn at home are useful elsewhere. Those who learn to speak the local language, or to read, or to play a musical instrument, don’t have to acquire these skills all over again when they step outside. But they don’t trot them out automatically. They are tentative at first, until they’re sure that the behaviour or skill they learned at home will also work in the new setting. 当然，也有孩子在家学习的一些事情在别处是有用的。掌握了言说和阅读本地语言或演奏乐器的人，走出家门不必重新学习这些技能。但是，他们不必机械地小跑离家出来。他们先试探，直到确信那些在家里学到的行为或技能在新的环境设定中也管用。 For a young child, it’s safer to discriminate than to generalise. The child’s mind is not short of storage space. A child can store different rules of behaviour for every setting, and different expectations for every individual he or she encounters. 对于小孩子，区别对待比一般化处理更安全。孩子的意识不缺存储空间。可以为不同环境设定存储不同行为规范，以及为他所与之交往的每个人分别存储各自对对方的期望。 Your goal in No Two Alike was to explain why individuals differ so much, even if they grew up in the same family, right? 您写《没有两个人一样》一书是解释为什么每个人如此不同，即使他们在同一家庭长大，对吗？ Right. I realised a couple of years after The Nurture Assumption was published that I had done only half the job: I had explained only how children get socialised. Socialisation is a process that causes children to become more similar in behaviour to their same-sex peers. And yet, despite being socialised, children continue to differ from one another in personality and social behaviour. 对。《教养的迷思》出版后过了几年，我发现自己只做了一半工作：我只解释了孩子是如何社会化的。社会化是导致孩子行为处事更像同性同龄人的过程。尽管被社会化，孩子们的个性和社会行为仍然彼此不同。 If anything, the differences widen during childhood and adolescence. I made some ineffectual efforts to deal with that problem in The Nurture Assumption, but I didn’t have a theory to account for it till I wrote the second book. The improved version of the theory presented in No Two Alike explains how children can, at the same time, become more similar to their peers in some ways and more different in other ways. 很可能，个体差异在孩童期和青春期扩大了。在《教养的迷思》中我做了些无效努力面对这个问题，但没有理论可以解释它，直到我写第二本书。《没有两个人一样》提出的改进版理论解释了为什么孩子在一些方面与同伴更相似，与此同时在另一些方面却变得更为不同。 There was a fair bit of replying to arguments put forward by critics of The Nurture Assumption. Was that one of the aims? 之前你针对《教养的迷思》批评者所提出的观点给出了不少直接回应。那是你的写作目的之一吗？ It was. I was tired of journalists telling me that my theory must be wrong because some expert at some big university had told them that there were plenty of studies that disproved it. I searched diligently for the studies they cited. In some cases they were nowhere to be found; at any rate, they had never been published in a peer-reviewed journal. In other cases a study had been published but the results didn’t do what the experts claimed – they didn’t disprove my theory. In one case, a study they cited actually did the opposite – it supported my theory! 是的。我厌烦了记者告诉我，我的理论肯定错误，因为某些著名大学的某些专家已经告诉他们，有大量研究反驳我的理论。我努力分析他们引用的研究。有些研究什么也没发现；不管怎么说，它们从未在同行评议的学术期刊上发表。另一些研究，发表的一项实验没获得专家声称的实验结果——并没有反驳我的理论。一个研究援引的一项实验结果实际上恰好相反——它支持我的理论！ That 1995 Psychological Review piece you mentioned won the George A. Miller award for an outstanding article in general psychology. There was a certain irony about that? 你提到的1995年那篇《心理学评论》文章荣获了George A. Miller心理学杰出论文奖。这是某种嘲讽吗？ In 1960 I was a graduate student in the Department of Psychology at Harvard. One day I got a letter saying that the Department had decided to kick me out of their PhD programme. They doubted I would ever make a worthwhile contribution to psychology, the letter said, due to my lack of ‘originality and independence’. The letter was signed by the acting chairman of the Department, George A. Miller! 1960年，我是哈佛大学心理学系研究生。有一天，我收到一封信，说系里已经决定把我排除在博士项目之外。信中说，由于我缺乏‘原创性和独立性’，他们对我做出有价值的心理学贡献表示怀疑。这封信正是由代理系主席George A. Miller签署的！ Sometimes, when life hands you a lemon, you should just bite in. Getting kicked out of Harvard was a devastating blow at the time, but in retrospect, it was the best thing that Harvard ever did for me. It freed me from the influence of ‘experts’. It kept me from being indoctrinated. Many years later, it enabled me to write The Nurture Assumption. 有时，当生活递给你一个柠檬时，你就应该咬它。当时被踢出哈佛是一个毁灭性打击，但现在回想起来，这是哈佛为我所做过的最好的事情。这让我从‘专家’的影响解脱出来。让我不被灌输。许多年以后，让我写出《教养的迷思》。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

