TYPES OF CLASSROOM EXERCISES
The exercises which teachers conduct
in their classrooms do not commonly involve a single
type of mental activity. It is true, however,
that certain lessons tend to involve one type of activity
predominantly. There are lessons which seek primarily
to fix habits, others in which thinking of the inductive
type is primarily involved, and still others in which
deductive thinking or appreciation are the ends sought.
As has already been indicated in the discussion of
habit, thinking, and appreciation in the previous
chapters, these types of mental activity are not to
be thought of as separate and distinct. Habit
formation may involve thinking. In a lesson predominantly
inductive or deductive, some element of drill may
enter, or appreciation may be sought with respect
to some particular part of the situation presented.
These different kinds of exercises, drills, thinking
(inductive or deductive), and appreciation are fairly
distinct psychological types.
In addition to the psychological types
of exercises mentioned above, exercises are conducted
in the classroom which may be designated under the
following heads: lecturing, the recitation lesson,
examination and review lessons. In any one of
these the mental process involved may be any of those
mentioned above as belonging to the purely psychological
types of lessons or a combination of any two or more
of them. It has seemed worth while to treat briefly
of both sorts of lesson types, and to discuss at some
length, lecturing, about which there is considerable
disagreement, and the additional topic of questioning,
which is the means employed in all of these different
types of classroom exercises.
The Inductive Lesson.
It has been common in the discussion of the inductive
development lesson to classify the stages through which
one passes from his recognition of a problem to his
conclusion in five steps. These divisions have
commonly been spoken of as (1) preparation; (2) presentation;
(3)comparison and abstraction; (4) generalization;
and (5) application. It has even been suggested
that all lessons should conform to this order of procedure.
From the discussions in the previous chapters, the
reader will understand that such a formal method of
procedure would not conform to what we know about mental
activity and its normal exercise and development.
There is some advantage, however, in thinking of the
general order of procedure in the inductive lesson
as outlined by these steps.
The step of preparation has to do
with making clear to the pupil the aim or purpose
of the problem with which he is to deal. It is
not always possible in the classroom to have children
at work upon just such problems as may occur to them.
The orderly development of a subject to be taught
requires that the teacher discover to children problems
or purposes which may result in thinking. The
skill of the teacher depends upon his knowledge of
the previous experiences of the children in the class
and his skill in having them word the problem which
remains unsolved in their experience in such a way
as to make it attractive to them. Indeed, it
may be said that children never have a worthy aim
unless it is one which is intellectually stimulating.
A problem exists only when we desire to find the answer.
The term “presentation”
suggests a method of procedure which we would not
want to follow too frequently; that is, we may hope
not simply to present facts for acceptance or rejection,
but, rather, we want children to search for the data
which they may need in solving their problem.
From the very beginning of their school career children
need, in the light of a problem stated, to learn to
utilize all of the possible sources of information
available. Their own experience, the questions
which they may put to other people, observations which
they may undertake with considerable care, books or
other sources of information which they may consult,
all are to be thought of as tools to be used or sources
of information available for the solution of problems.
It cannot be too often reiterated that it is not simply
getting facts, reading books, performing experiments,
which is significant, but, rather, which of these
operations is conducted in the light of a problem clearly
conceived by children.
The step of presentation, as above
described, is not one that may be begun and completed
before other parts of the inductive lesson are carried
on. As soon as any facts are available they are
either accepted or rejected, as they may help in the
solution of the problem; comparisons are instituted,
the essential elements of likeness are noticed, and
even a partial solution of the problem may be suggested
in terms of a new generalization. The student
may then begin to gather further facts, to pass through
further steps of comparison, and to make still further
modifications of his generalization as he proceeds
in his work. At any stage of the process the
student may stop to apply or test the validity of
a generalization which has been formed. It is
even true that the statement of the problem with which
one starts may be modified in the light of new facts
found, or new analyses instituted, or new elements
of likeness which have been discovered.
In the conduct of an inductive lesson
it is of primary importance that the teacher discover
to children problems, the solutions of which are important
for them, that he guide them in so far as it is possible
for them to find all of the facts necessary in their
search for data, that he encourage them to discuss
with each other, even to the extent of disagreeing,
with respect to comparisons which are instituted or
generalizations which are premature, and above all,
that he develop, in so far as it is possible, the
habit of verifying conclusions.
