6

The Third Way of Learning
LEARNING TO THINK
Inquiry Learning

THE FAMOUS FRENCH SCULPTOR RODIN idealized thinking in his bigger-than-life, chin-on-fist rendering of The Thinker. Our everyday language is full of references to thinking. We say “I need more time to think.” “Let me think that over.” “She is good at thinking on her feet.” What is thinking? Is asking questions a way of learning?

In this new era, overwhelmed as we often are by the sheer amount of information at our disposal, we often wonder if the information we have is any good. In addition to acquiring information, we need to evaluate it and decide what to do with it. If the second way of learning is about processing and remembering information, the third way of learning is about criticizing information, transforming it, and using it. This is done by asking a lot of questions, and the learning process is commonly referred to as inquiry.

Richard Paul, a major leader in the international critical thinking movement, describes the nature of the work that is increasingly required in the workplace as intellectual work (1995, 113).¹ Intellectual work requires thinking. Effective thinkers in the workplace are the people who generate ideas, develop and analyze proposals, invent new products, devise new services, suggest quality improvements, or sift through the information flowing through the organization to distinguish sense from nonsense.

Because it is customary to define learning as remembering facts, we sometimes forget that asking questions is actually a way of learning. In fact thinking, as a systematic way of asking the right questions, may be the oldest way of learning.

Unlike cognitive psychology, with its rather recent origins, efforts to understand thinking have their roots in classical antiquity. Philosophy, as a way of thinking about thinking, preceded science by more than two thousand years, and many of the guidelines used by effective thinkers today go back to Plato and Aristotle. Modern efforts to define and measure critical thinking were initiated by Edward Glaser (1941),² and much of our understanding of creative thinking relies on the more recent theories of J.P. Guilford (1986)³ and E. Paul Torrence (1995)⁴.

LEARNING THROUGH INQUIRY
Thinking About Thinking

What is thinking and why is inquiry a way of learning? The random thoughts that pass through our heads as we shower or drive along the highway are called nondirected thinking, which is different from purposeful directed thinking (Halpern, 1984).⁵ Directed thinking includes asking questions, analyzing and making arguments, identifying reasons, formulating hypotheses, seeking and weighing evidence, distinguishing facts from opinions, judging the credibility of sources, classifying data, making definitions, using analogies, making value judgments, and generating creative ideas. Directed thinking also involves certain habits of mind, such as being well informed and open minded, considering opposing viewpoints, respecting evidence, suspending judgment, tolerating ambiguity, being curious and skeptical, and revering the truth (Ennis, 1987).⁶

Three types of thinking are especially important in organizational settings: critical thinking, creative thinking, and dialogical thinking.

• Critical thinking has been defined as “judging the authenticity, worth, or accuracy of something, such as a piece of information, a claim or assertion, or sources of data” (Beyer, 1985, 19).⁷ Critical thinking focuses on the set of reasons set forth as the justification for an argument (Kurfiss, 1988, 2).⁸

• Creative thinking is “thinking guided—indeed driven—by a desire to seek the original. It involves mobility; it revels in exploration; it requires flexibility; it honors diversity” (Beyer, 1985, 33).⁹ Instead of following rules, creative thinkers break them. Creative thinking usually results in creative products or services, inventions, or new processes.

• Dialogical thinking involves being able to evaluate different points of view and frames of reference and to see both sides of an argument (Paul, 1987, 128).¹⁰ Through dialogical think-ing—a kind of role playing of another person’s thinking—we are able to enter opposing arguments and viewpoints, thereby examining the strengths and weaknesses of our own thinking.

Learning through inquiry is a way of learning that proceeds by asking questions. You may have encountered it in school settings under the vague name of “discussion” or experienced it in science labs. It sounds easy enough—just asking questions—but it is the type, content, and sequencing of questions that are important. There is an art of inquiry, and it is learned best by actually engaging in asking questions under expert guidance. Usually this is done in groups, but sometimes it is practiced under individual supervision. Above all, practice is important. You learn inquiry by actually asking questions.

Some people say that it is impossible to improve one’s thinking skills because thinking is mainly a matter of intelligence. Evidence is mounting, however, for the view that intelligence and thinking ability are not the same thing (Nickerson, et. al., 1985).¹¹ “Intelligence relates more to the raw power of one’s mental equipment. Raw power of intelligence is one thing, the skilled use of it is something else” (44).¹² Researchers have come to see that thinking involves other important elements besides intelligence, including knowledge (the subject one is thinking about), operations (the steps and processes used), and dispositions (attitudes or habits of mind about thinking). All can be improved through learning (Beyer, 1985, 20, 25).¹³

To master the art of inquiry as a way of learning, the first step is to learn more about critical, creative, and dialogical thinking, so that you know what questions to ask and how to ask them.

