Total Posts:22|Showing Posts:1-22
Jump to topic:

Teaching Children How to Think in School

Student4Life1975
Posts: 57
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/24/2015 10:14:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Everyone can sit and take in information, but very few people take the time to "learn how to learn" properly. By that I mean to teach children how to properly pay attention to someone or topic while interacting with a teacher. How to think while recognizing their biases and emotional responses. Also using more critical and logical thinking, 3rd person perspectives etc. Does anyone think this would be beneficial to instill at a young age?
there is no progress without compromise"
Ashlynjohnson
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 2:53:02 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think all brood require existence skill to onward their ability in http://www.ordercollegepapers.com... message and blame. This is wanted in any prospect job or relations.
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/19/2015 4:49:31 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think philosophy classes are the best for teaching critical thinking and logical analysis - especially if these classes take a more debate-orientated model.
Welfare-Worker
Posts: 1,173
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/23/2015 10:01:39 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Problem solving is the best vehicle for teaching critical thinking.
Left to their own, children are in the business of problem solving, it comes naturally.
A little guidance and direction goes a long way.

Debate can be good, but requires a foundation.

In order to teach problem solving, children must be permitted to make mistakes, that is the hard part.
You are not teaching them to build (whatever), you are teaching them how to work out the problems in building something. Big difference.

For young children 'teaching' should be considered as guidance - and not a transfer of knowledge.

Credit to John Holt and A.S. Neill.
sophie8
Posts: 3
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
7/31/2015 11:41:04 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
It is very important to teacgh children to think. Then they will not have problems with logics subjects. By the way, if there are some problems with writing, original academic works can be ordered at http://essaywritingstore.com....
Essay help service online
logan2
Posts: 5
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 1:11:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Children do a lot of growing and developing between the ages of 3 and 9. At 3, children are moving out of babyhood and into childhood. They have rich imaginations, may have strong fears, and love to play physically. As they move through the preschool ages and into school ages, they become more independent and confident about trying new things. Cognitive and language development change dramatically through these ages, as children go from asking the same "why?" questions repeatedly to being able to tell stories in sequential order and enjoying jokes and riddles. Whatever your role in a child"s life (teacher, parent, or other caregiver), there are some ways to make learning productive, fun, and enjoyable for the both of you.
Diqiucun_Cunmin
Posts: 2,710
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/24/2015 11:56:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
In Hong Kong, schools are teaching children to think and failing at that. Now they just teach children to think about a fixed set of question types (To what extent do you belief that ... is justified, Do the benefits of ... outweigh the cons, etc.)
The thing is, I hate relativism. I hate relativism more than I hate everything else, excepting, maybe, fibreglass powerboats... What it overlooks, to put it briefly and crudely, is the fixed structure of human nature. - Jerry Fodor

Don't be a stat cynic:
http://www.debate.org...

Response to conservative views on deforestation:
http://www.debate.org...

Topics I'd like to debate (not debating ATM): http://tinyurl.com...
garydubrall
Posts: 1
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/27/2015 8:14:50 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Its 2015 and my phone has access to the greatest store of information and knowledge ever assembled on this planet and we don't let kids use it. Minecraft is now used in more than 20,000 schools worldwide to teach the 3r's and cognitive abilities. Our kids are smarter than we are and we are just too arrogant to admit it. My granddaughters first grade reader has almost 500 words, mine in 1946 had 57.
TanzaFights
Posts: 20
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/15/2015 8:21:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Without other people shaping our views, how can we develop opinions of our own? I think mildly coaching children into believing things is just about acceptable until they are old enough to tell others what they think.
EXPLOSIONS
logical-master123
Posts: 288
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/23/2015 7:43:55 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 4:49:31 AM, Philocat wrote:
I think philosophy classes are the best for teaching critical thinking and logical analysis - especially if these classes take a more debate-orientated model.

