The Socratic Method

This page has a very interesting description of the Socratic method of teaching. The basic idea is that the “teacher” only asks questions and all the answers have to come from the students. Fairly difficult topics can be taught this way and the students will be more involved and interested, and claim is that the students will understand the topic better than a traditional lecture.

The post has a transcript of a session where the author taught the concept of binary numbers (and binary arithmetic) to third grade students. It is really impressive.

There is also an interesting discussion at the end which is also worth reading. Excerpts:

Of course, you will notice these questions are very specific, and as logically leading as possible. That is part of the point of the method. Not just any question will do, particularly not broad, very open ended questions, like “What is arithmetic?” or “How would you design an arithmetic with only two numbers?” (or if you are trying to teach them about why tall trees do not fall over when the wind blows “what is a tree?”). Students have nothing in particular to focus on when you ask such questions, and few come up with any sort of interesting answer.

For the Socratic method to work as a teaching tool and not just as a magic trick to get kids to give right answers with no real understanding, it is crucial that the important questions in the sequence must be logically leading rather than psychologically leading. There is no magic formula for doing this, but one of the tests for determining whether you have likely done it is to try to see whether leaving out some key steps still allows people to give correct answers to things they are not likely to really understand. Further, in the case of binary numbers, I found that when you used this sequence of questions with impatient or math-phobic adults who didn’t want to have to think but just wanted you to “get to the point”, they could not correctly answer very far into even the above sequence. That leads me to believe that answering most of these questions correctly, requires understandingof the topic rather than picking up some “external” sorts of clues in order to just guess correctly.

Read the full article.

Why Aren’t Humans Furry? Because stone-age moms ignored ugly hairy babies

People often think that I make up some of the things that I tell them. Suppose I told you that the reason humans are the only hairless apes is because mothers in the stone age used to ignore ugly hairy babies and favor the pretty hairless ones if there needed to be a choice. Would you believe me? Well, a respectable, award-winning paper is saying so. And I have the links to prove it.

Harris’ paper describes Stone Age societies in which the mother of a newborn had to decide whether she had the resources to nurture her baby. The newborn’s appearance probably influenced whether the mother kept or abandoned it. An attractive baby was more likely to be kept and reared.

Harris’ theory is that this kind of parental selection may have been an important force in evolution. If Stone Age people believed that hairless babies were more attractive than hairy ones, this could explain why humans are the only apes lacking a coat of fur. Harris suggests that Neanderthals must have been furry in order to survive the Ice Age. Our species would have seen them as “animals” and potential prey. Harris’ hypothesis continues that Neanderthals went extinct because human ancestors ate them.

See full article. You can also see the original paper.

Recording your kid’s promises with a digital camera: Parent Hacks | Parenting tips

If your kids tend to forget their promises, this might help:

My husband came up with the idea of using the video function on our digital camera to record her promising not to get upset when we say “no” to candy later because we’re letting her have a piece early. It worked! We’ve started doing it other times, too. She loves the digital camera, and it reminds her about the whole “delayed gratification” thing.