The Deductive Lesson. The interdependence
of induction and deduction has been discussed in the
chapter devoted to thinking. The procedure in
a deductive lesson is from a clear recognition of the
problem involved, through the analysis of the situation
and abstraction of the essential elements, to a search
for the laws or principles in which to classify the
particular element or individual with which we are
dealing, to a careful comparison of this particular
with the general that we have found, to our conclusion,
which is established by a process of verification.
Briefly stated, the normal order of procedure might
be indicated as follows: (1) finding the problem;
(2) finding the generalization or principles; (3)
inference; (4) verification. It is important
in this type of exercise, as has been indicated in
the discussion of the inductive lesson, that the problem
be made clear. So long as children indulge in
random guesses as to the process which is involved
in the solution of a problem in arithmetic, or the
principle which is to be invoked in science, or the
rule which is to be called to mind in explaining a
grammatical construction, we may take it for granted
that they have no very clear conception of the process
through which they must pass, nor of the issues which
are involved. In the search for the generalization
or principle which will explain the problem, a process
of acceptance and rejection is involved. It helps
children to state definitely, with respect to a problem
in arithmetic, that they know that this particular
principle is not the one which they need. It
is often by a process of elimination that a child can
best explain a grammatical construction, either in
English or in a foreign language. Of course the
elimination of the principle or law which is not the
right one means simply that we are reducing the number
of chances of making a mistake. If out of four
possibilities we can immediately eliminate two of
them, there are only two left to be considered.
After children have discovered the generalization
or principle involved, it is well to have them state
definitely the inference which they make. Just
as in the inductive process we pass almost immediately
from the step of comparison and abstraction to the
statement of generalization, so in the deductive lesson,
when once we have related the particular case under
consideration to the principle which explains it, we
are ready to state our inference. Verification
involves the trying out of our inference to see that
it certainly will hold. This may be done by proposing
some other inference which we find to be invalid,
or by seeking to find any other law or principle which
will explain our particular situation. Here again,
as in the inductive lesson, the skillful teacher makes
his greatest contribution by having children become
increasingly careful in this step of verification.
Almost any one can pass through the several stages
involved in deductive thinking and arrive at a wrong
conclusion. That which distinguishes the careful
thinker from the careless student is the sincerity
of the former in his unwillingness to accept his conclusions
until they are verified.
The Drill Lesson. The drill
lesson is so clearly a matter of fixing habits that
little needs to be added to the chapter dealing with
this subject. If one were to attempt to give
in order the steps of the process involved, they might
be stated as follows: (1) establishing a motive
for forming the habit; (2) knowing exactly what we
wish to do, or the habit or skill to be acquired;
(3) recognition of the importance of the focusing
of attention during the period devoted to repetitions;
(4) variation in practice in order to lessen fatigue
and to help to fix attention; (5) a recognition of
the danger of making mistakes, with consequent provision
against lapses; (6) the principle of review, which
may be stated best by suggesting that the period between
practice exercises may only gradually be lengthened.
Possibly the greatest deficiency in
drill work, as commonly conducted, is found in the
tendency upon the part of some teachers to depend upon
repetition involving many mistakes. This is due
quite frequently to the assignment of too much to
be accomplished. Twenty-five words in spelling,
a whole multiplication table, a complete conjugation
in Latin, all suggest the danger of mistakes which
will be difficult to eliminate later on. The
wise teacher is the one who provides very carefully
against mistakes upon the part of pupils. He assigns
a minimum number of words, or a number of combinations,
or a part of a conjugation, and takes care to discover
that children are sure of themselves before indulging
in that practice which is to fix the habit.
In much of the drill work there is,
of course, the desirability of gaining in speed.