Yeah.
Came back to the site :)
ithink-ithink
Posts: 11
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/30/2015 11:01:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
People's views are important for one's development of their own opinion, but it is also important that there is no singular strongest opinion being forced down one's throat. This is particularly easy to do in a classroom situation because a teacher is kind of like a preacher - an authority figure, even. Also our whole education system is based on scholastic thought, and therefore out-the-box thinking is discouraged, as the teacher needs to mark 'fairly' on the basis of what is 'known'.

From a very young age, my parents used to give me 1000 different answers to a question. It used to bug me as a child, but now I see that it very quickly and solidly ingrained in me the ability to (a) differentiate between many different sources/opinions and (b) form my opinion from them. By consistently making students believe a certain way is 'right' and no other alternatives should be investigated, you are limiting the children's ability to do that, potentially retarding them for life.

I suppose if you say 'a little' is ok, then that 'little' should really only be referring to things like the number line, and breaching 10, and mathematics until you enter tertiary education.
triangle.128k
Posts: 3,641
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 3:28:51 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
I agree, we really should teach children more on improving thinking and cognitive ability. Sadly, you'll notice the vast majority of public high schools don't emphasize this enough. What they do emphasize a lot though is strict memorization of facts. You go from class to class tired, only to absorb facts. The education style in many high schools is strictly totalitarian and is generally hostile towards critical thinking. There's nonsense of standardized testing, tests barely determine your intelligence, there's just so much boredom and no freedom and etc.

People learn to think if they go to a decent college. I really do believe we should teach children and teens more about thinking, and less about memorization.
ithink-ithink
Posts: 11
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 3:36:37 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 6/19/2015 4:49:31 AM, Philocat wrote:
I think philosophy classes are the best for teaching critical thinking and logical analysis - especially if these classes take a more debate-orientated model.

I think any subject is good. I don't think there's anything about philosophy that makes it special.
Philocat
Posts: 728
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/31/2015 7:00:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/31/2015 3:36:37 PM, ithink-ithink wrote:
At 6/19/2015 4:49:31 AM, Philocat wrote:
I think philosophy classes are the best for teaching critical thinking and logical analysis - especially if these classes take a more debate-orientated model.

I think any subject is good. I don't think there's anything about philosophy that makes it special.

I disagree. Philosophy encourages critical thinking unlike any other subject I have studied. Most other subjects, such as languages, humanities or sciences teach supposedly objective principles that are accepted without question, and then used to work out problems. But what philosophy does is it questions the principles themselves.
ithink-ithink
Posts: 11
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/1/2015 10:42:53 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/31/2015 7:00:28 PM, Philocat wrote:
At 10/31/2015 3:36:37 PM, ithink-ithink wrote:
At 6/19/2015 4:49:31 AM, Philocat wrote:
I think philosophy classes are the best for teaching critical thinking and logical analysis - especially if these classes take a more debate-orientated model.

I think any subject is good. I don't think there's anything about philosophy that makes it special.

I disagree. Philosophy encourages critical thinking unlike any other subject I have studied. Most other subjects, such as languages, humanities or sciences teach supposedly objective principles that are accepted without question, and then used to work out problems. But what philosophy does is it questions the principles themselves.

Then you weren't taught the other subjects properly, or you misunderstand the principles of academia. While our world is becoming more and more scholastic, it doesn't mean it is the subjects that are at fault. For example, while scientific *fact* is treated as fact, a good scientist will know that nothing can be completely proven, and so even our most fundamental facts may be incorrect. I never accept anything I learn without question, and I never studied philosophy formally.
MrsC
Posts: 2
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/5/2015 10:36:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 10:14:14 PM, Student4Life1975 wrote:
Everyone can sit and take in information, but very few people take the time to "learn how to learn" properly. By that I mean to teach children how to properly pay attention to someone or topic while interacting with a teacher. How to think while recognizing their biases and emotional responses. Also using more critical and logical thinking, 3rd person perspectives etc. Does anyone think this would be beneficial to instill at a young age?