ASKING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS
Critical Thinking

We are challenged to do critical thinking when we encounter written or spoken efforts to present a point of view, such as a report, plan, proposal, or position paper. The point of view is often buried in a lot of information and is sometimes disguised, therefore, as “just the facts.” You can learn to be a more effective critical thinker by examining any expressed point of view for these key elements and by asking these questions:

• Assertions. What assertion is being made? An assertion is a statement that states positively something to be true (Nicker-son, 1986, 35).¹⁴ Look first for the assertions. What are they? What do you want to ask about them?

• Opinions and Beliefs. Is this assertion an opinion or belief (20)?¹⁵ An example of an opinion is “Pepsi tastes better than Coke.” An opinion is a matter of taste. Nothing will settle this dispute. A belief, on the other hand, can be supported by evidence. If someone says, “More people in Ohio prefer Pepsi to Coke,” it is possible to gather evidence (for example, through a consumer survey) to support the belief. Ask yourself: What kinds of assertions are you examining?

• Warranted Beliefs. Can the belief be supported? Warranted beliefs have evidence to back them up. A belief with a lot of evidence is sometimes called a factual statement (Schwarze and Lape, 1997, 49–50).¹⁶ When the belief corresponds to a state of affairs and there is good evidence for it, we are more likely to believe it. That is why it is called a belief. Ask yourself: What is the evidence?

• Arguments. What is the argument? An argument is not just a verbal disagreement. In a technical sense, arguments are statements (assertions) constructed so as to support a conclusion (Nickerson, 1986, 68).¹⁷ The purpose of an argument is to convince. Ask yourself: What argument is being built here, to convince me of what?

• Conclusions. What is the conclusion? The first part of an argument to look for is in fact the last part, the conclusion. Conclusions are the part of the argument that the maker of the argument wants you to believe. Descriptive conclusions are statements about a present situation. Prescriptive conclusions are statements about what ought to be done (Browne and Keeley, 1994, 16).¹⁸ Reasonable people often disagree about the current state of affairs and what ought to be done about it.

• Premises. What are the premises of this argument? Premises are the statements that provide evidence, the facts and figures to support the conclusion (Nickerson, 1986, 36).¹⁹ Premises are also debatable because they aren’t just facts, they are arrangements of evidence. Sometimes the “facts” are not really true, and other important facts may have been ignored.

• Assumptions. What are the assumptions behind the argument? Assumptions are statements that people already believe and are obvious, or they are statements that no one has questioned (Nickerson, 1986, 36).²⁰ Assumptions are dangerous because they are often used as evidence and often go unchallenged or unidentified. Look for unexamined assumptions.

As you become more skilled at finding the argument, you will notice four kinds:

• Inductive arguments are bottom-up arguments built systematically from evidence. If you bite into a green apple and it is sour, you form a hypothesis: Maybe green apples are sour. If you check out a lot of green apples and they are all sour you are ready to draw a conclusion: Green apples are sour (Corbett, 1991, 11–46).²¹ Most scientific research uses inductive arguments.

• Deductive arguments are top down arguments that have an inner logic. They begin with what looks like a conclusion: All hard green apples are sour. You are offering me a hard green apple, therefore, it must be sour. The new conclusion has been reasoned out from the premise; it is a logical conclusion.

• Legal arguments are the kind used in courtrooms. There is a claim (my client is innocent) and a lot of disputed evidence. A claim is not absolute, so it can be established or rebutted, but in legal arguments we usually find degrees of proof, not certainty. That is why juries disagree. In these arguments you look for argued probabilities (Corbett, 1991, 42–45).²²

• Analogies are comparisons, and arguments that use analogies draw their strength from the similarities of the things being compared. For example, the argument might be made that being a good manager is like being a good parent. The argument works to the extent that similarities exist, but the analogy breaks down (as all analogies do) when crucial differences are made clear (Corbett, 1991, 21–23).²³ Ask yourself: How well does this analogy hold up?

As you conduct your inquiry by using the skills of an effective critical thinker and looking for the kinds of arguments being used, you can also watch for key problem areas addressed by critical thinkers, such as the following:

• Definitions. Sometimes people who are putting forth or discussing a report or proposal have not used clear definitions. The participants are not talking about the same thing, although they may think they are. You can ask for clear working definitions for the purposes of discussion.

