|
Critical
Thinking Homepage
Dimensions
of Thinking
Upcoming
CTWG Events
Assessment
Questioning
Strategies
The
Three Story Intellect
Fallacies
Moral Assessment
Course Design
Occasional Papers
Fritz's
Home Page
|
Questioning strategies
can combine the Elements of Reasoning with the Three-story Intellect
to create better precision, clarity, depth, significance, and coherence
in class discussion. When applied in the framework of Socratic Questioning,
faculty can use open-ended questions to explore the various components of
a question/issue while developing in students a better awareness of the
dimensions and levels of thinking. Three types of questions
help students structure their understanding of the topic: clarifying
questions; reasoning questions;
and substantive questions. |
|
Clarifying
Questions
|
Description
|
Examples
|
Levels
|
|
Seek additional
information in order to better to gain a clearer understanding.
Uses illustrations, examples, and analogies.
|
What does
religious
freedom
mean? Who was Thomas Jefferson?
What does the First Amendment
say? What are the two religion clauses
of the First Amendment? What religious
group dominated New England? In what order
were the colonies
founded? What similarities existed between the
colonies with respect
to religion? What differences existed among
the colonies
with respect to religion?
|
First level
-- define, identify, describe, list, name. Second level --
classify, sequence, compare, contrast.
|
Standards
|
Dimensions
|
|
accuracy, fairness,
precision, relevance, and clarity of meaning
|
basic concepts,
data, purpose, and question/issue
|
Reasoning
Questions
|
Description
|
Examples
|
Levels
|
|
Explore logical
connections in arguments and seeks rational coherence
|
The most
common fallacies include: appeal to
authority; ad hominem; hasty generalization; sweeping generalization;
begging the question; circular reasoning; red herring; straw man;
appeal to majority; appeal to tradition; appeal to novelty; ambiguity;
argument ad nauseam; undistributed middle; black and white
thinking; false alternative; non-sequitur; extended analogy;
false cause; and shifting the burden of proof. See common
fallacies page for descriptions and specific examples.
|
Second level
-- analyze, reason, explain, infer. Third level -- evaluate,
hypothesize, generalize, speculate, apply a principle, forecast
|
Standards
|
Dimensions
|
|
adequacy, clarity
of expression, consistency, justifiability, and reasonability
|
interpretations,
inferences, implications, assumptions, and consequences
|
Substantive
Questions
|
Description
|
Examples
|
Levels
|
|
probe the deeper,
broader, and more significant dimensions of a question/issue
|
What assumptions
about human nature ground the religion clauses of the First Amendment?
How did the framers of the Constitution differ in their perspective
on the church/state relations from British rulers? How might we
interpret the concept of religious liberty in light of Freud's perception
of religion? What might have happened if we imagined the various
colonies remained divided on issues of religion?
|
Second level
-- analyze, reason, explain, analogize. Third level -- hypothesize,
evaluate, imagine, judge, apply a principle
|
Standards
|
Dimensions
|
|
completeness,
depth, significance, insight, breadth, and flexibility
|
assumptions,
points of view, interpretations, and implications
|
|