Monday, November 1, 2010

Letter To Laodicea (part 13)

A primary reason for this style of presentation goes to the heart of theories of education.  It is often the case that, when forced to come to a conclusion through a consideration of information instead of being force fed opinions that must be accepted, the conclusions reached are more deeply rooted, and when necessary, productive of transformation, as it involves the active engagement of the recipient in what is hoped to be his or her own betterment.  This is why one of the most effective teaching methods is the method often referred to as the “Socratic method” (though it is much older than Socrates).  This method, in its most basic terms, engages teacher and student in an ongoing series of questions from teacher to student.  The teacher poses a question and the student is asked to answer.  When the student provides the answer, the teacher demands that the student defend the answer, and does so by essentially breaking down the content of the answer into a series of smaller statements and asking “why?” repeatedly. 

With the constant asking of “why,” the student is forced to demonstrate a full awareness of all that is implied by the answer given, along with demonstrating that he or she truly understands the answer rather than simply parroting something previously heard.  It is perhaps the most un-nerving and frustrating type of pedagogical relationship, but it is also immensely effective.  Not only is the student forced to reach their own conclusions, but they are also required to be thoroughly engaged with the teacher so as to grasp the ongoing instruction that is being provided by the teacher in the form of the questioning analysis of the students answers.  The student benefits from being forced to defend those conclusions, as developing the ability to think and reason (both inductively and deductively) through information provided, rather than the collection of information for the purpose of regurgitating information in order to effect the illusion of knowledge (though the assemblage of facts is a necessity), is the purpose of education.  The pursuit of knowledge, and the putting of knowledge to service through a reasonable application of the intellect, is part of what it means to be truly human, and quite frankly, must be immensely pleasing to the One that conferred this ability to the creatures made in His image. 

Returning to this effective method of instruction, we find that the teacher is never put precisely in the position of having to give the student a definitive and final answer (though the teacher guides the process); and in the end, the student will have a more firm grasp of the knowledge and conclusions that the teacher most likely had in mind when first positing the question. 

Unbeknownst to them, parents routinely find themselves engaged in the practice of the Socratic method of instruction, though because they are not necessarily aware of it it is usually not of their own volition.  Entrance upon this manner of investigating knowledge usually occurs when a child asks the parent a question.  The parent, not wanting to disappoint the child that views them as something of the repository of all the world’s knowledge, responds with an answer, hoping (or naively believing) that it will be satisfactory to the inquisitive mind.  The child, almost always unsatisfied with the answer provided, further engages the parents with the simple question of “why?”.  The parent is then forced to provide further clarification of the original answer, which generally elicits another “why?” from said child.  This goes on until the parent ceases all questioning and disengages the application of instruction with the final and grand pronouncement of “because.” 

Ironically and quite humorously, this scenario places the child in the position of teacher, with the parent unwittingly placed into the position of student.  At the same time, both parent and child benefit.  The child, naturally, benefits from what is hopefully an increase in their knowledge of correct and factual information, while the parent benefits from having been placed in the position of having to think through their own answers to the questions, thereby becoming more thoroughly grounded in their own knowledge because of the mental gymnastics to which they have been subjected by their young “teacher.”  The mutual benefit of this method of engagement often results in teachers telling students such things as “I have probably learned more from you than you have learned from me.”  

No comments:

Post a Comment