test questions good and bad
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/17/05 9:13:15 PM, katherand2003@... writes:
A young (former) friend of mine once said cleverly (NOT) "I would say 'f- -
- you,' but I'm not going to."
Test questions have always been frustrating, and in the early 70's there were
attempts to make tests "relevant," and so there was a test designed to be
updated and make more sense. And then THOSE qustions were sent around because
it had to do with subway schedules and elevators and stuff. Most people in
the U.S. don't live anywhere near a subway (and most of those not even near a
bus), and many in towns with no elevators whatsoever except maybe in the
two-story hospital, if they have one. So those questions too were rejected.
In the same season, though, testing itself was being studied and analyzed to
death, and the way some tests were devised for a while (maybe still, but I
doubt it), when they started doing computer scoring, was that there were better
answers and worse answers. Responses were weighted so that they could get the
REALLY high scores (see how many best answers a person had). So if someone
picked that 2nd answer that seemed almost as good as the first, that could
show on the scoring too.
But for test scores to be very useful, all involved have to understand
them--every school counsellor, teacher and parent... and that just wasn't likely to
happen. So standardized tests went through some awkward days and some fancy
experimental days, and are probably still constantly revised because of
complaints that some aspect or other wasn't fair.
But for unschoolers, it doesn't matter. We can encourage kids to go with
more creative answers. A very badly worded question (trivia or real-life or
standardized test) can create more mirth and learning than a well-worded one, if
the mom's attitude about it is light and happy instead of dark and angry.
If learning is the goal, not testing, then we as unschoolers should not invest
negative energy in or around testing. It's just a thing, like a fence or a
menu, or like an old pair of shoes maybe we should throw away.
Here's an example of a much better answer, a story Pam Sorooshian posted some
time back:
================
"There are 72 students in a school and 6 classes. How many students are
in each class?"
Rosie says - "There could be any number from zero to 72 in a class."
The answer is 12.
================================
And my favorite from my kids, when they were little, and a pre-school
BrainQuest card showed line drawings of a table, lamp, chair and bed and asked which
one used electricity. It was a great moment. The kids looked at me with
the most wonderful little-kid looks of "What!?" and said all of them could, but
none of them had to. Sure enough, there are electric tables (we owned two,
with outlets mounted in the side, and a light table), and certainly beds in
hospitals use electricity, and our neighbor had just bought a recliner that
could lift her up and out of it, and they'd seen recliners that had heat and
massage features. They were also familiar with kerosene lamps, oil lamps and
battery lamps, and the picture-question clearly showed an electrical outlet, I
think, so batteries wouldn't have counted.
So for my kids, that was not a question with a simple "right" answer. Good
for them!!!
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> -=-My sister in law just tested her 9 year old homeschooler and I wasOh, HUH! Cheating!
> struck by how badly worded the tests were. Some of them made
> absolutely no sense. ANYhoodle. But that's a thread I won't start.-=-
>
A young (former) friend of mine once said cleverly (NOT) "I would say 'f- -
- you,' but I'm not going to."
Test questions have always been frustrating, and in the early 70's there were
attempts to make tests "relevant," and so there was a test designed to be
updated and make more sense. And then THOSE qustions were sent around because
it had to do with subway schedules and elevators and stuff. Most people in
the U.S. don't live anywhere near a subway (and most of those not even near a
bus), and many in towns with no elevators whatsoever except maybe in the
two-story hospital, if they have one. So those questions too were rejected.
In the same season, though, testing itself was being studied and analyzed to
death, and the way some tests were devised for a while (maybe still, but I
doubt it), when they started doing computer scoring, was that there were better
answers and worse answers. Responses were weighted so that they could get the
REALLY high scores (see how many best answers a person had). So if someone
picked that 2nd answer that seemed almost as good as the first, that could
show on the scoring too.
But for test scores to be very useful, all involved have to understand
them--every school counsellor, teacher and parent... and that just wasn't likely to
happen. So standardized tests went through some awkward days and some fancy
experimental days, and are probably still constantly revised because of
complaints that some aspect or other wasn't fair.
But for unschoolers, it doesn't matter. We can encourage kids to go with
more creative answers. A very badly worded question (trivia or real-life or
standardized test) can create more mirth and learning than a well-worded one, if
the mom's attitude about it is light and happy instead of dark and angry.