Sex on TV: Less impact on teens than you might think 电视上的色情内容: 对青少年的影响比你想象的少 作者:Christopher Ferguson @ 2016-08-02 译者:babyface_claire(@许你疯不许你傻) 校对:鳗鱼禅(@鳗鱼禅) 来源:https://theconversation.com/sex-on-tv-less-impact-on-teens-than-you-might-think-61957 Few people would doubt that sex is ubiquitous in media – whether movies, television, music or books – and that teens today have unprecedented access to all of it. It’s often taken for granted that this easy access to “sexy media” has an influence on teenage sexuality. 性在媒体上无处不在，这个论断少有人质疑。无论电影、电视、音乐或书籍，对当今的青少年而言，有关性的一切信息触手可及，这种便捷史无前例。人们经常理所当然的认为，随处可见的“色情媒体”会对青少年性行为产生影响。 Specifically, the worry is that teens may have sex earlier or engage in higher-risk sexual activities such as having multiple partners or exposing themselves to potential pregnancies or STDs. In 2010 the American Academy of Pediatrics even published a position paper claiming that sexually explicit media could promote risky teen sexual behavior. 具体来说，人们担心的是青少年可能更早发生性行为，或者参与高风险性行为。比如与多位同伴有性行为，或者暴露于怀孕或染上性病的风险中。2010年美国儿科协会甚至发表了一篇意见书，声称色情媒体可能诱发青少年危险性行为。 But government data find that teens are actually waiting longer than in the past to have sex. And teen pregnancy rates are at historic lows. How is it possible that sexy media has such a pernicious effect even as teen sexuality is becoming healthier? 然而政府数据显示，事实上青少年发生性行为前的等待时间比过去更长。且现时未成年人怀孕率处于历史最低点。色情媒体如此有害，而青少年性行为反而比以往健康，这怎么可能呢？ I’ve spent more than a decade researching how media – like video games or advertising – influences youth behavior. What fascinates me is how society interacts with media, often embracing salacious content while simultaneously blaming it for societal problems, whether real or imagined. 我花了超过十年的时间研究视频游戏和广告之类的媒体如何影响青少年行为。让我着迷的是，社会如何与媒体相互作用。媒体经常热衷于色情内容，同时却将之归咎于真实或假想中的社会问题。 So my colleagues and I decided to look at the research on sexy media and teenage sexual behavior to see how the strong the link between the two is. 于是我和我的同事们决定研究色情媒体和青少年性行为的关系，看看这两者之间的相关性有多高。 Sexy media doesn’t predict sexual behavior 色情媒体不是性行为的有效预测变量 Despite the common assumptions about sex in the media and its alleged effects on teens, the evidence behind the link is weak. Some studies find evidence for a small effect (perhaps in some circumstances but not others), while others find no evidence for any effect. 尽管人们声称媒体上的性信息会影响青少年，这个受到普遍认同的假设前提并未得到多少证据支持。有些研究发现了微弱效应存在的证据（可能在某些情形下有相关性，其它情形下没有），然而另一些研究没有发现存在任何影响的证据。 One reason the evidence may not be conclusive is that there are practical and ethical limitations to conducting research. We can’t run experiments where teens watch different TV shows and we wait around to see who has sex. This means research often relies on self-reported data. What we do is ask teens to report on their sexual behavior and their media preferences, as well as other variables we might like to control for (such as personality or family environment) and see if correlations exist. 证据可能不够有说服力的原因之一是，开展此类研究有操作上的和伦理上的限制。我们不能在青少年观看不同电视节目的地方进行实验，并且在周围等待，看谁发生了性行为。这意味着研究经常依赖自我报告的数据。我们所做的是，让青少年报告他们的性行为和偏好的媒体，以及我们可能想控制的其它变量（比如性格和家庭环境），来看是否存在相关性。 