In this field successful teachers have discovered that
much is gained by more or less artificial stimuli which
seem to be altogether outside of the work required
to form a habit. In drill on column addition
successful work is done by placing the problem on the
board and following through the combinations by pointing
the pointer and making a tap on the board as one proceeds
through the column. Concert work of this sort
seems to have the effect of speeding up those who
would ordinarily lag, even though they might get the
right result. The most skillful teachers of typewriting
count or clap their hands or use the phonograph for
the sake of speeding up their students. They have
discovered that the same amount of time devoted to
typewriting practice will produce anywhere from twenty-five
to one hundred per cent more speed under such artificial
stimulation as they were in the habit of getting merely
by asking the students to practice. These experiences,
of course, suggest that drill work will require an
expenditure of energy and an alertness upon the part
of teachers, and not merely an assignment of work
to be done by pupils.
Appreciation Lesson. The work
which the teacher does in securing appreciation has
been suggested in a previous chapter. It will
suffice here briefly to state what may be thought
of as the order of procedure in securing appreciation.
It is not as easy in this case to state the development
in terms of particular steps or processes, since, as
has already been indicated in the chapter on appreciation,
the student is passive rather than active, is contemplating
and enjoying, rather than attacking and working to
secure a particular result. The work of the teacher
may, however, be organized around the following heads:
(1) it is of primary importance that the teacher bring
to the class an enthusiasm and joy for the picture,
music, poetry, person, or achievement which he wishes
to present; (2) children must not be forced to accept
nor even encouraged to repeat the evaluation determined
by teachers; (3) spontaneous and sincere response
upon the part of children should be accepted, even
though it may not conform to the teacher’s estimate;
(4) children should be encouraged to choose from among
many of the forms or situations presented for their
approval those which they like best; (5) the technique
involved in the creation of the artistic form should
be subordinated to enjoyment in the field of the fine
arts; (6) throughout, the play spirit should be predominant,
for if the element of drudgery enters, appreciation
disappears.
Teachers who get good results in appreciation
secure them mainly by virtue of the fact that they
have large capacity for enjoyment in the fields which
they present to children. A teacher who is enthusiastic,
and who really finds great joy in music, will awaken
and develop power of appreciation upon the part of
his pupils. The teacher who can enter into the
spirit of the child poetry, or of the fairy tale, will
get a type of appreciation not enjoyed by the teacher
who finds delight only in adult literature. It
is of the utmost importance to recognize the fact
that children only gradually grow from an appreciation
or joy in that which is crude to that which represents
the highest type of artistic production. It is
important to have children try themselves out in creative
work; but the influence of a teacher may be far greater
than that of the attempts of the children to produce
in these fields.
Lecturing. Among the various
types of methods used in teaching there is probably
no one which has received such severe criticism as
the so-called lecture method. The result of this
criticism has been, theoretically at least, to abolish
lecturing from the elementary school and to diminish
the use of this method in the high school, although
in the colleges and universities it is still the most
popular method. Although it is true that the
lecture method is not the best one for continual use
in elementary and high school, still its entire disuse
is unfortunate. So is its blind use by those
who still adhere to the old ways of doing things.
The chief criticisms of the method
are, first, that it makes of the learner a mere recipient
instead of a thinker; second, that the material so
gained does not become part of the mental life of the
hearers and so is not so well remembered nor so easily
applied as material gained in other ways; third, that
the instructor has no means of determining whether
his class is getting the right ideas or wholly false
ones; fourth, the method lacks interest in the majority
of cases. Despite the truth of these criticisms,
there are occasions when the lecture or telling method
is the best one in fact the only one that
can accomplish the desired result.
First, the lecture method may sometimes
take the place of books. Often, even in the elementary
school, there is need for the children to get facts, information
in history or geography or literature, and
the getting of these facts from books would be too
difficult or too wasteful. In such a case telling
the facts is certainly the best way to give them.
A teacher in half a period can give material that it
might take the children hours to find. By telling
them the facts, he not only saves waste of time, but
also retains the interest. Very often discouragement
and even dislike results from a prolonged search for
a few facts. Of course in the higher schools,
when the material to be given is not in print, when
the professor is the source of certain theories, methods,
and explanations, lecturing is the only way for students
to get the material. It must be borne in mind
that human beings are naturally a source of interest,
particularly to children, and therefore having the
teacher tell, other things being equal, will make a
greater impression than reading it in a book.