If learning is the goal, not testing, then we as unschoolers should not invest
negative energy in or around testing. It's just a thing, like a fence or a
menu, or like an old pair of shoes maybe we should throw away.
Here's an example of a much better answer, a story Pam Sorooshian posted some
time back:
================
"There are 72 students in a school and 6 classes. How many students are
in each class?"
Rosie says - "There could be any number from zero to 72 in a class."
The answer is 12.
================================
And my favorite from my kids, when they were little, and a pre-school
BrainQuest card showed line drawings of a table, lamp, chair and bed and asked which
one used electricity. It was a great moment. The kids looked at me with
the most wonderful little-kid looks of "What!?" and said all of them could, but
none of them had to. Sure enough, there are electric tables (we owned two,
with outlets mounted in the side, and a light table), and certainly beds in
hospitals use electricity, and our neighbor had just bought a recliner that
could lift her up and out of it, and they'd seen recliners that had heat and
massage features. They were also familiar with kerosene lamps, oil lamps and
battery lamps, and the picture-question clearly showed an electrical outlet, I
think, so batteries wouldn't have counted.
So for my kids, that was not a question with a simple "right" answer. Good
for them!!!
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ellen Oberlin
So do most unschoolers have portfolio evaluations instead of testing? In
Florida we have several options among which those two are usually used.
Ellen
Florida we have several options among which those two are usually used.
Ellen
>
>But for unschoolers, it doesn't matter. We can encourage kids to go with
>more creative answers.
[email protected]
In a message dated 11/18/05 10:02:21 AM, ellenoberlin@... writes:
Those who are worried about tests (if there even is anyone worried) might
want to read this:
http://sandradodd.com/tests
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> So do most unschoolers have portfolio evaluations instead of testing?Most unschoolers have neither.
>
Those who are worried about tests (if there even is anyone worried) might
want to read this:
http://sandradodd.com/tests
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Ellen Oberlin
Okay,
How do they comply with state requirements? Or are most illegal?
Ellen
How do they comply with state requirements? Or are most illegal?
Ellen
>From: SandraDodd@...
>Reply-To: [email protected]
>To: [email protected]
>Subject: Re: [UnschoolingDiscussion] test questions good and bad
>Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2005 12:17:04 EST
>
>
>In a message dated 11/18/05 10:02:21 AM, ellenoberlin@... writes:
>
>
> > So do most unschoolers have portfolio evaluations instead of testing?
> >
>
>Most unschoolers have neither.
>
>Those who are worried about tests (if there even is anyone worried) might
>want to read this:
>http://sandradodd.com/tests
>
>Sandra
>
>
>
>[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
Deb
--- In [email protected], "Ellen Oberlin"
<ellenoberlin@h...> wrote:
the school district and there are umbrellas out there that don't
require anything but attendance (that is, email them a list of 'school
days' and you're done, just so they can say Yes you 'attended').
--Deb
<ellenoberlin@h...> wrote:
>used.
> So do most unschoolers have portfolio evaluations instead of
>testing? In
> Florida we have several options among which those two are usually
>But FL also has the umbrella option which keeps you from dealing with
> Ellen
>
the school district and there are umbrellas out there that don't
require anything but attendance (that is, email them a list of 'school
days' and you're done, just so they can say Yes you 'attended').
--Deb
[email protected]
-=-Okay,
How do they comply with state requirements? Or are most illegal?-=-
#1, those aren't the only two choices
#2, most states don't have the requirements your state has
#3... see below
From the list's description and guidelines:
* This list is international. State specific questions are best answered
elsewhere. (Try http://www.unschooling.com/ click "Message Boards" then "Across
the Continent, Around the World".)
* This list's focus is learning through unschooling, not homeschooling
politics. Discussions of legislative and legal issues can be found at
http://www.nhen.org/forum.
Those guidelines are at yahoogroups in this list's files, and also here:
http://sandradodd.com/lists/other
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
How do they comply with state requirements? Or are most illegal?-=-
#1, those aren't the only two choices
#2, most states don't have the requirements your state has
#3... see below
From the list's description and guidelines:
* This list is international. State specific questions are best answered
elsewhere. (Try http://www.unschooling.com/ click "Message Boards" then "Across
the Continent, Around the World".)
