Thoughts on teaching & educational technology

I introduced LoQ in my previous post, and promised to provide examples for each level — here they are.

Concerning the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the following questions would all be valid within the model:

Level 1

1. Where is Pearl Harbor?
2. When did the attack occur?
3. What did the Japanese attack?

Level 2

1. How did the Japanese keep the attack a secret?
2. Why did they attack Pearl Harbor?
3. How did the attack affect American public opinion?

Level 3

1. Would it have made more sense for the Japanese to invade Hawaii, rather than just attack it?
2. How would the results of the attack have differed if the American aircraft carriers had been in port at the time?

Notice that there are clear, single-sentence answers for the L1s, while the L2s require use of some of the L1 facts along with description & explanation, as well as additional information. Regardless of the differences, L1s and L2s do have answers — the former being clear & concrete; the latter somewhat less so. L3s, on the other hand, do not have clear answers — they may not have answers on which people can agree at all. You might think that such questions do not have a place in the classroom, especially on in which we’re trying to teach standards & content. I disagree. While there are not definite answers to L3 questions, valid arguments supported by evidence will go along way to constructing compelling cases — and along the way, students will have to demonstrate a keen knowledge and understanding of the facts & concepts in order to make any sense. So L3s, while naturally ambiguous and difficult to answer, are the very questions students need to be able to wrestle with most.

So there’s the model, in the form that I teach and use. In my next post I’ll describe how I teach it to my students, and will address the challenges they’ve had in working to become proficient with it.

jdg