Second, the lecture method is valuable
as a means of explanation. Despite the fact that
the material given may be adapted to the child’s
level of development, still it often happens that it
is not clear. Then, instead of sending the child
to the same material again, an explanation by teacher
or fellow pupil is much better. It may be just
the inflection used, or the choice of different words,
that will clear up the difficulty.
Third, the telling method should be
used for illustration. Very often when illustration
is necessary the lecture method is supplemented by
illustrative material of various types objects,
experiments, pictures, models, diagrams, and so on.
None of this material, however, is used to its best
advantage unless it is accompanied by the telling method.
It is through the telling that the essentials of the
illustrative material gain the proper perspective.
Without such explanation some unimportant detail may
focus the attention and the value of the material be
lost. It has been customary to emphasize the
need for and the value of this concrete illustrative
material. Teachers have felt that if it was possible
to have the actual object, it should be obtained; if
that was not possible, why then have pictures, but
diagrams and words should only be used as a last resort.
There can be no doubt as to the value of the concrete
material, especially with little children but
its use has been carried to an extreme because it
has been used blindly. For instance, sometimes
the concrete material because of its general inherent
interest, or because of its special appeal to some
instinct, attracts the attention of the child in such
a way that the point which was to be illustrated is
lost sight of. Witness work in nature study in
the lower grades, and in chemistry in the high school.
The concrete material may be so complex that again
the essential point is lost in the mass of detail.
No perspective can be obtained because of the complexity witness
work with principles of machines in physics and the
circulation of the blood in biology. Sometimes
the diagram or word explanation with nothing of the
more concrete material is the best type of illustration.
A fresh application of the principle or lesson by the
teacher is another means of illustration and one of
the best, for it not only broadens the student’s
point of view and gives another cue to the material,
but it may also make direct connection with his own
experience. Illustrations in the book often fail
to do this, but the teacher knowing his particular
class can make the application that will mean most.
Telling a story or incident is another way of illustration.
The personal element is nearly always present in this
means, and is a valuable spur to interest.
Illustrations of all kinds, from the
concrete to the story form, have been grossly misused
in teaching, so that to-day teachers are almost afraid
to use any. The difficulty has been that illustrations
have been used as a means of regaining wandering attention.
It has been the sugar-coating. The illustration,
then, has become the important thing and the material
nonimportant. The class has watched the experiment
or listened to the story, but when that was over the
attention was gone again. Illustrations should
not be the means of holding the attention; that is
the function of the material itself. If the lesson
cannot hold the interest, illustrations are worse
than useless. Illustrations, then, of all kinds
must be subordinated to the material they
are only a means to an end, and that end is a better
understanding of the material. Illustrations,
further, should have a vital, necessary connection
with the point they are used to make clearer.
Illustrations that are dragged in, that are not vitally
connected with the point, are entirely out of place.
If illustrations always truly illustrated, then children
would not remember the illustration and forget the
point, for remembering the illustration they would
be led directly to the point because of the closeness
of the connection.
Fourth, telling or lecturing is the
best way to get appreciation. This was discussed
in the chapter on appreciation, so need only be mentioned
here. The interpretation by the teacher of the
character, the picture, the poem, the policy, or what
not, not only increases the understanding of the listener,
but also calls up feeling responses. It is in
this telling that the personality of the teacher,
his experiences, his ideals, make themselves felt.
One can often win appreciation of and allegiance to
the best in life by the use of the telling method in
the appropriate situations.
Fifth, the lecture method should sometimes
be used as a means of getting the desired mental attitude.
The general laws of learning emphasize the importance
of the mind’s set as a condition to readiness
of neurone tracts. Five or ten minutes spent
at the beginning of a subject, or a new section of
work, in introducing the class to it, may give the
keynote for the whole course. A whole period may
be profitably be spent this way. Not only will
the telling method used on such occasions give the
right emotional attitude towards a subject, but also
the right intellectual set as well.
