=Its Characteristics.=--Developing, or training, questions, are sometimes referred to as Socratic questions. The terms are, however, not altogether synonymous. The method of Socrates had two divisions, known as _irony_ and _maieutics_. The former consisted in leading the pupil to express an opinion on some subject of current interest, an opinion that was apparently accepted by Socrates. Then, by a series of questions adroitly put, he drove his pupil into a contradiction or an absurd position, thus revealing the inadequacy of the answer. This phase of the Socratic method is rarely applicable with young children. Occasionally, in grammar or arithmetic, for instance, an incorrect answer may properly be followed up so as to lead the pupil into a contradiction, but it is usually not desirable to embarra.s.s him unnecessarily. It is never agreeable to be covered with the confusion which such a situation usually brings about. The other phase of the Socratic method, the _maieutics_, consisted in leading the pupil, by a further series of questions, to formulate the correct opinion of which the first hastily-given answer was only a fragment. This coincides with the developing method and may sometimes be profitably employed with young children.
EXAMPLE OF SOCRATIC QUESTIONING.--As an example of Socratic questioning may be noted the following taken from Plato"s _Minos_.
Socrates has questioned his companion concerning the nature of Law and has received the answer, "Law is the decree of the city." To show his companion the inadequacy of this definition, Socrates engages with him in the following dialogue:
_Socrates_: Justice and law, are highly honourable; injustice and lawlessness, highly dishonourable; the former preserves cities, the latter ruins them?
_Pupil_: Yes, it does.
_Socrates_: Well, then! we must consider law as something honourable; and seek after it, under the a.s.sumption that it is a good thing. You defined law to be the decree of the city: Are not some decrees good, others evil?
_Pupil_: Unquestionably.
_Socrates_: But we have already said that law is not evil?
_Pupil_: I admit it.
_Socrates_: It is incorrect therefore to answer, as you did broadly, that law is the decree of the city. An evil decree cannot be law.
_Pupil_: I see that it is incorrect.
Having shown his pupil the fallacy of his first definition, Socrates proceeds to teach him that only what is right is lawful. This part of the dialogue proceeds as follows:
_Socrates_: Those who know, must of necessity hold the same opinion with each other, on matters which they know: always and everywhere?
_Pupil_: Yes--always and everywhere.
_Socrates_: Physicians write respecting matters of health what they account to be true, and these writings of theirs are the medical laws?
_Pupil_: Certainly they are.
_Socrates_: The like is true respecting the laws of farming, the laws of gardening, the laws of cookery. All these are the writings of persons, knowing in each of the respective pursuits?
_Pupil_: Yes.
_Socrates_: In like manner, what are the laws respecting the government of a city? Are they not the writings of those who know how to govern--kings, statesmen, and men of superior excellence?
_Pupil_: Truly so.
_Socrates_: Knowing men like these will not write differently from each other about the same things, nor change what they have once written. If, then, we see some doing this, are we to declare them knowing or ignorant?
_Pupil_: Ignorant, undoubtedly.
_Socrates_: Whatever is right, therefore, we may p.r.o.nounce to be lawful in medicine, gardening, or cookery; whatever is not right, not to be lawful but lawless. And the like in treatises respecting just and unjust, prescribing how the city is to be administered.
That which is right, is the regal law; that which is not right, is not so, but only seems to be law in the eyes of the ignorant, being in truth lawless.
_Pupil_: Yes.
It will be seen from the above examples, that much of the Socratic questioning is really explanatory; the questions, though interrogative in form, being often rhetorical, and therefore a.s.sertive in value.
THE QUESTION
=Characteristics of a Good Question.=--Good questions should seize upon the important features and emphasize these. Unimportant details, though useful in giving vividness to a narrative and enabling the pupil to build up a clear picture of the scene or incident, may well be ignored in questioning. The teacher must see that the pupil grasps the essentials and must direct his questions towards the attainment of that end. The questions should be arranged in logical sequence, so that the answers, if written out in the order given, would form a connected account of the topic under discussion. Further, the questions should require the expression of a judgment on the part of the pupil. In the main they should not be answerable by a single word or a brief phrase.
One of the greatest weaknesses in the answers of pupils is the tendency _to_ extreme brevity. As a result, it is difficult to get pupils to give a connected and continuous narration, description, or exposition in any subject. The remedy for this defect is to ask questions which demand answers of considerable length, and to avoid those which require only a sc.r.a.ppy answer.
=Form of the Question.=--It should ever be borne in mind that the teacher"s language influences the language habits of his pupils.
Carelessly worded, poorly constructed questions are likely to result in answers having similar characteristics. On the other hand, correctness in the form of the questions asked, accuracy in the use of words, simple, straightforward statements of the thing wanted, will be reflected, dimly perhaps, in the form of the pupils" answers. Care must, therefore, be exercised as to the form in which questions are asked.