* This list's focus is learning through unschooling, not homeschooling
politics. Discussions of legislative and legal issues can be found at
http://www.nhen.org/forum.
Those guidelines are at yahoogroups in this list's files, and also here:
http://sandradodd.com/lists/other
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
nellebelle
>>>>>>>>>>How do they comply with state requirements? Or are most illegal?>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You need to check with your own state. This list doesn't deal with legalities other than in very general ways.
Mary Ellen
Legally unschooling in Washington state
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
nellebelle
>>>>>>>>Legally unschooling in Washington state>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Oops, I mean legally providing "home-based instruction" in an unschooling way...
Mary Ellen
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
k
SandraDodd@... wrote:
That's SIL's job. ~~~Phew!
<snip>
looking
for and another may not be able to see where any of the questions are
headed. Questions are often not without intentions even in real life.
In real life you would want to avoid putting intentions onto your
questions. But that's the whole point of standardized tests. Paradox:
question reality.. yeh but question someone's knowledge.. maybe you'll
get all kinds of seemingly "wrong" answers.
But
I agree. Illogically worded questions would excite mirth as easily as
anger, and mirth would be a good choice. The cool thing is, in some
states at least -I think all of them-, it doesn't matter if kids pass
or
fail. As long as the tests are completed and sent in, the school aged
kids are all accounted for. (I'm not sure about the laws, so nobody
quote me on that.) I don't think there's any need to invest ourselves
in outcomes. Otherwise, I'll be writing something like this: "Dear
Senator/ Congressperson, if you legislate that I teach to the test at
home, I promise you a failing grade on YOUR test by voting against
you."
headcount or look at the attendance sheets because in real life you
might not want to assume something based on what it's handy to do in
your head with math. A handier thing to know: how to deal with real
life.
to any question.
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
> In a message dated 11/17/05 9:13:15 PM, katherand2003@...No no. I wasn't giving the test or talking about it to my nephew. ;)
> writes:
>
>
>
>> -=-My sister in law just tested her 9 year old homeschooler and I
>> was struck by how badly worded the tests were. Some of them made
>> absolutely no sense. ANYhoodle. But that's a thread I won't
>> start.-=-
>>
>
> Oh, HUH! Cheating!
That's SIL's job. ~~~Phew!
<snip>
> But for test scores to be very useful, all involved have toOh well. One student may divine the answer the test designer is
> understand them--every school counsellor, teacher and parent... and
> that just wasn't likely to happen. So standardized tests went
> through some awkward days and some fancy experimental days, and are
> probably still constantly revised because of complaints that some
> aspect or other wasn't fair.
looking
for and another may not be able to see where any of the questions are
headed. Questions are often not without intentions even in real life.
In real life you would want to avoid putting intentions onto your
questions. But that's the whole point of standardized tests. Paradox:
question reality.. yeh but question someone's knowledge.. maybe you'll
get all kinds of seemingly "wrong" answers.
> But for unschoolers, it doesn't matter. We can encourage kids to goIt would be a bother to have to test ds to meet state requirements.
> with more creative answers. A very badly worded question (trivia or
> real-life or standardized test) can create more mirth and learning
> than a well-worded one, if the mom's attitude about it is light and
> happy instead of dark and angry. If learning is the goal, not
> testing, then we as unschoolers should not invest negative energy in
> or around testing. It's just a thing, like a fence or a menu, or
> like an old pair of shoes maybe we should throw away.
But
I agree. Illogically worded questions would excite mirth as easily as
anger, and mirth would be a good choice. The cool thing is, in some
states at least -I think all of them-, it doesn't matter if kids pass
or
fail. As long as the tests are completed and sent in, the school aged
kids are all accounted for. (I'm not sure about the laws, so nobody
quote me on that.) I don't think there's any need to invest ourselves
in outcomes. Otherwise, I'll be writing something like this: "Dear
Senator/ Congressperson, if you legislate that I teach to the test at
home, I promise you a failing grade on YOUR test by voting against
you."
> Here's an example of a much better answer, a story Pam SorooshianYeh, 6x12=72. But you'd do better to visit the classrooms and do a
> posted some time back:
>
> ================
>
> "There are 72 students in a school and 6 classes. How many students
> are in each class?"
>
> Rosie says - "There could be any number from zero to 72 in a class."
>
> The answer is 12.