It is evident then that the lecture
or telling method has its place in all parts of the
educational system, but its place should be clearly
and definitely recognized. The danger is not
in using it, but in using it at the wrong time, and
in overusing it. Bearing in mind the dangers that
adhere to its use, it is always well, whether the method
is used in grades or in college, to mix it with other
methods or to follow it by another method that will
do the things that the lecture method may have left
undone.
The Recitation Lesson. As has
been suggested in the opening of this chapter, the
recitation lesson is not a type involving any particular
psychological process. It is, rather, a method
of procedure which may involve any of the other types
of work already discussed. When the recitation
lesson means merely reciting paragraphs from the book
with little or no reference to problems to be solved
or skill to be developed, it has no place in a schoolroom.
When, however, the teacher uses the recitation lesson
as an exercise in which he assures himself that facts
needed for further progress in thinking have been secured,
or that habits have been established, or verbatim
memorization accomplished, this type of exercise is
justified. It is well to remember that the thought
process involved in the development of a subject, or
the solution even of a single problem, may extend over
many class periods. The recitation lesson may
be important in organizing the material which is to
be used in the larger thought whole. Again, this
type of exercise may involve the presentation of material
which is to be used as a basis for appreciation in
literature, in music, in art, in history, and the
like. The organization of experiences of children,
whether secured through observations, discussions,
or from books, around certain topics may furnish a
most satisfactory basis for the development of problems
or of the gathering of the material essential for their
solution. A better understanding of the conditions
which make for success in habit formation, in thinking,
and the development of appreciation, will tend to
eliminate from our schools that type of exercise in
which teachers ask merely that children recite to them
what they have been able to remember from the books
which they have read or the lectures which they have
heard.
The Examination and Review Lessons.
In the establishment of habits, the development of
appreciation, or the growth in understanding which
we seek to secure through thinking, there will be
many occasions for checking up our work. Successful
teaching requires that the habit that we think we
have established be called for and additional practice
given from time to time in order to be certain that
it is fixed. In like manner, the development
of our thought in any field is not something which
is accomplished without respect to later neglect.
We, rather, build a system of thought with reference
to a particular field or subject as a result of thinking,
and rethinking through the many different situations
which are involved. In like manner, in the field
of appreciation the very essence of our enjoyment
is to be found in the fact that that which we have
enjoyed we recall, and strengthen our appreciation
through the revival of the experience. The review
is, of course, most successful when it is not simply
going over the whole material in exactly the same
way. In habit formation it is often advisable
to arrange in a different order the stimuli which are
to bring the desired responses, for the very essence
of habit formation is found in the fact that the particular
response can be secured regardless of the order in
which they are called for. In thinking, as a subject
is developed, our control is measured by the better
perspective which we secure. This means, of course,
that in review we will not be concerned with reviving
all of the processes through which we have passed,
but, rather, in a reorganization quite different from
that which was originally provided.
The examination lesson is classified
here as of the same type as the review because a good
examination involves all that has been suggested by
review. The writer has no sympathy with those
who argue against examinations. The only proof
that we can get of the success or failure of our work
is to be found in the achievement of pupils. It
is not desirable to set aside a particular period
of a week devoted entirely to examinations, because
examinations in all subjects cannot to best advantage
be given during the same period. There are stages
in the development of our thinking, or in the acquiring
of skill, or in our understanding and appreciation
which occur at irregular intervals and which call
for a summing up of what has gone before, in order
that we may be sure of success in the work which is
to follow. It is, of course, undesirable to devote
a whole week to examinations on account of the strain
and excitement under which children labor. It
is entirely possible to know of the achievements of
children through examinations which have been given
at irregular intervals throughout the term. It
would be best, probably, never to give more than one
examination on any one day, and, as a rule, to devote
only the regular class period to such work. In
another chapter the discussion of more exact methods
of measuring the achievements of children will be
discussed at some length.
In all of the lesson types mentioned
above, one of the most important means employed by
teachers for the stimulation of pupils is the question.
It seems wise, therefore, to devote some paragraphs
to a consideration of questioning as determining skill
in teaching.
Questioning. The purpose
of a question is to serve as a situation which shall
arouse to activity certain nerve connections and thus
bring a response. Questions, oral or written,
are the chief tools used in schools to gain responses.