With this in mind, my colleagues Patrick Markey at Villanova and Danish researcher Rune Nielsen and I conducted a meta-analysis of 22 studies with over 22,000 participants that examine the correlation between sexy media and teenage sexual behavior. A meta-analysis lets us look for commonalities in the results, and is something that had not been done previously with this pool of research. 出于这种考虑，我和在维拉诺瓦的同事Patrick Markey，还有丹麦研究员Rune Nielsen进行了一项对22个研究，包含超过2.2万参与者的荟萃分析，来检验色情媒体和青少年性行为之间的相关性。这个荟萃分析让我们寻找已有研究结果中的共性，这批研究此前未做过荟萃分析。 All of the studies in the meta-analysis looked at depictions of sexual situations, nudity, partial nudity or explicit discussions of sex in television shows or movies easily accessible to minors (and thus excluded pornography). 这次荟萃分析里的研究都着眼于电视节目上对行为情景的描述、裸露、部分裸露或者公开讨论的性内容, 或者容易被未成年人接触到的电影 （因此排除了色情文学）。 In particular, we were curious to see whether sexy media predicted teen sexual behavior once other variables had been controlled. For instance, maybe boys tend to watch sexier media and also are more sexually risk-taking. Or perhaps youth who are more liberal in terms of personality are more open both to sexy media and earlier sexual initiation. Perhaps a difficult family background is the underlying key to understanding any correlation between media use habits and actual sexual behavior. 我们特别好奇的是，一旦其它变量受到控制，色情媒体接触行为能否预测青少年性行为。例如，可能男孩更倾向于观看更色情的媒体内容，并且愿意承担更多的性风险。或者有更自由人格的青少年更易于接受色情媒体和早期性启蒙。也许一个复杂的家庭背景是理解媒体使用习惯和实际性行为相关性背后的关键。 Ultimately, this is what we found. Once other factors such as family environment, personality or even gender were controlled, sexy media exposure did not meaningfully correlate with teen sexual behavior. 最后，这是我们的发现。一旦其它因素，比如家庭环境、性格甚至性别都受到控制，色情媒体的曝光与青少年性行为没有显著的相关。 Contrary to common fears, sexy media doesn’t seem to have any practical significance for when teens first have sex or start other sexual behaviors. This lack of correlation is a warning sign we might be on the wrong track in trying to blame media for teen sexual risk-taking. 与常见的恐惧相反，色情媒体内容似乎对青少年首次性行为或者进行其它性接触的时间没有任何实际影响。缺乏相关性是一个警告信号，我们将青少年冒险的性行为归咎于媒体的观点可能是错误的。 Why doesn’t media influence teens? 为什么媒体内容影响不了青少年？ There are numerous theories that discuss how individuals and media interact. However, many older media effects theories didn’t consider why people were drawn to media, how they processed it, or what they hoped to get from it. Such theories assumed viewers simply irrationally and purposelessly imitated what they saw. Most of the papers we examined in our meta-analysis were tests of these basic, automatic, media effects theories. 有很多理论讨论个人和媒体如何相互影响。然而，许多早期媒体效应理论没有考虑为什么人们被媒体内容吸引，他们如何处理媒体内容，或者他们想从媒体内容中得到什么。这些理论假设观众只是简单非理性和无目的地模仿他们观看的内容。我们荟萃分析里的大多数论文就是这些基本、自动的媒体效应理论的实验测试。 In the past few years, some scholars (myself included) have specifically called for the retirement of these older media effects theories. This is because the evidence increasingly suggests that fictional media such as feature movies or sitcoms media is too remote to have a clear impact on consumers' behavior, especially compared to families and peers. 过去几年，一些学者（包括我自己）号召淘汰这些早期媒体效应理论。越来越多的证据表明，像故事电影和情景喜剧这样的虚构媒体内容太遥不可及，不足以对消费者的行为产生清晰明确的影响，尤其是与家庭和同龄人这两个因素相比。 In addition, emerging evidence suggests that young children process fictional media differently from real events. If small children are able to process a difference between fictional events and real events, we can assume that teens don’t really expect media to reflect reality. 此外，新出现的证据表明，年轻的孩子处理虚构媒体的方式不同于真实事件。如果小孩子都能够辨别虚构事件和真实事件之间的差异，我们可以假设青少年从来没有真正想过媒体反映了现实。 Our results regarding the limited impact of media also fit with the observations from societal data. Despite a plethora of sexual media available to teens, a crisis of risky teen sexual behavior has not emerged. 我们关于媒体有限影响的研究结果也符合来自社会数据的观察。尽管青少年接触到种类繁多的色情媒体，高风险青少年性行为的危机并没有出现。 