>
> ================================
headcount or look at the attendance sheets because in real life you
might not want to assume something based on what it's handy to do in
your head with math. A handier thing to know: how to deal with real
life.
> And my favorite from my kids, when they were little, and a pre-schoolAbsolutely. The questioner may not have all the possible true answers
> BrainQuest card showed line drawings of a table, lamp, chair and bed
> and asked which one used electricity. It was a great moment. The
> kids looked at me with the most wonderful little-kid looks of
> "What!?" and said all of them could, but none of them had to. Sure
> enough, there are electric tables (we owned two, with outlets mounted
> in the side, and a light table), and certainly beds in hospitals use
> electricity, and our neighbor had just bought a recliner that could
> lift her up and out of it, and they'd seen recliners that had heat
> and massage features. They were also familiar with kerosene lamps,
> oil lamps and battery lamps, and the picture-question clearly showed
> an electrical outlet, I think, so batteries wouldn't have counted.
>
>
> So for my kids, that was not a question with a simple "right" answer.
> Good for them!!!
to any question.
> SandraKathe
__________________________________
Start your day with Yahoo! - Make it your home page!
http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
[email protected]
You totally misunderstood me:
You can't bring something to this list and not discuss it. That's what's
cheating.
You said "that's a thread I won't start" but at that point you had.
-=-Questions are often not without intentions even in real life.-=-
??
If that was important information please rephrase.
-=-In real life you would want to avoid putting intentions onto your
questions.-=-
I don't understand this either.
In real life question OFTEN have intentions. If they don't, they're stupid
questions, aren't they?
-=->
I think you missed the good part of Pam's story too.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> ANYhoodle. But that's a thread I won'tI wasn't talking about cheating on the test.
> >> start.-=-
> >>
> >
> > Oh, HUH! Cheating!
>
> No no. I wasn't giving the test or talking about it to my nephew. ;)
> That's SIL's job. ~~~Phew!
>
You can't bring something to this list and not discuss it. That's what's
cheating.
You said "that's a thread I won't start" but at that point you had.
-=-Questions are often not without intentions even in real life.-=-
??
If that was important information please rephrase.
-=-In real life you would want to avoid putting intentions onto your
questions.-=-
I don't understand this either.
In real life question OFTEN have intentions. If they don't, they're stupid
questions, aren't they?
-=->
> "There are 72 students in a school and 6 classes. How many studentsYeh, 6x12=72-=-
> are in each class?"
>
> Rosie says - "There could be any number from zero to 72 in a class."
>
> The answer is 12.
>
> ================================
I think you missed the good part of Pam's story too.
Sandra
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
k
Sandra.. everybody... stay with me. I don't come across right and
sometimes I'm worse than I usual. Ask anybody who knows me IRL. I can
exasperate them all.
SandraDodd@... wrote:
questions with very specific goals (intentions) that the questionee
might not share at all, then or ever. Therefore the question could be
interpreted in wildly different ways, even if they're based on some
mundane factoid that anyone can look up. Such questions aren't meant
to
test the farther reaches of the knowledge of the person(s) being
questioned.
Unfortunately, no examples are coming to mind to illustrate my point,
dang it. *sigh* Exasperating myself now.
was 6x12=72. I only stated the obvious "answer is 12" to start with
(in
order to work from what had been my running commentary on "intentions"
and all that) and went on saying that there was more to the story, but
I
guess it didn't come off very clearly what I was trying to say.
OR I missed the good part and still remain unenlightened to date. My
reading comprehension skills (or not) come back to haunt me.
Kathe
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
sometimes I'm worse than I usual. Ask anybody who knows me IRL. I can
exasperate them all.
SandraDodd@... wrote:
> You totally misunderstood me:;)
>
>
>>ANYhoodle. But that's a thread I won't
>>
>>>>start.-=-
>>>>
>>>
>>>Oh, HUH! Cheating!
>>
>>No no. I wasn't giving the test or talking about it to my nephew.
>>That's SIL's job. ~~~Phew!what's
>>
>
> I wasn't talking about cheating on the test.
> You can't bring something to this list and not discuss it. That's
> cheating.Yes. I misunderstood you. Got it. Duh. ;) Now I get it.
> -=-Questions are often not without intentions even in real life.-=-stupid
> ??
> If that was important information please rephrase.