In some situations it is the only means a teacher
may have of arousing the response. Psychologically,
then, the value of the question must be judged by
the response.
Questions may be considered from the
point of view of the kind of response they call for.
Probably the most common kind of question is the one
that calls for facts as answers. It involves memory but
memory of a rote type. It does not require thinking.
All drill questions are of this type. The connections
aroused are definitely final in a certain order, and
the question simply sets off the train of bonds that
leads directly to the answer. Another type of
question involving the memory process is the one which
initiates recall, but here thought is active.
The answer cannot be gained in a mechanical way, but
selection and rejection are involved. The answer
is to be found by examining past experience, but only
in a thoughtful way. Questions which call for
comparison form another type. These may vary
from those which involve the comparison of sense material
to those which involve the comparison of policies
or epochs. Words, characters, plots, definitions,
plans, subjects everything with which intellectual
life deals is open to comparison. Comparison
is one of the steps in the process of reasoning, and
hence questions of this type are extremely important.
Then there are the questions which arouse the response
of analysis. These questions vary among themselves
according to the type of analysis needed, whether
piecemeal attention or analysis due to varying concomitants.
The former drives the thinker through gradual recognition
and elimination of the known elements to a consciousness
of the only partly known. The latter, by attracting
the attention to unvarying factors in the changing
situations, forces out the new and until then unknown
element. Some questions require judgment as a
response. The judgment may be one concerning
relationships, or concerning worth or value, or be
merely a matter of definition all questions
calling for criticism are of this type. In any
case this type of question involves the thought element
at its best. The question requiring organization
forms another type. There is no sharp line of
division between these types of questions. No
one of them should be used exclusively. Some
of them imply operations of a simple type as well
as the particular response demanded by that form.
For instance, some of the questions involving analysis
imply comparison and recalling. A judgment question
might call for all the simple processes noted above
and others as well. The responses then vary in
complexity and difficulty. The order of advance
in both complexity and difficulty of the response
is from the mere drill question to the judgment question.
Another type of question is the one
which desires appreciation as a response. This
question is one of the most difficult to frame, for
it must tend to inhibit the critical attitude and
by means of the associations it arouses or its own
suggestive power get the appreciative response.
Questions of this type often call for constructive
imagery as a means to the desired end. Some questions
are directive in their tendency. They require
as response an attitude or set of the mind. They
set the child thinking in this direction rather than
that. In a sense they are suggestive, but they
suggest the line of search rather than the response.
A final type of question is akin to the one just discussed the
question whose response is further questions.
Here again the response desired is an attitude, but
in this case it is more than an attitude, it is also
a definite response that shall come in the form of
questions. The questions of a good teacher should
result in students asking questions both of people
and of books. These last three types of questions
are perhaps the most difficult of all. Because
of their complexity and subtlety they often miss fire
and fail of their purpose. Properly handled they
are among the most powerful tools a teacher has.
The type of question used must vary, not only with
the particular group of children, and the type of
lesson, but also with the subject. Questions
that would be the best type in mathematics might not
be so good for an art lesson. The kinds of questions
used must be adapted to the particular situation.
Psychologically a question is valuable
not only in accordance with the kind of response it
gets, but also in proportion to the readiness of the
response. A question that is of such a character
that the response is hazy, stumbling, hesitating a
question that brings no clear-cut response because
the child does not understand what is wanted, is a
poor question. This does not at all mean that
the right response must always come immediately.
Some of the best questions are put with the intention
of forcing the child to realize that he can’t
answer that he doesn’t know.
If that type of response comes to that question, it
is the best possible answer. Nor need the whole
answer come immediately. For instance, in many
of the judgment questions the thinking process aroused
may take some time before the judgment is reached,
and meanwhile several partial answers may be given.
But if the question asked started the process, without
waste of time in trying to find out what it meant,
the question is good. With these explanations,
then, the second qualification of a good question
is that it secures the appropriate response readily.
In order to do this, these factors must be considered:
First, the principle of apperception must be recognized.
Every question must deal with material that is on
a level with the stage of development of the one questioned.
Not only so, but the question must connect somewhere
with the learner’s experience. This means
a recognition also of individual differences.