We watch what we’re interested in watching 我们观看我们感兴趣的 Newer models of media use suggest that it is the individuals who consume media, not the media itself, who are the driving agents of behavior. Evidence suggests that users seek out and interpret media according to what they want to get from it, rather than passively imitating it. 较新的媒体使用模型表明，是消费媒体内容的个人而不是媒体本身，驱动了行为。有证据表明，用户根据他们想要从中得到什么来寻找和解读媒体，而不是被动的模仿。 People don’t generally accidentally watch media, sexual or otherwise, but are motivated to do so because of preexisting desires. 人们通常不是偶然地观看媒体、性或者其它，而是被先前存在的欲望驱动。 For instance, some recent studies have indicated that youth seek out media that fit with preexisting motives, called a selection effect, but that media don’t necessarily lead to further problem behaviors. For example, research suggests that some teens who are already aggressive might be interested in violent video games, but playing such games doesn’t make kids more aggressive. 例如，最近的一些研究显示青年人寻求适合先前已经存在的动机的媒体，这被称为“选择效应”。但是媒体并不一定导致进一步的问题行为。比如，研究表明一些本来就已经好斗的青年人可能对暴力视频游戏感兴趣，但玩这样的游戏并没有让孩子更好斗。 That’s a point that sometimes seems ignored when we talk about teens and sex. Interest in sex is a largely biologically motivated process; fictional media really isn’t required. Teens will become interested in sex all on their own. 这就是当我们谈论青少年与性时，有时候会忽略的一点。对性的兴趣很大程度上是生物性驱动的过程，虚构媒体并非必需。青少年自发的对性产生兴趣。 Parents have more influence than the media 父母比媒体影响更大 Parents can rest a bit easier since the evidence suggests that media isn’t a primary driver of teen sexuality. 父母们可以松口气了，因为证据表明媒体不是一个青少年性行为的主要驱动力。 To the extent media has any impact at all, it is likely only in a vacuum left by adults reluctant to talk to kids about sex, especially the stuff kids really want to know. 即便媒体能施加影响，也只是在一个由成人所留下的真空内起作用，有些成人不愿意跟孩子谈论与性有关的话题，尤其是孩子真正想知道的事情，由此便产生了真空。 How do you ask someone out on a date and how do you handle it if they say no? What does sex feel like? When is it OK to have sex? What are the risks and how do you avoid them? In the face of patient, empathic and informative discussions about sex by adults kids trust, the media likely has little influence. 你怎么邀请别人出去约会？如果他们拒绝了，你怎么处理？性爱是怎么样的？什么时候可以发生性行为？性行为有什么风险，你怎么避免这些风险？在成人与孩子之间互相信任、耐心、有同理心和有理有据的讨论面前，媒体可能几乎没有影响。 Ultimately, whether media have salacious or more conscientious portrayals of sexuality, we should not expect media to replace conversations with youth by parents, guardians and educators. 最后，无论媒体是否有露骨或更谨慎的性描写，我们都不应期待媒体取代父母、监护人和教育工作者与青少年的谈话。 I’m not suggesting everyone run out and buy “50 Shades of Grey” for their teen, but if teens happen to come across it (and they will), it’s not the end of the world. 我不是建议每个人都跑出去买《五十度灰》给他们的小孩，但是如果青少年无意中发现这本书（他们肯定会），这不是世界末日。 The important thing for parents is to talk to their kids. 作为父母，重要的是和他们的孩子谈一谈。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

（本文删节版发表于《长江日报·读周刊》） 塑造行为的多重机制 辉格 2016年12月2日 人的行为方式千差万别且变化多端，这也体现在我们描绘行为的形容词的丰富性上：羞涩，奔放，畏缩，鲁莽，克制，放纵，粗野，优雅，勤勉，懒散，好斗，随和……这些词汇同时也被用来描绘个体性格，有些甚至用来辨识文化和民族差异，由此可见，尽管人类行为丰富多变，却仍可识别出某些稳定而持久的模式。 那么，究竟是哪些因素，经由何种过程，塑造了种种行为模式呢？在以往讨论中，流行着一种将遗传和环境影响对立两分的倾向，仿佛这两种因素是各自独立起作用的，最终结果只是两者的线性叠加，就像调鸡尾酒，人们关注的是各种原料的配比，五勺基因，两勺家庭，两勺学校，再加一勺『文化』，一个活蹦乱跳的文明人就出炉了。 这种将成长中的孩子视为受影响者或加工对象的视角，是不得要领的，实际上，成长是一个主动学习的过程，基因和环境的关系更像软件中代码和数据输入的关系，基因编码引导个体从环境中采集数据，以便配置自身的行为算法，把代码和数据放一起搅一搅不可能得到想要的功能，在软件工程中，也没人会谈论代码和数据对算法表现分别有多大比例的影响。 正如马特·里德利（[[Matt Ridley]]）在《天性经由教养》中所阐明，成长是遗传代码随教养进程依次执行的过程，然而，对于这一过程具体如何展开，迄今只有零散的论述，而缺乏一幅系统化的全景图，幸运的是，心理学家朱迪·哈里斯（[[Judith R.Harris]]）在《教养的迷思》中提出的开创性见解，为我们拼凑这样一幅系统流程草图提供了便利。 对于个人，最持久而一致的那些行为特征被称为人格，主流人格心理学识别了经验开放性、尽责性、外向性、亲和性、情绪稳定性这五个最具一致性的特征，它们很大程度上是先天的（遗传差异可解释一半以上的人格差异），并且至少从成年后就伴随终身，在不同场景中的表现也相当连贯。 但人格并不直接对应行为模式，个人在决定如何行事时，还会考虑所在群体的规范，并借助由文化所传承的整套符号，正因此，有着相似人格的两个人，在不同文化或同一文化的不同群体中，会表现出十分不同的行为，比如同样一个外向型高亲和度的人，在向客人表达亲热时，是拥抱、亲吻、抚手，还是捶胸、拍肩、摸头，将随文化而异。 