>
> -=-In real life you would want to avoid putting intentions onto your
> questions.-=-
>
> I don't understand this either.
> In real life question OFTEN have intentions. If they don't, they're
> questions, aren't they?Garhhh... no no. I meant putting words into people's mouths by asking
questions with very specific goals (intentions) that the questionee
might not share at all, then or ever. Therefore the question could be
interpreted in wildly different ways, even if they're based on some
mundane factoid that anyone can look up. Such questions aren't meant
to
test the farther reaches of the knowledge of the person(s) being
questioned.
Unfortunately, no examples are coming to mind to illustrate my point,
dang it. *sigh* Exasperating myself now.
> -=->And there I was-- thinking I understood it. I wasn't saying the story
>
>>"There are 72 students in a school and 6 classes. How many students
>>are in each class?"
>>
>>Rosie says - "There could be any number from zero to 72 in a class."
>>
>>The answer is 12.
>>
>>================================
>
>
> Yeh, 6x12=72-=-
>
> I think you missed the good part of Pam's story too.
>
> Sandra
was 6x12=72. I only stated the obvious "answer is 12" to start with
(in
order to work from what had been my running commentary on "intentions"
and all that) and went on saying that there was more to the story, but
I
guess it didn't come off very clearly what I was trying to say.
OR I missed the good part and still remain unenlightened to date. My
reading comprehension skills (or not) come back to haunt me.
Kathe
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
Deb
--- In [email protected], k <katherand2003@y...>
wrote:
the witness"?
--Deb
wrote:
>Maybe trying to hit the idea of what Perry Mason would call "leading
> Garhhh... no no. I meant putting words into people's mouths by
>asking
> questions with very specific goals (intentions) that the
>questionee
> might not share at all, then or ever. Therefore the question
>could be
> interpreted in wildly different ways, even if they're based on
>some
> mundane factoid that anyone can look up. Such questions aren't
>meant
> to
> test the farther reaches of the knowledge of the person(s) being
> questioned.
>
> Unfortunately, no examples are coming to mind to illustrate my
>point,
> dang it. *sigh* Exasperating myself now.
>
the witness"?
--Deb
Sandra Dodd
On Dec 12, 2005, at 6:39 AM, Deb wrote:
talk on encouraging kids to ask questions and answering them in ways
that draw out more thought sometimes, or straight out sometimes
(depends on the question and the situation and mood and all that).
In there somewhere he said there is such a thing as a stupid question
(or maybe he said bad question)--a question to which you already know
the answer.
I agree sometimes, but there are times to ask a question in order to
get the other person to think about it. Things like "What's the
worst thing that will happen if you don't go to work today?" Or
"Have you considered other options?" The questioner might have a
good idea of the answer, but the purpose of the question is to help
the other person think through a decision, not to get information.
Sometimes they're hypthetical questions intended to ellicit an
emotional response, and if the questioner is in a position to help
care for that person's emotional wellbeing, I see no sin in that. If
a kid is upset about a relationship problem with a friend, I might
say "Is there anything you could do to make it better?" or "Did you
do the best you could do?"
A couple of times over the years someone has claimed that this list
or some related discussion was not respecting the Socratic method or
some such, by which the complainant meant to say that asking random
questions and then considering all the diverse answers was "the
Socratic method." Not so. With the Socratic method, there's a
Socrates--a teacher--and there are others who are being led to the
difficult ideas by questions designed by the teacher. He knows where
he's headed, but he's figured out the philosophical principle over
years of thought and is hoping to get this person who hasn't figured
it out to go through the thought processes to get there. If he just
states the principle, the other person might not ever really get it.
If the other person comes to it through the rearrangement of his own
thoughts then he will "discover" it, even though he was fairly much
led there by someone who knew what and where "it" was.
With the Socratic method, the questioner knows the answer. But it's
lame to apply that to something concrete or measurable (which schools
sometimes do) and it's sadistic to do it about practical matters in
your own home. That can be infuriating. If I lost my keys and Keith
knew where they were, he should say "They're right here," not ask me
a series of questions designed for me to remember where I left them.
Asking those kinds of questions if you do NOT know can be helpful
("What jacket were you wearing when you had them last?")
So I don't think it's any good to condemn all questions of a type
without considering the circumstances and purpose and helpfulness of
them.