• Language. Language is used in different ways—sometimes precisely, sometimes metaphorically. It is important to know how language is being used, and for meanings to be as clear as possible. Note how meanings get confused when someone says:

“He cooks carrots and peas (pees) in the same pot.”

Does he cook two vegetables, or does he cook one vegetable in a pot that he also uses for urination (Halpern, 1984, 27)?²⁴ You can look for confusion that grows out of ambiguous or imprecise use of language and point this out.

• Categories. Ideas often need to be put into larger bundles called categories. The sorting and classifying of ideas is often necessary to discover what goes with what. Categories are not always known in advance; sometimes they emerge from the discussion. You can help establish and name categories, and then get the particulars in the right places. This often involves making lists.

• Relationships. Clear thinkers note how one idea or category of ideas is related to another. Can the ideas be put into a matrix or web? Is the relationship among the ideas causal, spatial, temporal, linear, circular, or spiral? Because participants in an inquiry are often too close to the ideas to see the connections, you can ask about these relationships. Sometimes it helps to make drawings that chart the relationships of ideas.

One additional tool that will help you sharpen your critical thinking is the ability to identify logical fallacies. There are certain hazards to avoid in critical thinking, and for some reason, people who are perhaps too eager to present their point of view tend to repeat common mistakes again and again (Corbett, 1991²⁵; Browne and Keeley, 1994²⁶; Nickerson, 1986²⁷). Some of these mistakes are:

• Ad hominem argument—attacking the person, not the idea; name-calling

• Association—attaching credit or discredit to an idea by associating it with a person or group

• Appeals—to authority, tradition, or numbers for support

• Stereotyping—using labels and “boxes” to avoid more careful examination

• Glittering generalities—employing sophisticated jargon or fancy phrases that cloud understanding

• Equivocation—changing the meaning of a term as the discussion proceeds

• Begging the question—restating the same conclusion rather than examining the argument (not to be confused with “calling into question”)

• Red herring—changing the subject to alter the course of the discussion

• False dilemma—setting up only two alternatives when there may be more

• Simple explanation—failing to recognize or give credit to rival explanations

• Selective use of evidence—gathering and using only the evidence that supports a position while avoiding contrary evidence

• Overgeneralization—concluding too much from limited evidence

• Hasty closure—jumping to conclusions

• Seeking the perfect solution—rejecting partial solutions, when these may be the best available

GETTING BRIGHT IDEAS
Creative Thinking

Creativity is a complex matter and not something that can be established in an ongoing way by participating in a few workshop activities. You can, however, learn about creative thinking and become better at it through sustained practice. The first step is to get a better grasp of what creativity is.

Some of the earliest studies of creativity stressed inherited genius (Weisberg, 1993).²⁸ Modern theories of creativity build on the work of J.P. Guilford (1986, 41–50),²⁹ who suggested that certain factors are associated consistently with creativity, and that to some extent these can be learned and developed. Guilford named and described these factors:

• Sensitivity to problems—ability to notice problems and opportunities for creativity

• Fluency of ideas—the number and complexity of ideas produced, particularly ideas that go off in new directions

• Flexibility—ability to alter one’s mental set and make transformations of one thing into another

• Originality—uniqueness of response compared to the typical response of others

• Redefinitions—ability to redefine something and change its meaning

Guilford and his followers also added at a later time the idea of elaboration, the ability to work out the details of the original idea (Baer, 1993, 14).³⁰

You can notice people who appear to exhibit behavior that matches these factors, and you can monitor your own thinking by asking yourself to look for creative opportunities, to let your creative ideas flow, to be more flexible and original, and to allow yourself to see things in new ways.

The creative process is often presented as a series of steps. Drawing on the work of others in the field, University of Chicago psychologist Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi (1996, 79–80)³¹ suggests that the following steps can usually be observed:

• Preparation—becoming immersed in a set of problematic issues that are interesting and arouse curiosity

• Incubation—the “aha!” moment when the pieces of the puzzle fall together

• Evaluation—when the idea is examined further to see if it is worth pursuing

• Elaboration—working out the details

Csikszentmihalyi (1996)³² strongly supports the idea that creativity needs to result in creative outcomes or products, followed eventually by public recognition of their value. He places considerable emphasis on becoming well grounded in a domain or field as a prerequisite to creative insights. His view supports the old adage, “Creativity favors the well-prepared mind,” and he challenges the stereotype that creative people are weird or unbalanced, finding in his studies that they exhibit a combination of playfulness and discipline, the introvert and extrovert, the traditional and rebellious.

