“If your students don’t remember what you taught them, did you really teach them?” Many teachers most likely have made the following observation (or something like it) during their careers: “They knew it last week, but they don’t today!” Assuming initial instruction of “it” was effective in the short term, a likely explanation for the failure to accurately and fluently retrieve skills and content in the long term centers on practice. It’s not necessarily that practice did not occur, but rather, the independent practice procedures and activities used were not optimally designed and delivered for a specific purpose. Without use of evidencebased, independent practice procedures and strategies, what is taught can be forgotten, fragmented, or poorly organized. In addition, seeing the results of their efforts dissipate over a short period of time is frustrating for students and their teachers. For this special issue, we use the term independent practice to describe when students practice newly acquired skills (e.g., skills that can be performed with 85% or higher accuracy) with minimal or no support for the specific purpose of long-term retention, fluid retrieval, and generalization. Some independent practice activities may involve other students if doing so makes pedagogical sense; however, students are still expected to complete some practice items independently. Other forms of practice, such as guided practice, are crucial within explicit instruction models; however, guided practice occurs during initial instruction, whereby the teacher provides high levels of initial guidance as students begin to practice and then systematically fades those supports based on student performance (Archer & Hughes, 2011; Dunlosky, Rawson, Marsh, Nathan, & Willingham, 2013). Although cognitive scientists and educational psychologists have validated a number of effective independent practice techniques, this information has not consistently trickled down to classrooms, resulting in yet another research-to-practice casualty! This is not surprising given the concept of practice in education is often misunderstood, misused, maligned, and somewhat ignored. For example, some education writers 850067 TECXXX10.1177/0040059919850067Council for Exceptional ChildrenTEACHING Exceptional Children editorial2019

中文翻译：

---

有目的的独立实践程序：特刊简介

“如果你的学生不记得你教过他们什么，你真的教过他们吗？” 许多教师在他们的职业生涯中很可能有以下观察（或类似的观察）：“他们上周知道，但今天不知道！” 假设“它”的初始教学在短期内是有效的，那么长期未能准确、流畅地检索技能和内容的可能解释集中在实践上。实践不一定没有发生，而是所使用的独立实践程序和活动没有针对特定目的进行最佳设计和交付。如果不使用基于证据的独立实践程序和策略，所教的内容可能会被遗忘、支离破碎或组织不善。此外，看到他们努力的结果在短时间内消失，让学生和老师感到沮丧。对于本期特刊，我们使用术语独立练习来描述学生何时练习新获得的技能（例如，可以以 85% 或更高的准确率执行的技能），而对长期保持、流畅的特定目的的支持很少或没有支持检索和概括。如果这样做具有教学意义，一些独立的实践活动可能会涉及其他学生；但是，学生仍然需要独立完成一些练习项目。其他形式的实践，例如指导性实践，在明确的教学模式中是至关重要的；然而，指导练习发生在初始指导期间，教师在学生开始练习时提供高水平的初始指导，然后根据学生的表现系统地淡化这些支持（Archer & Hughes, 2011; Dunlosky, Rawson, Marsh, Nathan, & Willingham, 2013）。尽管认知科学家和教育心理学家已经验证了许多有效的独立实践技术，但这些信息并没有一直渗透到课堂上，导致又一次从研究到实践的伤亡！鉴于教育实践的概念经常被误解、误用、诽谤和有些忽视，这并不奇怪。比如一些教育作家 850067 TECXXX10.1177/0040059919850067 2013）。尽管认知科学家和教育心理学家已经验证了许多有效的独立实践技术，但这些信息并没有一直渗透到课堂上，导致又一次从研究到实践的伤亡！鉴于教育实践的概念经常被误解、误用、诽谤和有些忽视，这并不奇怪。比如一些教育作家 850067 TECXXX10.1177/0040059919850067 2013）。尽管认知科学家和教育心理学家已经验证了许多有效的独立实践技术，但这些信息并没有一直渗透到课堂上，导致又一次从研究到实践的伤亡！鉴于教育实践的概念经常被误解、误用、诽谤和有些忽视，这并不奇怪。比如一些教育作家 850067 TECXXX10.1177/0040059919850067特殊儿童委员会教优秀的孩子 社论2019