Sandra
> -=- Such questions aren'tA lot gets said about questioning. Richard Prystowski and I did a
> >meant
> > to
> > test the farther reaches of the knowledge of the person(s) being
> > questioned.-=-
>
>
>
> -=-Maybe trying to hit the idea of what Perry Mason would call
> "leading
> the witness"? -=-
talk on encouraging kids to ask questions and answering them in ways
that draw out more thought sometimes, or straight out sometimes
(depends on the question and the situation and mood and all that).
In there somewhere he said there is such a thing as a stupid question
(or maybe he said bad question)--a question to which you already know
the answer.
I agree sometimes, but there are times to ask a question in order to
get the other person to think about it. Things like "What's the
worst thing that will happen if you don't go to work today?" Or
"Have you considered other options?" The questioner might have a
good idea of the answer, but the purpose of the question is to help
the other person think through a decision, not to get information.
Sometimes they're hypthetical questions intended to ellicit an
emotional response, and if the questioner is in a position to help
care for that person's emotional wellbeing, I see no sin in that. If
a kid is upset about a relationship problem with a friend, I might
say "Is there anything you could do to make it better?" or "Did you
do the best you could do?"
A couple of times over the years someone has claimed that this list
or some related discussion was not respecting the Socratic method or
some such, by which the complainant meant to say that asking random
questions and then considering all the diverse answers was "the
Socratic method." Not so. With the Socratic method, there's a
Socrates--a teacher--and there are others who are being led to the
difficult ideas by questions designed by the teacher. He knows where
he's headed, but he's figured out the philosophical principle over
years of thought and is hoping to get this person who hasn't figured
it out to go through the thought processes to get there. If he just
states the principle, the other person might not ever really get it.
If the other person comes to it through the rearrangement of his own
thoughts then he will "discover" it, even though he was fairly much
led there by someone who knew what and where "it" was.
With the Socratic method, the questioner knows the answer. But it's
lame to apply that to something concrete or measurable (which schools
sometimes do) and it's sadistic to do it about practical matters in
your own home. That can be infuriating. If I lost my keys and Keith
knew where they were, he should say "They're right here," not ask me
a series of questions designed for me to remember where I left them.
Asking those kinds of questions if you do NOT know can be helpful
("What jacket were you wearing when you had them last?")
So I don't think it's any good to condemn all questions of a type
without considering the circumstances and purpose and helpfulness of
them.
Sandra
Betsy Hill
** With the Socratic method, there's a
Socrates--a teacher--and there are others who are being led to the
difficult ideas by questions designed by the teacher. He knows where
he's headed, but he's figured out the philosophical principle over
years of thought and is hoping to get this person who hasn't figured
it out to go through the thought processes to get there.**
I'd like to explore *when* it might be reasonable to answer our
children's questions with a question (rather than with an answer). I
don't answer with an answer when it's a simple spelling question, for
instance. (Especially a spelling question in the heat of the action in
World of Warcraft. <g>)
Would their be right and wrong ways to use the Socratic method in an
unschooling setting?
My stab at it would be that the Socratic method is fine as long as it
isn't like some kind of intellectual version of the playground game
"keep away".
I suppose the guidelines that apply here are "keep going only as long as
it holds their interest" and the "don't exasperate your children; it
isn't edifying (or nice)."
I have a dear friend who has written a book, Teaching Science Skills at
Home: Without Being a Rocket Scientist, that encourages the use of the
Socratic method. I'm trying to think through the question of how well
the ideas in this book fit with unschooling. I think they fit pretty
well, but any learning resource can be misused. (It's a very recent
book, so I'd be surprised if anyone on this list has read it.)
Betsy
Socrates--a teacher--and there are others who are being led to the
difficult ideas by questions designed by the teacher. He knows where
he's headed, but he's figured out the philosophical principle over
years of thought and is hoping to get this person who hasn't figured
it out to go through the thought processes to get there.**
I'd like to explore *when* it might be reasonable to answer our
children's questions with a question (rather than with an answer). I
don't answer with an answer when it's a simple spelling question, for
instance. (Especially a spelling question in the heat of the action in
World of Warcraft. <g>)
Would their be right and wrong ways to use the Socratic method in an
unschooling setting?
My stab at it would be that the Socratic method is fine as long as it
isn't like some kind of intellectual version of the playground game
"keep away".
