Sunday, April 15, 2007

 
Inquiry Method of Instruction (IMI)

© Sanjay Mukherjee and Rukesh Patel

This paper has been written based on the work of Rukesh Patel and Sanjay Mukherjee. The duo collaborated in an effort to find a new method to adapt the principles of Socratic teaching and Dialogue Driven Learning to the teaching of Math in the eLearning environment. IMI is an attempt to formalize the more challenging of the two realms of applications of Dialogue-Driven Learning (DDL). Rukesh Patel has earlier written a paper describing and defining the applications and limitations of the approach.



Premises

1. L earning can occur through a constructive system of questioning.
2. Effective instruction can be imparted through conversation.
3. Conversation needs a definite personality to be effective.
4. The method of instruction must respect the learner’s ability.


Challenges

1. Learner interaction is critical to this method. The exposition cannot move ahead without learner input.
2. Since this method calls for a significant amount of branching, it may require more time than other methods to complete an ‘exposition’.


Methodology

This method of exposition integrates the Interactive Conversation Interface (ICI) with the Socratic Method. It starts by posing a lead-in question to the learner and then replying with a question for every answer. The focus is to capitalize on the learner’s deductive reasoning ability by asking logically leading questions and addressing any errors or contradictions in logic through constructive dialogue.

The dynamics of the conversation must create an environment of trust between the learner and the ‘personality’ of the course. We talk of personality because the concept of personality is fundamental to creating a conversational learning journey as opposed to a guided discovery or direct teaching approach.

Compelling contextual scenarios will form the basis of the conversation and the arguments, wherever the math skill under discussion naturally lends itself to exposition via a context. These contexts will run right through the exposition.

This method would take advantage of stacked responses wherein certain key learner responses will be remembered to provide accumulative feedback. This enhances the learner’s experience by maintaining the illusion of his/her awareness by enabling the course to respond to more than just the learner’s immediate responses.

Pattern of Dialogue

Question
Options

Question
Options

Question
Options


This pattern of dialogue encourages deductive thinking in the learner since each answer option is followed by another question with options requiring further logical thought on the initial foundation. Each answer option at any point in time initiates a distinct branch of reasoning. One of these serves as the main branch or the ideal thread of deductive logic and the other branches eventually lead back to this main thread of logic running through the exposition.


Learning Paths

There are two critical learning paths which define the level of the learner: Efficient Leaning Path (ELP) and Inefficient Learning Path (ILP). The ELP is for students on the fast track, while the ILP is for students who take their time in getting things into perspective. The language for each path is determined by these considerations thus ensuring a customized learning experience. iMi allows for a change of gears from one learning path to another which enables a student to fast-track his/her learning.

The method of branching is such that it eliminates the wrong answers till the learner arrives at the correct answer through reasoning. The focus is on learning and not teaching with the learner playing the central role.

The number of answer options for each question will vary between two and four depending on the question and its objective. The options would be of the following type:

‘Logically Correct, Arithmetically Correct’ answer
‘Logically Correct, Arithmetically Incorrect’ answer
‘Logically Incorrect, Arithmetically Correct’ answer
‘Logically Incorrect, Arithmetically Incorrect’ answer
‘No Answer’ answer

There will be a minimum of two options for any question and one of the options will be a correct answer.
‘Logically Correct, Arithmetically Correct’ answer
Choosing this option implies the learner has followed the logical path and arrived at the correct answer.

The branch that follows from this option will continue to build on the prime logic or the ideal thread.

‘Logically Correct, Arithmetically Incorrect’ answer
Choosing this option indicates that the learner has followed the logical path but has made a common arithmetical error due to oversight or lack of attention to detail. The branch that diverges from here will address the specific arithmetic error and lead back to the main thread.

‘Logically Incorrect, Arithmetically Correct’ answer
Choice of this option indicates the learner is making a known logical error and then computing the arithmetic correctly.

The branch that emanates from this option would address the flaw in logical reasoning by exploring the context and the learning problem and then lead back to the main thread.

Logically Incorrect Arithmetically Incorrect answer
This option can’t really be designed. It’s a random implausible answer that stands in for some flaw in the deductive logic of the learner or some other error.

The branch that emanates from here can try to ascertain the true nature of the error and lead the learner from there or try an alternative logic/question to lead the learner through the same essential problem.

The ‘No Answer’ answer
This is the 'How/I Don’t Know/You Tell Me' kind of option, which asks for an explanation without offering an answer. The difficulty of instruction here lies in the fact that the learner may be fatigued or has not been able to think through the logic or does not want to think through the logic. Essentially, in this kind of an option the learner has exercised the freedom not to think things through and therefore does not arrive at the correct answer on his/her own.

The conversation in this branch would present the problem in another light and continue with indirect questions, eventually leading back to the main thread.


Dynamics of Conversation

The combination of conversation and questioning aims to explore the logic behind a fact/concept and help the learner construct his/her way to arrive at it.

The nature and tone of the conversation aims to build a relation with the learner such that the learner understands that the course is treating the learner like an able participant or peer in the learning process.

There are two important aspects of the learning environment that this method focuses on:

1. Empathy with the learner
2. Understanding the connection between the context and the acquisition of knowledge


Empathy

The core belief here is that the learner has a consistent internal logic which can be led to discover things on its own starting from first principles.

The conversation must follow a style that a member of the target audience (in this case, seventh and eighth graders) uses naturally. The level, depth, or complexity of content/logic must also be adjusted to the learner’s level. This is crucial because a part of the progress of learning is hinged on the relationship of the learner with the course. And that relationship works only if the course is able to converse at the same level as the learner and convey the feeling that it understands the learner’s world.


Context and acquisition of knowledge

The conversation also illustrates the relevance of the learning to the learner’s immediate world. Therefore, the content of the conversation has two distinct purposes:

Relate or describe mathematical problems and solutions in real-world terms through contextual examples
Build rapport and mutual respect through a shared language


* * * * *
posted by Sanjay Maya 10:17 PM