They should be stripped of all superfluous introductory words, such as, "Who can tell?" "How many of you know?" etc. Such prefaces are not only useless and a waste of time, but they also put before pupils a bad model if we are to expect concise and direct statements from them. The questions should be so clear and definite in meaning as to admit of only one interpretation. Questions such as, "What happened after this?" "What did Cromwell become?" "What about the rivers of Germany?" "What might we say of this word?" are objectionable on the score of indefiniteness.
Many correct answers might be given for each and the pupils can only guess at what is required. If the question cannot be so stated as to make what is desired unmistakable, the information had better be given outright. Questions should be brief and usually deal with only one point, except, perhaps in asking for summaries of what has been covered in the lesson. In the latter case it is frequently desirable to put a question involving several points in order to ensure definiteness, conciseness, and connectedness in the answer; for example, "For what is Alexander Mackenzie noted? State his great aim and describe his two most important undertakings connected therewith." But in dealing with matter taken up for the first time or involving original thought, this type of question, demanding as it does attention to several points, would put too great a demand upon the powers of young children. Under such conditions it is best to ask questions requiring only one point in answer.
THE ANSWER
=Form of Answers.=--The possibility of improving the pupil"s language power through his answers has already been referred to. To secure the best results in this regard, the teacher should insist on answers that are grammatically correct and, usually, in complete sentences. It would be pedantic, however, to insist always upon the latter condition. For such questions as, "What British officer was killed at Queenston Heights?" or "What province lies west of Manitoba?" the natural answers are "General Brock," or "Saskatchewan." To require pupils to say, "The British officer killed at Queenston Heights was General Brock," or "The province west of Manitoba is Saskatchewan," would be to make the recitation unnatural and formal. When answers are a mere echo of the question, with some slight inversion or addition, they become exceedingly mechanical, and useless from the point of view of language training. While it is desirable to avoid, as far as possible, questions that admit of answers of a single word or short phrase, such questions are sometimes necessary and are not objectionable. Questions should not be thrown into the form of an elliptical statement in which the pupil merely fills a blank, for example, "The capital of Ontario is...?" "The first English parliament was called by...?" Nor should they be given in inverted form, as, "Montreal is situated where?" "The Great Charter was signed by what king?" Alternative questions such as, "Is this a noun or an adjective?" "Was Charles I willing or unwilling to sign the Pet.i.tion of Right?" as well as those questions that are answerable by "Yes" or "No," require little thought to answer and should be avoided if possible. When they are used, the pupil should at once be required to give reasons for his answer. Neither the form of the question nor the teacher"s tone of voice or manner should afford any inkling as to the answer expected.
=Calling for Answers.=--In order that the attention of the whole cla.s.s may be maintained, the question should be proposed before the pupil who is to answer is indicated. No fixed order in calling upon the pupils should be adopted. If the pupils are never certain beforehand who is to be named to answer the question, they are more likely to be kept constantly on the alert. The questions should be carefully distributed among the cla.s.s, the duller pupils being given rather more and easier questions than the brighter ones. One of the temptations that the teacher has to overcome is that of giving the clever and willing pupils the majority of the questions. The question should seldom be repeated unless the first wording is so unfortunate that the meaning is not clear and it is found necessary to recast it. To repeat questions habitually is to put a premium on inattention on the part of the pupils. A bad habit often noted among teachers is that of wording the question in several ways before any one is asked to answer it.
=Methods of Dealing with Answers.=--As has been already indicated in another connection, the answers of the pupils should be generally in complete sentences and frequently should be in the form of a continuous paragraph or series of paragraphs, especially in summaries and reviews.
The continuous answer should be cultivated much more than it is, as a means of training pupils to organize their information and to express themselves in clear and connected discourse. On the other hand, however, children should be discouraged from giving more information than is demanded by the question. While it is desirable that the correctness of an answer should be indicated in some way, the teacher should guard against forming the habit of indicating every correct answer by a stereotyped word or phrase, such as, "Yes" or "That"s right." Answers should seldom be repeated by the teacher, unless it is desirable to re-word them for purposes of emphasis. Repet.i.tion of answers encourages careless articulation on the part of the pupil answering and inattention on the part of the others. One of the worst habits a teacher can contract is the "gramophonic" repet.i.tion of pupils" answers. The answers given by the pupils should almost invariably be individual, not collective. Simultaneous answering makes a noisy cla.s.s-room, cultivates a monotonous and measured method of speaking, and encourages the habit of relying on others. There are always a few leaders in the cla.s.s that are willing to take the initiative in answering, and the others merely chime in with them. The method is not suitable for the expression of individual opinion, for all pupils must answer alike. There is, further, the possibility that absurd blunders may pa.s.s uncorrected, because in the general repet.i.tion the teacher cannot detect them.