I suppose the guidelines that apply here are "keep going only as long as
it holds their interest" and the "don't exasperate your children; it
isn't edifying (or nice)."
I have a dear friend who has written a book, Teaching Science Skills at
Home: Without Being a Rocket Scientist, that encourages the use of the
Socratic method. I'm trying to think through the question of how well
the ideas in this book fit with unschooling. I think they fit pretty
well, but any learning resource can be misused. (It's a very recent
book, so I'd be surprised if anyone on this list has read it.)
Betsy
Deb
I'll answer with a question if I need more information as to where
one of DS' questions is coming from - those out-of-the-blue type
things. I always keep in mind the story of the mom of a young boy
who comes to his mom and asks Where did I come from? She sits him
down and calmly(despite her fluttering heart at it being 'too
soon'), with picture books and all, explains the whole process of
reproduction. When she's done, he is sitting quite silent and almost
stunned. She asks if he has any questions or comments and he
says "Wow! Jimmy said he was from Cleveland!" Thus, I make sure I
know what information is being elicited before I venture too far off
the path.
Questions with questions is also something I do when there is no one
answer to something and I can ask a "what do you think?" or "how
would you do that?" type question.
Things like how to spell and what does 2+9 equal? we just answer
right out and move on. Sometimes I'll follow up the answer with a
question to find out what's happening in his head to prompt that
question (unless it is obvious).
--Deb
one of DS' questions is coming from - those out-of-the-blue type
things. I always keep in mind the story of the mom of a young boy
who comes to his mom and asks Where did I come from? She sits him
down and calmly(despite her fluttering heart at it being 'too
soon'), with picture books and all, explains the whole process of
reproduction. When she's done, he is sitting quite silent and almost
stunned. She asks if he has any questions or comments and he
says "Wow! Jimmy said he was from Cleveland!" Thus, I make sure I
know what information is being elicited before I venture too far off
the path.
Questions with questions is also something I do when there is no one
answer to something and I can ask a "what do you think?" or "how
would you do that?" type question.
Things like how to spell and what does 2+9 equal? we just answer
right out and move on. Sometimes I'll follow up the answer with a
question to find out what's happening in his head to prompt that
question (unless it is obvious).
--Deb
Sandra Dodd
On Dec 12, 2005, at 12:12 PM, Betsy Hill wrote:
I think it would be the same right or wrong as in any social
situation with friends.
I used to run philosophy discussions in an SCA context, and while
some might have thought we were brainstorming, it wasn't that. A
question would be thrown out that would lead people toward
philosophical ideals or practicalities, and their answers might be
questions, kind of like what happens on this list. <g>
But when kids are REALLY little, and a mom shows instead of just
spilling the answer, that's kind of that thing. You show them
something like... 2x3. If they're asking how many donuts three
people get out of half a dozen you could say "two" but if the donuts
are right there, it might be more useful to physically manipulate
them into three piles. But I think really it would be even MORE
useful to add some things like "What if one person doesn't want any?
What if I only want one?" I wouldn't press the kid to answer (like a
test) at all, but just throw it out to show that the question has a
simple mathematical answer, but with the addition of human factors
it's a different question.
Sometimes there's a calm long moment, and sometimes the donuts are in
a bag in the back of the car and it's raining hard and the kid's
really hungry and the answer should be "TWO" without further
artistry. <g>
-=-I have a dear friend who has written a book, Teaching Science
Skills at
Home: Without Being a Rocket Scientist, that encourages the use of the
Socratic method. I'm trying to think through the question of how well
the ideas in this book fit with unschooling. I think they fit pretty
well, but any learning resource can be misused. (It's a very recent
book, so I'd be surprised if anyone on this list has read it.)-=-
Those discussions can be fun AND logic-skills-building. When a
little kid is asking (as I think they all do) whether an umbrella
would help break his fall if he jumped off the roof holding one, or
if maybe a towel tied around his neck like a Superman cape MIGHT help
him fly, if he jumps right and thinks lovely thoughts... the parent
could say "Stay off the roof or you'll get a spanking," or maybe ask
a leading question like... (depending on the mood of the kid and all
possibly considered factors) "How would the towel help?" or "If
people could fly, don't you think lots of them would be doing it?"
