My Observations in Education

The root of 'education' is said to be 'ex dūcō', which could mean 'lead out', but also 'guide' and 'draw' (as in pull), which according to Plato is the method by which Socrates would ask his pupils questions with the aim of getting them to ponder the nature of questions, rather than merely derive conclusions, though answers may arise in that process.

"The overall purpose of Socratic questioning, was to challenge accuracy and completeness of thinking in a way that acts to move people towards their ultimate goal."

(source)

Socratic questioning aims to challenge thought processes to discover our limitations and to make distinctions, such as those between 'verity' and 'veracity'.

In my years of teaching I came to discover three principle factors that would change how I would teach, or in my case, impart the English language to my pupils.

The first is that a question can be a statement—a call for attention or acknowledgement, above all—that it is important to have learners consider the intent and rationale behind questions.

And, vice-versa, a statement often contains a question. Sometimes*, the answer may even lie dormant within the question itself.

*To illustrate, 'sometimes' is in of itself likely a clue that the statement is a question. (For, the teacher need put in check his or her own expectations.)

• Probing presuppositions and beliefs is a vital process for asking purposeful questions.
• Rephrasing one's question or statement can reveal clues we seek.
• Welcoming criticism and providing clarifications can help matters.
• Evidence and authority need support our argument.
• Avoid jumping to conclusions, and exploring alternative perspectives is vital.
• Questions are always helpful, but accepting that we may never have answers is equally important.
• Reflecting on the consequences of our assumptions and statements is valuable.

The second factor is to invite all to try and teach what it is [we] are learning.

(The teacher included.) If teaching is learning, then learning involves teaching.

It is ultimately an exchange—a dialogue. For one, we learn from each other's cultural backgrounds, personal skills, (etc.)—which brings us to the third factor:

This one comes more specifically from my observations in the classroom, and involves what some might call the 'collective consciousness' at play; when I delegate a certain task in a group each individual in their sub-groups will apparently contribute a different angle and perception so that, in the wrap-up, the 'solution' to a task was only as complete as the sum of the findings of the whole. Moreover, the strategies used to find the solutions I generally left up to them since, even when I instructed one way, others managed to go about a task in multiple ways. (There are too many such incidents to detail in this article, but I am certain that other teachers have observed this little-studied phenomenon.)

Going back to the first point:

One should be more diligent and question for ourselves WHY it is we are asking something, to also perhaps rephrase HOW it is we originally wished to ask something.

For, it pays to be more precise.

According to Buster Benson, there are as many as 205 types of cognitive fallacies. (See chart. I highly recommend his material. I bought that image as a poster, which hangs in my study.)

As you can see, that's a lot of weeding to do before one may avoid any logical traps and biases.

This is why we [should] embrace—not criticise—idioms and colloquial, solecisms and pleonasms, and welcome flexibility and diversity (e.g. more loanwords and neologisms, slang and emojis), since isn't that what comprises the very nature of the English language?

It goes without saying that one will inevitably fall into one or another fallacy at every step of the way. Still, we must ask ourselves the following, and probe into our own presuppositions and unquestioned beliefs:

• Why am I actually asking [something]?
• Does my question perhaps already contain an answer when I rephrase it?
• How relevant is my question at this time?
• What degree of certainty is there in what I am positing?
• How sure can I be that what I am saying holds weight?
• Am I looking for verity or veracity?
• Does my argument hold an assumption? If so, can I clarify or reposition?

If you feel misunderstood, ask yourself any number of questions:

• Why do I feel I am being criticised, or personally attacked?
• Am I being too much on the defensive? Am I too proud?
• Can I elaborate with an illustration for clarity?
• Is the receiver even the right person to ask?
• How can I be sure of what I am saying?
• What evidence is there to support what I am saying?
• On what authority or evidence am I basing my argument or premise?
• What alternative ways are there of addressing my point?
• Is it really all that necessary? (It's not the end of the world. / Enough is enough.)
• Can I accept that others may not know the answers (for which I seek)?
• Am I comparing with others' answers I have learned?
• Am I looking for perfection? the perfect 'solution'? the end-all of things?
• Am I willing to consider that I may be wrong? Or, better still, that it may not be about being right (or wrong)?
• What is the worst that could happen if I feel I cannot accept others' opinions?
• What might be the consequences of my assumption?
• Why is it so important for me to have an answer or to come to an immediate decision?
• Can I be contented to know that not all is knowable?
• If I don't insist on having an immediate answer, might the answer come by itself, when I least expect it to?

Finally, we need study more closely what it is individuals are asking, for intent, rationale, reasons, behind the questions. Then, allow all to reflect on the sum of answers, which lie within us all rather than without.