在这方面，儿童有着非凡的学习能力，只须借助少量样本，便可构建出一个范本模式，据此判断在何种情景下怎么做才是地道的、妥贴的；而且他们十分清楚不同群体和不同性质的关系中适用不同规范，家人、亲戚、邻里、同学、朋友、陌生人之间的规范学习和范本建模将分别进行，学习结果独立存储，并在相应场景下被激活。 哈里斯指出，这一学习过程主要在年龄相近的同侪群体中自发进行，长辈的做法会被参考，但训导和传授的努力几乎是徒劳的，当孩子们从某些线索发现长辈的做法已过时落伍，会毫不犹豫的弃之不顾，甚至当缺乏可供参照的样本时，他们也会经由群体内协调而创造出一种全新规范，就像他们创造克里奥尔语和尼加拉瓜手语那样。 在规范学习中，并非所有样本都被同等对待，那些看起来更受青睐和尊崇，更具号召力和支配力——总之地位更高——的个体，其行为将被赋予更高权重，而青少年在识别哪些是高地位受尊崇个体方面，有着敏锐直觉（其中受异性青睐程度是关键线索之一，这也是性选择得以发生的重要途径），正是通过这样的学习和协调过程，社会等级结构代复一代自我再生。 识别、追随和效仿群体中的尊贵者，并努力为自己赢得体面和尊贵（因为这会为个体带来切实的利益），是文化进化的一大动力机制，它维持着社会的等级结构和价值阶梯，也推动着风尚潮流的循环轮替，值得一提的是，性选择也在其中发挥了殊为关键的作用，因为识别高地位者的一大线索便是受异性青睐的程度，同时这一青睐也是对追逐地位和追随群体价值取向的重要激励。 习得规范进入群体之后，下一步便是确立自己在群体中的位置，个体出于自身的人格特质和资源与天赋条件，在群体中寻找适合自己的生态位，个体差异也将随此选择而展开，同时其行为方式会在群体规范所给定的框架之下，按照自身地位及与群内他人的关系而调整。 上述『先同化后分化』的两阶段模型，可帮助我们理解青春期躁动这一极为普遍的文化现象，青春期躁动表现为跟风盲从，集体狂热，缺乏个性与独立思考，强烈且富有攻击性的团体意识和民族主义，这实际上是一个强化群体认同的机制，在部落社会，它常以严酷的成人礼和结伙对外攻击等更正规和有组织的方式进行。 在经历躁动过程的严酷考验之后，个体习得规范并被纳入群体，同时，考验过程中的表现也将决定他未来在群体内的地位，一旦这一过程结束，成员身份确立，各自找到自己的生态位，躁动与狂热便会消退，规范的强制性和集体义务将逐渐放松，大家分头过自己的小日子去了，但躁动中所建立的群体认同、团伙情谊和个人间关系纽带仍将长期存续，并服务于更为功利性的目标。 两阶段模型也可解释一个哈里斯所强调、且常被忽视的现象：尽管人格具有相当高一致性，但同一个人在不同社会情境中的行为模式仍可十分不同，不同到像两个人那样，比如一位长兄在家里对弟妹们表现出长子所常有的那种强势和支配性，在学校却可能甘做跟班小弟，一个在办公室里沉默寡言的人在兴趣社团中却滔滔不绝、能言善辩，一个父母跟前的乖孩子在街头帮派中也许是个狠角色，哈里斯将此称为人格多面性，或许也就是人们常说的多重人格。 这是因为从先天人格特质到具体行为模式之间，经过了自我生态定位和个性展现，而这是针对不同群体分别进行的，当个人进入这些群体时，将根据自身禀赋优势和价值取向与该群体规范和价值阶梯的匹配程度作出定位，从而展现人格的不同侧面：是争当其领导者？努力向上爬的积极分子？寻求庇护的弱势追随者？还是不太情愿的服从者？或三心两意的投机分子？不同定位的行为差异是显而易见的。  

【2016-11-22】 @爱贝睿学堂 #用心父母#孩子犯错，到底该不该惩罚他呢？惩罚他觉得孩子还小，可是如果不惩罚的话，他又怎么能学好？这可真是左右为难，怎么办呢？ @赵昱鲲 节目中介绍了三个步骤来培养孩子责任心，你和孩子实践过了么？[兔子]O网页链接 ​​​​ @赵昱鲲:#用心父母# 我反对任何形式的惩罚，而是让孩子承担自然后果，这样他才能有真正的责任心，不至于到将来被社会惩罚。 @whigzhou: 为何你要拒绝成为自然的一部分呢？ @whigzhou: 1）比如儿子叫我婊子， 我给他一个耳光，这个后果好像挺『自然』的，他在外面这么做也会吃耳光 @whigzhou: 2）我不认为父母的责任仅限于充当孩子成长的自然环境，有些事情无法经由平滑的学习路径习得，在无辅导学习过程中，可能1/4的学习者死掉了，比如辨别毒蘑菇， @whigzhou: 3）有些错误行为没有直接可感知的负面反馈，除了人为施加的惩罚，比如从欺骗和背约中获利 @赵昱鲲:辉总没有听这个节目吧？[哈哈] 我在里面提到了，孩子打了你，你也可以打回去，这就是自然后果的一部分。我说的惩罚是没有因果关系的惩罚 @whigzhou: 嗯嗯没听，只看了微博帖 @赵昱鲲: @whigzhou 这是文字版的一部分。在微博上讨论育儿，其实很费劲，因为育儿是一件很复杂的事情，孩子的年龄、父母的性格、家庭的社会经济地位、外界环节的影响等等，都得考虑进去，什么都说，就什么都没法说，最后就只能讲大道理了。 ​​​​ @whigzhou: 照这么说，我们只是对什么叫『惩罚』有不同看法，依我看，惩罚当然是基于受罚者对因果关系之认识的，否则不构成激励反馈，只能叫『光火』或『暴跳』，如此改变词义是要安抚玻璃心？呵呵 @赵昱鲲:另外，有些惩罚时间拉得太长，我就见过家长在从幼儿园接孩子回家时说，回去看我怎么收拾你，那其实孩子不太会明白晚上受的惩罚与白天干的坏事之间的联系的。 @whigzhou: 嗯回路要短，所以以前老人兜里都揣着糖果～  

【2016-08-21】 @whigzhou: 两宋之间温州一定发生了点什么……浙东学派，绍兴师爷，宁波帮商人，似乎都能从这张表里看出点苗头。 ​​​​ @whigzhou: 这还是对各路解额施加了限制之后的情况，否则数字会更夸张。 @南洋首富: 二件事：1、永嘉学派大兴办学打下的基础。2、乾道二年特大水灾温州人死了一大半，空地吸引莆田泉州仙游移民，而闽南人热衷科举。永嘉学派的办学普及加上闽南移民带来的热衷科举文化，使温州进士大增。 @whigzhou: 受教受教～ @whigzhou: 贾志扬《宋代科举》//@Mr-Pudding:请问这是什么书？  

Real Reform for Detroit’s Kids 为底特律孩子做真正的改革 作者：Steven Malanga @ 2015-05-05 译者：babyface_claire（@许你疯不许你傻） 校对：hkustliqi 来源：http://city-journal.org/html/real-reform-detroits-kids-14433.html It’s time to break up the city’s dysfunctional school system. 是时候打破这座城市功能失调的学校系统了。 Even as it tries to revive itself after emerging from bankruptcy, Detroit faces a new crisis: it had to shut down many of its schools this week because of a sickout by teachers. The Detroit Federation of Teachers engineered the stoppage to pressure the Michigan legislature to agree to a $715 million aid package—without which, Detroit schools could run out of money by June. 即使底特律在摆脱破产之后试图重整，它还是面临着新的危机：由于教师的托病旷工，本周许多学校被迫关闭。底特律教师联合会策划了这次罢工，以便向密歇根州议会施压让它同意一个7.15亿美元的援助项目——没有它，底特律的学校在六月就会破产。 Michigan governor Rick Snyder wants to tie the aid to reforms that would bring new leadership to the troubled system, but some legislators are skeptical—with good reason. Snyder’s plan represents the fifth major reform agenda in the last 30 years for the Detroit Public Schools, which have been plagued by lousy leadership, a reform-resistant union, and a shortage of resources. Instead of a new plan for an old system, it’s time for Snyder and Michigan’s legislators to try something new. 