LIMITATIONS
Though questioning is the most valuable of teaching devices, it is quite susceptible of being overworked. There is quite as much danger of using it too extensively as there is of using it too little. Frequently, teachers try to question from pupils what they could not be expected to know. Further, it is possible by too much questioning to cover up the point of the lesson rather than reveal it, and to mystify the pupils rather than clarify their ideas. These are the two main abuses of the device. After all, it should be remembered that, important as good questioning undoubtedly is, it is not the only thing in lesson technique. In teaching, as elsewhere, variety is the spice of life.
Sympathy, sincerity, enthusiasm in the teacher will do more to secure mental activity in the pupils than mere excellence in questioning. The energetic, enthusiastic, sympathetic teacher may secure better results than the teacher whose ability in questioning is well-nigh perfect, but who lacks these other qualities. If, however, to these qualities he adds a high degree of efficiency in questioning, his success in teaching is so much the more a.s.sured.
PART III. EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY
CHAPTER XIX
CONSCIOUSNESS
=Data of Psychology.=--Throughout the earlier parts of the text, occasional reference has been made to various cla.s.ses of mental states, and to psychology, as the science which treats of these mental states, under the a.s.sumption that such references would be understood in a general way by the student-teacher. At the outset of a study of psychology as the science of mind, however, it becomes necessary to inquire somewhat more fully into the nature of the data with which the science is to deal. Mind is usually defined either by contrasting it with the concrete world of matter, or by describing its activities. It is said, for instance, that mind is that which feels and knows, which hopes, fears, determines, etc. By some, indeed, mind is described as merely the sum of these states of knowing and feeling and willing. The practical man says, however, _I_ know and feel so-and-so, and _my_ wish is so-and-so. Here an evident distinction is drawn between the knower, or conscious self, and his conscious activities. While, however, we may agree with the practical man that there is a mind, or self, that knows and wills and feels; yet it is evident that the self, or knower, can know himself only through his conscious states. It must be understood, therefore, that mind in its ultimate sense cannot be studied directly, but only the conscious states, or conditions of mind. Thus psychology becomes a study of mental states, or states of consciousness; and it is, in fact, frequently described as the science of consciousness.
=Nature of Consciousness.=--Our previous study of the nature of experience has shown that various kinds of conscious states may arise in the mind, now the smell of burning cloth, now the sound of a ringing bell, now the feeling of bodily pain, now a remembered joy, now a future expectation or a resolution. Such a conscious state was seen, moreover, to represent on the part of the mind, not a mere pa.s.sive impression coming from some external source, but an active att.i.tude resulting in definite experience. It signifies, in other words, a power to react in a fixed way toward impressions, and direct our conduct in accordance with the resulting states of consciousness. Consciousness in the individual implies, therefore, that he is aware of phenomena as they are experienced, and is able to modify his behaviour accordingly.
=Types of Consciousness.=--Although allowable, from the standpoint of the learning process, to describe a conscious state as an att.i.tude of awareness in which the individual grasps the significance of an experience in relation to his own needs; it must be recognized that not all consciousness manifests this meaningful quality, or this relation to a felt aim, or end. While lying, for instance, in a vague, half-awake state, although one is conscious, the mental condition is quite devoid of the meaningful quality referred to, and entirely lacks the feeling of reaction, or of mental effort. In this case there is no distinct reference to the needs of the self, and a lack of that focusing of attention necessary to give the consciousness a meaning and purpose in the life of the individual. All such pa.s.sive, or effortless, states of consciousness, which make up those portions of mental existence in which no definite presentation seems to hold the attention, although falling within the sphere of the scientific psychologist, may nevertheless be left out of consideration in a study of educational psychology. Learning involves apperception, and apperception is always giving a meaning to new presentations by actively bringing old knowledge to bear upon them. For the educator, therefore, psychology may be limited to a study of the definite states of consciousness which arise through an apperceiving act of attention, that is, to our states of experience and the processes connected therewith. For this reason, psychology is by some appropriately enough defined as the science of experience.
=Consciousness a Stream.=--Although we describe the data of psychology as facts, or states, of consciousness, a moment"s reflection will show that our conscious life is not made up of a number of mental states, or experiences, completely separated one from the other. Our consciousness is rather a unified whole, in which seemingly disconnected states blend into one continuous flow of conscious life. For this reason, consciousness is frequently compared to a stream, or river, moving onward in an unbroken course. This stream of consciousness appears as disjointed mental states, simply because the attention discriminates within this stream, and thus in a sense detaches different portions one from the other, or, as sometimes figuratively put, it creates successive waves on the stream of consciousness. A mental state, or experience, so-called, is such a discriminated portion of this stream of consciousness, and is, therefore, itself a process, the different processes blending in a continuous succession or relation to make up the unbroken flow of conscious life. For this reason psychology is frequently described as a study of conscious processes.