At least that way you don't embarrass him by saying, "Oh sure--we all
tried it and it doesn't work." And if he's interested you could find
some stuff about Icarus and some of da Vinci's designs for possible
flight. (Google makes that stuff a snap now!)
Sandra
> Would their be right and wrong ways to use the Socratic method in an=================================
> unschooling setting?
I think it would be the same right or wrong as in any social
situation with friends.
I used to run philosophy discussions in an SCA context, and while
some might have thought we were brainstorming, it wasn't that. A
question would be thrown out that would lead people toward
philosophical ideals or practicalities, and their answers might be
questions, kind of like what happens on this list. <g>
But when kids are REALLY little, and a mom shows instead of just
spilling the answer, that's kind of that thing. You show them
something like... 2x3. If they're asking how many donuts three
people get out of half a dozen you could say "two" but if the donuts
are right there, it might be more useful to physically manipulate
them into three piles. But I think really it would be even MORE
useful to add some things like "What if one person doesn't want any?
What if I only want one?" I wouldn't press the kid to answer (like a
test) at all, but just throw it out to show that the question has a
simple mathematical answer, but with the addition of human factors
it's a different question.
Sometimes there's a calm long moment, and sometimes the donuts are in
a bag in the back of the car and it's raining hard and the kid's
really hungry and the answer should be "TWO" without further
artistry. <g>
-=-I have a dear friend who has written a book, Teaching Science
Skills at
Home: Without Being a Rocket Scientist, that encourages the use of the
Socratic method. I'm trying to think through the question of how well
the ideas in this book fit with unschooling. I think they fit pretty
well, but any learning resource can be misused. (It's a very recent
book, so I'd be surprised if anyone on this list has read it.)-=-
Those discussions can be fun AND logic-skills-building. When a
little kid is asking (as I think they all do) whether an umbrella
would help break his fall if he jumped off the roof holding one, or
if maybe a towel tied around his neck like a Superman cape MIGHT help
him fly, if he jumps right and thinks lovely thoughts... the parent
could say "Stay off the roof or you'll get a spanking," or maybe ask
a leading question like... (depending on the mood of the kid and all
possibly considered factors) "How would the towel help?" or "If
people could fly, don't you think lots of them would be doing it?"
At least that way you don't embarrass him by saying, "Oh sure--we all
tried it and it doesn't work." And if he's interested you could find
some stuff about Icarus and some of da Vinci's designs for possible
flight. (Google makes that stuff a snap now!)
Sandra
Betsy Hill
** Those discussions can be fun AND logic-skills-building. When a
little kid is asking (as I think they all do) whether an umbrella
would help break his fall if he jumped off the roof holding one, or
if maybe a towel tied around his neck like a Superman cape MIGHT help
him fly, if he jumps right and thinks lovely thoughts... the parent
could say "Stay off the roof or you'll get a spanking," or maybe ask
a leading question like... (depending on the mood of the kid and all
possibly considered factors) "How would the towel help?" or "If
people could fly, don't you think lots of them would be doing it?"
At least that way you don't embarrass him by saying, "Oh sure--we all
tried it and it doesn't work." And if he's interested you could find
some stuff about Icarus and some of da Vinci's designs for possible
flight. (Google makes that stuff a snap now!)**
That's a great example. Everyone at my house seems to have been born
too tame (or too cautious) for roof jumping, but I still remember the
childhood thrill of the umbrella tugging upwards when a strong wind gust
hit.
Betsy
little kid is asking (as I think they all do) whether an umbrella
would help break his fall if he jumped off the roof holding one, or
if maybe a towel tied around his neck like a Superman cape MIGHT help
him fly, if he jumps right and thinks lovely thoughts... the parent
could say "Stay off the roof or you'll get a spanking," or maybe ask
a leading question like... (depending on the mood of the kid and all
possibly considered factors) "How would the towel help?" or "If
people could fly, don't you think lots of them would be doing it?"
At least that way you don't embarrass him by saying, "Oh sure--we all
tried it and it doesn't work." And if he's interested you could find
some stuff about Icarus and some of da Vinci's designs for possible
flight. (Google makes that stuff a snap now!)**
That's a great example. Everyone at my house seems to have been born
too tame (or too cautious) for roof jumping, but I still remember the
childhood thrill of the umbrella tugging upwards when a strong wind gust
hit.
Betsy