密歇根州长Rick Snyder想把这个援助项目与一项改革挂钩，这项改革将把新领导班子引入这个陷于困境的系统，但是一些议员对此持怀疑态度——而且有很好的理由。Snyder的计划是过去30年里底特律公立学校的第五大改革议程，而底特律公立学校一直被糟糕的领导，抵抗改革的工会和资源短缺所困扰。 是时候让Snyder和密歇根立法委员会尝试一些新的方法，而不只是用个新瓶装旧酒。 Detroit’s public schools began their decline in the 1970s, as middle class residents fled the city. Even as the educational challenges increased, however, the system’s bureaucracy grew and grew. The board of education gained a reputation for financial mismanagement, fostering the impression that Detroit’s schools were being operated as a jobs program for adults, rather than to educate kids. 随着中产阶级逃离底特律，这座城市的公立学校从1970年代就开始衰退。尽管教育挑战加剧，这个系统的官僚主义却日积月累。教育委员会得到了财务管理不善的名声，造成了一种底特律的学校是以给成年人提供就业计划而运作，而不是教育孩子的印象。 By the late 1980s, the system ran a $180 million deficit, with a high school dropout rate of 50 percent and daily absenteeism averaging almost 20 percent of all students. The state brought in new management to stabilize the school system’s budget. 到1980年代末，教育系统有着1.8亿美元的财政赤字，高中辍学率高达50%，平均每天的缺席人数几乎占所有学生的20%。州里曾引进新的管理办法来稳定学校系统的预算。 Education reforms followed. Some principals gained the freedom to select their own curriculum and staff. A bitter teachers’ strike undermined these reform efforts, shuttering schools for 26 days in September of 1992. As one school board member told the press: “[The strike] hit the reform effort upside the head like a two-by-four.” 教育改革随后也被实行了。有些校长获得了选择他们自己的课程和员工的自由。一次激烈的教师罢工破环了这些改革措施，使得学校在1992年9月不得已被关闭26天。一个学校董事会成员告诉媒体，“（这次罢工）给了改革努力当头一棒。” The school district continued to drift. Controversy erupted when the board mishandled $1.5 billion in borrowed money meant to renovate schools. In 1997, then-governor John Engler proposed dissolving the board of education and turning the system over to a new group appointed by Mayor Dennis Archer. 学区继续脱离正轨。由于学校董事会对借来用于修缮学校的15亿美元管理不当，争议再度触发。1997年，时任州长John Engler提议解散学校董事会，把这个机构变成由市长Dennis Archer掌管的一个新部门。 In September 1999, however, the teachers struck again, this time for nine days, in opposition to Archer’s reform proposals, which included a merit-pay system tied to classroom performance. Archer wound up dropping the idea. 然而，在1999年9月，教师再次罢工，这次为期9天，以此反对Archer的改革提议。罢工提议包括了一个与课堂表现相关联的绩效工资制度。Archer最终放弃了他的改革设想。 Five years later, with the system showing little progress in educating students, frustrated Detroit residents voted for yet another reform plan, this time giving management of the schools back to an elected school board. That decision proved disastrous; the district’s finances quickly deteriorated. 五年之后，随着该系统显示出在教育学生方面进展甚微，沮丧的底特律居民投票支持另一个改革计划，这次把管理学校的权力还给了一个选举产生的学校董事会。这一决定被证明是灾难性的，该地区的财政状况迅速恶化。 In September 2006, teachers went on strike yet again, this time over proposals to freeze pay and require greater health-care contributions. By 2009, the district faced a $259 million deficit, as the new board failed to cut costs to respond to a rapid enrollment decline. Governor Jennifer Granholm seized control of the Detroit school district in February 2009 and installed a financial manager to right the ship. 2006年9月，教师再次罢工，这次针对的是冻结薪水和要求更多的医保缴款。到2009年，由于新的学校董事会在入学率快速下降的同时却没能消减支出，该地区面临着一个2.59亿美元的财政赤字。在2009年2月，州长Jennifer Granholm控制了底特律的学区，并指定了一个财务经理来挽回局势。 An audit discovered hundreds of employees getting paid for no-show jobs and salaries allocated to dead people. Obama education secretary Arne Duncan called the district a “national disgrace.” The system’s graduation rate had plunged to 25 percent, and in 2009, its students registered the lowest scores on the National Assessment of Education Progress tests since the exams have been given. 