Questioning Strategies

 

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