The question must also be couched in language that
can be understood easily by the one questioned.
To have to try to understand the language of the question
as well as the question, results in divided attention
and delayed responses. Second, the question should
be clear and definite. A question that has these
characteristics will challenge the attention of the
class. It is directed straight at the point at
issue, and no time will be lost in wondering what the
question means, or in trying two or three tentative
answers. Third, the younger the child, the simpler
the question must be. With little children, to
be good a question may involve only one idea, or relationship.
The amount involved in the question, its scope and
content, must be adapted to the mental development
of the learner. It is only a mature thinker who
can carry simultaneously two or three points of issue,
or possibilities. Fourth, the question to gain
a ready response must be interesting. Not only
must the lesson as a whole be interesting, but the
questions themselves must have the same quality.
Dull questions can kill an otherwise good lesson.
The form of the question is thus a big factor in gaining
a ready response. All the qualities which gain
involuntary attention can be used in framing an interesting
question novelty, exaggeration, contrast,
life, color, and so on.
The third point to be considered in
determining a good question is whether or not it satisfies
the demands of economy. This demand is a fair
one both from the standpoint of the best use of the
time at the disposal of the learner, and also from
the standpoint of the best means of gaining the greatest
development on the part of the learner in a given
time. The number of questions asked thus enters
in as a factor. When a teacher asks four or five
questions when one would serve the same purpose, she
is not only wasting time, but the child is not getting
the opportunity to do any thinking and therefore is
not developing. Recent studies on the actual
number of questions asked in a recitation point to
the conclusion that economy both of time and in development
is being seriously overlooked. Economy in response
may also be brightened by preserving a logical sequence
between questions. It is a matter of fact in
psychology that associations are systematized about
central ideas; it is also a fact that the set of the
mind, in this direction rather than that, is characteristic
of all work. Logical sequence, then, makes use
of both these facts both of the systematization
of ideas and of the mental attitude.
The fourth test of good questioning
is the universality of its appeal. Some questions
which are otherwise good appeal but to comparatively
few in the class. This, of course, means that
responses are being gained but from few. The
best questioning stimulates most of the class; all
members of the class are working. In order to
secure this result the questions must be properly
distributed over the class. The bright pupils
must not be allowed to do all the work; or, on the
other hand, all the attention of the teachers must
not be given to the dull pupils. Not only should
the questions be well distributed, but they must vary
according to the individual ability of the particular
child. This has already been emphasized in dealing
with readiness of response. Many a lesson has
been unsuccessful because the teacher gave too difficult
a question to a dull child, and while she was struggling
with him, she lost the rest of the class. The
reverse is also true, to give a bright child a question
that requires almost no thinking means that a mechanical
answer will be given and no further activity stimulated.
The extent to which all the class are mentally active
is one measure of a good question.
QUESTIONS
1. Give an example of a lesson
which you have taught which was predominantly inductive.
Show how you proceeded from the discovery of the problem
to your pupils to the solution attained.
2. What is involved in the “step”
of presentation?
3. Why may we not consider the
several “steps” of the inductive lesson
as occurring in a definite and mutually exclusive sequence?
4. In what respect is the procedure
in a deductive lesson like that which you follow in
an inductive lesson?
5. Show how verification is an
important element in both inductive and deductive
lessons.
6. Give illustrations of successful
drill lessons and make clear the reason for the degree
of success achieved.
7. What measures have you found
most advantageous in securing speed in drill work?
8. What are the elements which
make for success in an appreciation lesson?
9. Upon what grounds and to what
extent can lecturing be defended as a method of instruction?
10. What may be the relation
between a good recitation lesson and the solution
of a problem? Growth in power of appreciation?
11. For what purposes should
examinations be given? When should examinations
be given?
12. When are questions which call for facts justified?
13. Why are questions which call
for comparisons to be considered important?
14. Why is it important to phrase questions carefully?
15. Why should a teacher ask
some questions which cannot be answered immediately?
16. What criteria would you apply
in testing the questions which you put to your class?
17. Write five questions which
in your judgment will demand thinking upon some topic
which you plan to teach to your class.