一个审计员发现有上百员工通过不用出勤的工作获得报酬，甚至有工资分配给死人。奥巴马的教育部长Arne Duncan称这个学区为“国家的耻辱”。这个学校系统的毕业率跌至25%。在2009年，它的学生得到了自从国家教育进展评估测试开展以来的最低分。 The state of Michigan has maintained control since 2009, but progress has been halting, in part because of the school system’s institutional dysfunction. The recalcitrant teachers’ union has successfully resisted many reforms. And Detroit’s bankruptcy, which left the city short of resources, hasn’t helped. Residents keep fleeing the city, and students keep leaving the school system. Enrollment is down to just 49,000, from 168,000 in 2000. 自从2009年来，密歇根州政府一直控制着学校系统，但是进展已经停滞，部分是由于学校系统的制度障碍。顽固的教师工会已成功抵制许多改革。底特律的破产，致使城市资源短缺，对此无所助益。居民一直在逃离这座城市，学生一直在离开学校系统。入学人数从2000年的16万8千跌落至仅有4万9千。 Facing these challenges, Snyder recently appointed the respected former bankruptcy judge Steven Rhodes to try and right the system’s finances. But Rhodes isn’t an educator, and Detroit’s kids desperately need better schools. Snyder should recognize by now that they won’t get them from the sclerotic and inept public system. 面临这些挑战，Snyder最近任命备受尊敬的前破产法官Steven Rhodes尝试修正学校系统的财政状况。然而Rhodes并不是教育家，底特律的孩子迫切需要更好的学校。Snyder现在应该意识到, 这些孩子不会从僵化且无能的公共学校系统得到良好的教育。 There is another way. In recent years, dozens of charter schools have been established in Detroit, attracting tens of thousands of city students. In fact, charter schools now enroll more students in Detroit than the public school system does. Snyder should aim higher—toward the complete elimination of traditional public schools in favor of an all-charter model. 还有另一种途径。近年来，底特律建立了许多特许学校，吸引着成千上万的城市学生。事实上，在底特律，现在特许学校比公立学校系统招收的学生更多。Snyder应该追求更高的目标，支持用一个全特许学校模式来彻底取代传统的公立学校。 Too radical? Not for New Orleans, which took this path after Hurricane Katrina, transitioning from its 120-school public education system to one dominated by charter schools. To bring about the transformation, New Orleans turned to the Louisiana Recovery School District (RSD), a state body instituted to take over failing schools. 太过激进？对新奥尔良来说不是。在卡崔娜飓风之后，新奥尔良采取这种方式把120所公立学校系统转化为一个特许学校系统。为了完成这次转变，新奥尔良求助于路易斯安那州复苏学区（RSD） 这一接管失败学校的州立机构。 After Katrina, the RSD became the public school operator in New Orleans. By 2007, some 60 percent of the city’s kids were enrolled in charters. New Orleans phased out its last government schools in 2015, effectively completing the changeover to an all-choice system. Graduation rates and test scores have rallied impressively. And it’s all happened in a network of schools that educates nearly as many children as Detroit does. 在卡崔娜飓风之后，RSD成了新奥尔良公立学校的管理者。到2007年，大约60%的城市孩子进入了特许学校。在2015年，新奥尔良逐步淘汰了最后的公立学校，有效的完成了向一个完全自由择校系统的转换。毕业率和考试成绩的上涨令人印象深刻。这都是发生在一个教育着与底特律同样多孩子的教育网络内。 Not surprisingly, charter schools in Detroit have their opponents. In fact, some critics are using the latest crisis to undermine charters, proposing to limit their ability to expand. Michigan should be doing exactly the opposite—phasing out Detroit’s reform-impervious public school system, encouraging local groups and charter operators from around the country to open more schools, and giving all Detroit residents the opportunity to escape the toxic grip of the city’s disastrous educational system. 不足为奇的是，特许学校在底特律有他们的反对者。事实上，一些批评家利用最新的危机来削弱特许学校并提议限制他们的扩张。密歇根州应该做的恰恰相反，逐步淘汰底特律无力改革的公立学校系统，鼓励地方团体和来自全国各地的特许经营者开放更多的学校，给所有底特律居民机会逃避这个城市有毒的灾难性的教育系统。 Steven Malanga is the senior editor of City Journal, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, and the author of Shakedown: The Continuing Conspiracy Against the American Taxpayer. Steven Malanga是城市期刊的高级编辑，曼哈顿研究院的高级研究员，著有《勒索:对美国纳税人的持续阴谋》。 （编辑：辉格@whigzhou） *注：本译文未经原作者授权，本站对原文不持有也不主张任何权利，如果你恰好对原文拥有权益并希望我们移除相关内容，请私信联系，我们会立即作出响应。