I totally agree with you, but unfortunately the way the school system is set up, these ideas were never a priority. There needs to be a complete reworking of the system, and it does start at a young age. It requires more than just a classroom in which students are perceived as empty vessels, rather students need to be active throughout the learning process while they continually reflect on those processes, and this can only be done if they have a facilitator to help guide them through those processes.
danboy82
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2015 5:07:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/24/2015 10:14:14 PM, Student4Life1975 wrote:
Everyone can sit and take in information, but very few people take the time to "learn how to learn" properly. By that I mean to teach children how to properly pay attention to someone or topic while interacting with a teacher. How to think while recognizing their biases and emotional responses. Also using more critical and logical thinking, 3rd person perspectives etc. Does anyone think this would be beneficial to instill at a young age?

Most definitely. Great teachers empathize, but teaching students to view the world from a third person perspective is always an important goal.
Dan
danboy82
Posts: 7
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
11/7/2015 5:09:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Children need to learn critical thinking skills from a younger age, especially given our complex world. But also, they need some formative years of acquiring information as well. I think they need to go through the three phases: acquisition, meaning-making and transfer of knowledge.
Dan
SkyLeach
Posts: 206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:30:28 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
Game theoretic models that take into account competitive debate and supporting argument as competitive motivators in education show promise.

For one resource on this, Martin Shubik discusses some of these models for educational systems in 'Game Theory and the Social Sciences'. Most of the book stresses the mathematical models, but there is a chapter on applications towards education.
Math is just another language, however one without analogy.

- http://arxiv.org...
SkyLeach
Posts: 206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
6/8/2016 12:52:29 PM
Posted: 6 months ago
At 11/1/2015 10:42:53 AM, ithink-ithink wrote:
At 10/31/2015 7:00:28 PM, Philocat wrote:
At 10/31/2015 3:36:37 PM, ithink-ithink wrote:
At 6/19/2015 4:49:31 AM, Philocat wrote:
I think philosophy classes are the best for teaching critical thinking and logical analysis - especially if these classes take a more debate-orientated model.

I think any subject is good. I don't think there's anything about philosophy that makes it special.

I disagree. Philosophy encourages critical thinking unlike any other subject I have studied. Most other subjects, such as languages, humanities or sciences teach supposedly objective principles that are accepted without question, and then used to work out problems. But what philosophy does is it questions the principles themselves.

Then you weren't taught the other subjects properly, or you misunderstand the principles of academia. While our world is becoming more and more scholastic, it doesn't mean it is the subjects that are at fault. For example, while scientific *fact* is treated as fact, a good scientist will know that nothing can be completely proven, and so even our most fundamental facts may be incorrect. I never accept anything I learn without question, and I never studied philosophy formally.

As a person who didn't learn philosophy until late in life, I would have considered this statement reasonable. In my late 20s and early 30s, however, I started an intense dive into philosophy. Now I read it as follows:

Conjectural displacement of guilt. Blame placed on improper education. This reinforces the counter-argument, not the statement itself. Passive aggressive suggestion that the opponent is failing to (or incapable of) understanding academia. Ephemeral inconsistency of definition of fact. A fact is unfalsifiable. Extrapolation cannot be proven in totality, but facts are always facts and axiomatic by application in scientific methodology. If more data is observed, facts do not change, only context for reasons of interpretation change (i.e. the experiment was flawed and so the data was flawed or the results miss-applied).

My own study of philosophy, especially this history of philosophy, has helped me reinforce my own critical thinking skills. It is reasonable to assume that it would help other students as well.

A lot of scientists have put a great deal of effort into claiming philosophy is useless, but they do so by calling out the antics of high-profile philosophers rather than looking in a mirror. The philosophies of science and mathematics are born of the same lineage.

One thing I am certain of is this: academics have become so afraid of the taint of being wrong that they are afraid to make attempts any longer. Science has suffered because of this. They need to stop the monkey behavior of fighting for status and let innovation back into research.

Remember, a PhD is a doctorate in... philosophy.
Math is just another language, however one without analogy.

- http://arxiv.org...