This understanding of creativity implies that to develop your powers of creative thinking, you will need to spend significant amounts of time on

• Preparation—becoming familiar enough with a field to be creative

• Acquaintance—learning about how the creative process works

• Involvement—working on concrete projects that stimulate and develop the creative process

APPRECIATING ANOTHER POINT OF VIEW
Dialogical Thinking

Dialogical thinking involves “dialogue or extended exchange between different points of view or frames of reference” so that we can assess the strengths and weaknesses of our thinking and experience the inner logic of alternative points of view (Paul, 1987, 292).³³

Richard Paul (1987, 258)³⁴ suggests that human beings have a tendency toward being egocentric thinkers, and that we all have “a side of us willing to distort, falsify, twist, and misinterpret.” To overcome these egocentric tendencies in our thinking, we need to work hard at becoming fair-minded thinkers (1987, 259–262).³⁵ At a minimum, this means being able to present sympathetically more than one side of an issue.

This sympathetic presentation can be achieved by role playing the thinking of another. What would those on the other side of this issue say? How would they attack this argument? The challenge is to become willing to enter sympathetically into opposing points of view and thereby recognize the strengths and weaknesses in one’s own viewpoint. In such a discussion, “people learn to experience the dialogical process as leading to discovery, not victory” (Paul, 1987, 138).³⁶

Dialogical thinkers learn to ask certain root questions that help people get beyond the content of a particular set of ideas to a deeper understanding of each other (Paul, 1987, 297).³⁷ You may wish to use some of the following questions drawn from a longer list developed by Richard Paul:

• How did you come to think this?

• Why do you believe this?

• What are some of the reasons why people believe this?

• Some people might object to your position by saying…. How would you answer them?

• What do you think of this contrasting view?

• What are the practical consequences of believing this?

• What would we have to do to put it in action?

Dialogical thinking enables you to loosen your emotional attachment to your own point of view. To practice dialogical thinking, try this technique: take the side that is losing the argument until it appears to be winning; then switch to the side that is losing and help them out. Become adept at stepping back and arguing both sides.

SEARCHING FOR ANSWERS
Framing Questions

Inquiry, as we have noted, is a way of learning that relies heavily on asking the right questions. But what are the right questions, and of all of the questions that could be asked, how should you go about selecting the right ones? Obviously, this takes experience, but as you can see from reading this chapter there is some theory and technique involved as well. You can learn to ask appropriate and incisive questions, the kind that move the inquiry toward better understanding and new insights.

If you find yourself in a structured situation, you can watch the facilitator to see what kinds of questions are being asked. Often this provides a good model for your own questions. Your role, of course, is to try to deal with the questions asked and use the exchange to sharpen your own thinking. As a participant, however, you also have the right and responsibility to ask questions. The kinds of questions you ask and the way you frame them will contribute greatly to the quality of the inquiry.

The art of asking questions has been explored in a useful book by J.T. Dillon (1990)³⁸ entitled The Practice of Questioning. Based on that work, we offer these guidelines.

• Choose your questions carefully. What will be learned through your question and how will it move the inquiry toward greater understanding?

• Phrase questions carefully. Questions will be answered differently depending on the words you use.

• Anticipate answers. Project likely answers and anticipate what you will do with them.

• Use open questions. Employ questions that make room for a wide range of responses and avoid questions that can be answered yes or no.

• Avoid dichotomous questions. Either/or questions do not foster inquiry. Ask questions that invite multiple alternatives.

• Use narrative questions. These questions invite a story rather than a verification, such as, “Tell me what happened when …” rather than, “Were you at home on Friday?”

Not all inquiry is done collectively. Sometimes you will be working alone, analyzing a particular report or proposal. But all of the guidelines, steps, and suggestions offered above still apply. Some people actually prefer to do their thinking alone and although some stimulation is sacrificed, the quality of outcome may increase with solitude. Remember, inquiry is actually a way of learning, and some of your best learning may occur when you are thinking things out on your own.

LESSONS LEARNED

Ten Things You Can Do to Maximize Your Learning

1. Acknowledge inquiry as a way of learning.

2. Realize that thinking skills can be learned and improved.

3. Look for assertions, conclusions, premises, and assumptions when you analyze arguments.

4. Watch for inductive, deductive, and legal arguments, and for arguments that use analogies.

5. Attend to definitions, precise use of language, categories of ideas, and relationships among ideas.

6. Identify and avoid logical fallacies.

7. Understand what creativity is and realize that it takes preparation.

8. Know and follow the stages of the creative process.

9. Try to understand both sides of an issue.

10. Learn to ask useful and appropriate questions.