——海德沙龙·翻译组，致力于将英文世界的好文章搬进中文世界——

【2016-07-13】 1）影响幸福感主要因素是相对社会地位及地位之近期变动，可以几个指标衡量：社会阶梯的级数（N），个体所能感知到的级数（M），个体处于哪一级（P），最近之升降（C）， 2）处于各级的人口比例是不均匀的，至少从中位阶梯（即，站在该级上的人，其地位不低于一半人口）往上，数量呈指数下降， 3）社会大型化和复杂化将增加总的级数N， 4）密集居住、高流动性、发达媒体，将增加个体所能感知到的级数M， 5）增加M会让一些人（X）感觉自己相对地位下降了，同时让另一些人（Y）感觉自己相对地位上升了，因为（2），X的比例远高于Y，所以增加M总是拉低社会总的幸福感水平， 6）城市化、大众媒体和网络社交都会提高M 7）高等教育也会提高个体的M值 8）传统社会的结构较为扁平，同等规模的N值小于现代社会 9）传统社会绝大多数人生活中小社会，城市规模也较小，社会视野和社交范围皆较小，故同等经济条件下M值更小 10）以上大概可以解释，为何当收入提高到某个水平之后，增加收入不再能提高幸福感 11）以上还可得出几个推断：同等经济条件下，都市人比小城市人幸福感低，博士生比高中生幸福感低，用微信的比不用微信的幸福感低…… 12）我认为『追求幸福』毫无意义  

对文化而言，教育是它将自身装载到新的个体头脑中的过程，借助这一过程，文化不断获得新载体，从而在一代代个体生死交替的同时得以存续下去，并在比个体寿命长得多的时间内保持连续性；在此意义上，教育就像磁带翻录机，让音乐跨越个体磁带而得以长存；当然，文化系统庞大而复杂，每一个体所装载的，只是其中一个堪以自成体系的子集。 而对于个人，教育则是习得一种语言和它所包含的知识，一套生活与社会技能，一组口味、偏好、价值观和伦理规范的过程；简言之，教育过程为个体安装了一套文化系统，就像为电脑裸机安装一套操作系统，从而将裸猿变成衣冠之猿，拥有在特定社会生存下去所需要的文化禀赋和社会能力，并具有一个完整而成熟的人格与意志。 在那些结构简单、文化朴陋的小型社会，教育和生长发育一样自然而顺利，一个人只要身心健全，并且不被隔离在日常社会生活之外，无须太多努力，便可顺利习得和别人差不多的文化，而即便他格外努力，也学不到太多超出普通水平的东西。 这是因为，我们裸猿并不真的像电脑裸机那么空白，而是内置了各种高度特化而有效率的学习机制，对生活所需的学习任务有着本能的饥渴和领悟力，因为人类物种已在类似条件下进化了数十万年，已经获得了针对这些学习任务的适应器，它们就像一个有待填充的知识框架，引导我们按某个时间表自发的学习。 最刻板的一种学习机制被动物行为学家称为“铭刻（imprint）”，它们随个人成长过程而自动展开，有点像电脑首次启动时的参数配置过程；有些候鸟会在首次随长辈作夜间飞行时，记下当时的星图，此后一生便可用此星图为季节性迁徙作导航；很可能借助类似机制，我们在幼年时便学会了哪些东西可以吃，而哪些是有毒的、危险的。 当然并非所有学习都这么刻板，但许多学习过程背后或许都有着类似的机制，即，我们本能地寻求某些知识，并懂得从何种情境中提取它们，也知道如何运用这些知识；最令人惊叹的是语言之习得，尽管语言非常复杂且变幻多端，其难度在成年人学习第二语言时都能体会，但只要在学习窗口期被适当暴露于母语环境中，每个健康孩子都能轻易学会。 然而，自从人类过上定居生活，组织起更大型社会，有了更精细的分工与合作，发展了需要各种专门知识和技能的农业、商业和制造业，进而创造出极为繁复庞杂的文化，这种自发的学习方式就无法满足所有需要了；许多技能和职业需要长时间的专门学习，并得到专家的传授和指点，往往还要在特定的教学设施和课业程序之中进行，这就要求教育必须成为一项专门事业。 文字的发明带来了新情况，越来越多知识被以文字记录和传播，长距离通讯交流也须以文字为媒介，大跨度贸易和行政更须借各种票据和文件才可能展开，同时文字也大大提升了知识的可积累性，前所未有的巨量知识被创造出来，并支撑起越来越复杂的技术和组织，简言之，整个文化系统中越来越大的部分，赖文字为介质而得以存在、散布和传承。 这就对基础教育提出了要求，掌握基本读写和算术技能，成了进一步学习其他知识和技能、从事某些职业的前提，因而成为个人赢得社会成功的一条重要途径；结果，在分工精细、文明发达的社会，接受基础教育的机会和成效，日益成为影响个人前途的重要因素。 文明时代的学习和教育向人类提出了巨大挑战，定居生活和精细分工的历史并不长，文字和算术的发明则更晚，我们或许还没有发展出有足够针对性的适应器，来帮助我们像学习语言那么容易学会它们；事实上，在读写、数学、逻辑和抽象理论的学习上，面临的障碍要大得多，许多人在经历了十几年全日制教育之后，仍然不善于读写和计算。 更糟糕的是，不少证据显示，我们的心智结构与某些学习任务恰恰是相抵触的，在因果关系推断上，在逻辑、概率和统计学问题上，在远离日常尺度的系统级问题上，我们的直觉往往是错多对少，错得很远且屡错不改，简直冥顽不化；这提示了，教育本身是一门需要研究和习得的技能，教育者需要找到一些方法，帮助人类学会他们原本不善于学习的东西。 教育让个人习得技能，从而在追求利益与成就时拥有优势，但这只是一方面，教育之于个人更深刻的影响是，它会改变他们对“什么是自己的利益，如何才算成功”的认识，通过教育，文化将风情时尚变成个人偏好，将习俗变成个人习惯，将传统变成个人价值观，将伦理规范变成个人道德情感。 偏好并非都天生就有，许多情趣爱好需要养成，并以习得某些体验能力为前提；味觉不经过各种食物的刺激和训练，就品味不出美酒佳肴的细微妙处；不会阅读，就感受不到小说的精彩；不了解有关典故，就体会不到许多幽默感；不熟悉历史，就难以被某些故事中的波澜、沧桑、沉重、悲壮所打动；缺乏道德情感，也就欣赏不了自由精神或侠风义骨。 离开这种种体验，生活将变得苍白乏味，人格不再那么丰厚饱满，生命因而也将不再那么有意义。物理上，人类同处一个世界，然而对个人有意义的，是头脑中那个观念世界（即波普所谓第二世界），而这个世界的规模、历史和丰富程度，取决于每个人的认识能力；一片杂草，对普通人只是杂草，在植物学家眼里，却是个极为丰富精彩的生态系统。 在文盲眼里，任何书籍不过是另一块纸砖，文字世界中的任何东西对他都不存在，历史只是迷雾深处隐约可见的一小片朦胧，或是来自戏曲评话中若干片段缺乏纵深的凌乱杂缀；传统乡村的多数居民，一辈子活动范围不过几十里，外加上一圈模糊不清的陌生地带，偶尔传来些遥远消息，便是他们的全部世界了。 正是教育延展了我们的感官，赋予我们文明时代才有的那些认知能力，从而在时间、空间、丰富性和结构层次等维度上拓展了我们所体验到的世界；让我们能够神游于古代社会，领略异国风情，欣赏蜂巢蚁穴中的精彩生活，赞叹细胞结构之巧妙。 更重要的是，它扩展了我们的选择空间和自由意志，让我们意识到原来生活还有这么多可能性，因为任何选项只有被认识才有意义，对于文盲，一家大书店并不比一堆复印纸提供更多选项，同样，对于那些被蒙昧牢牢禁锢在其生活轨道之中的人，世上种种他从未听闻也不能理解的艺术、娱乐、学问、生活方式、居住地、社会制度，都根本不是他的选项。  

【2016-02-16】 @whigzhou: 个人主义必定伴随着对抗性，否认对抗、讲究隐忍退让、一团和气、齐心协力拧成一股绳、为此诉诸权威以压制对抗、抹除差异的群体，无论是家庭还是社会，都是容不下个人主义的，我们不能在提倡个人主义的同时否认对抗，而只能在承认对抗的同时设法学会以诚实、体面、守信、有尊严的方式处理对抗。 @whigzhou: 至于从何时开始、在何种程度上将孩子作为独立自主的个人对待，我的看法是分年龄段逐步推进，并鼓励孩子证明自己已配得上更高一级的对待，最终在某个时刻承认其自由人的地位，至于我家的猫，则注定只能永远处于我的权威主义控制之下。 @rainbowend:把儿童培养成成人的一大目标就是让他像个人一样为自己争取利益表达诉求， 同时也学会有礼貌的沟通达成妥协吧。把这说成对抗性也太怪了 @whigzhou: 把礼貌和对抗对立起来才叫怪，两支球队可以很有礼貌很讲规则很有尊严的进行对抗 @whigzhou: 自由主义者最具误导性的一句格言是，人生而自由，要我说，“人生而为暴徒”更接近真相，自由是已经学会收好爪子的好猫们所创造的俱乐部公共品，加入这个俱乐部的资格不是与生俱来的，既要学会收好爪子，否则就是暴徒，又要学会在必要时挥出爪子，否则便是奴隶。 @whigzhou: 文明社会驯服暴徒的方式有两种，一是权威主义的压制和惩戒，让暴徒了解不收好爪子的惨痛代价，二是对合作性的社会奖励机制，让暴徒意识到，收好爪子也可以维护自己的利益，还能带来合作收益，第一种方式导向专制社会，第二种导向自由社会。