JREF Education Resources

[athon]

As a result of TAM3, I've decided to accelerate my creation of a skepticism / critical thinking unit. I was originally going to get stuck into it just before I returned back to an Australian teaching job, as I could implement such a unit in a Queensland school easier than I could in a UK school.

However, I now see that the JREF has a niche for such resources and feel that it would be beneficial to create such a pool in cooperation with other forum educators. I believe that we can build a network of teaching tools, resources and lesson plans that is both flexible enough to compliment any suject or unit, and solid enough that a single (or series) unit could be made from the database.

To do this, I think we need some goals and a core of people who are willing to initially organise, collect the resources, and then are dedicated enough to arrange them in a manner that can be converted to a downloadable format to put up on the JREF webpage.

As a start, I could like people to do the following. Suggest what you would like to see in a critical thinking unit. Brainstorm ideas, methods, concepts...anything that would be of use in a database of resources. The age groups are irrelevant at this point, although differentiation will occur once a suitable pool has been collected.

Later I would appreciate a list of websites, text books, games, videos etc. that could be woven in. Lastly, a sizeable selection of worksheets, exams, question sheets and assessment pieces could be made which could either stand alone (applicable within nearly any subject or science unit) or incorporated in a single skepticism unit.

I know Kiless was interested in working with me in creating a unit on skepticism in anticipation of changes to the Western Australian education system. Any other teachers, from any country, would be most welcome to help us to build something that the JREF could use.

Let's get something started here, folks.

Athon

 

[H3LL]

Will you be looking at a lecture approach or a more interactive approach?

A favourite start for me is:

A Field Guide to Critical Thinking

 

[athon]

Will you be looking at a lecture approach or a more interactive approach?

A favourite start for me is:

A Field Guide to Critical Thinking

Purely resources at this point. How they are used is up to the educator using them. I'd like to see a unit plan that can be downloaded, with all notes and resources as references that can also be downloaded. For video files, they can eithe be linked to a site from which they can be purchased or the actual file itself linked for download. That way a teacher can copy the pages, convert them as they see fit into a format compatible with their school's curriculum, and find relevant texts etc. that will make up the unit. Making such things easily accessable will surely pave the way for more institutes to alter their curriculums to make way for skepticism and critical thinking in schools.

Usually new schools borrow old work plans and unit schemes from old schools. Critical thinking resources are too rare to be made into schemes, let alone state or national curriculums.

Small steps will slowly have big impacts.

Athon

 

[Colloden]

I’m not an educator, but I can do software if there’s any call for it. Not exactly what you’re looking for I know, but software’s what I do.

 

[Jeff Corey]

I'm in. A lot of stuff is free, we need a librarian.
Maybe a place where people offer links?

 

[athon]

I’m not an educator, but I can do software if there’s any call for it. Not exactly what you’re looking for I know, but software’s what I do.

Hey Colloden. Long time no see! Thanks for the offer; I'll take you up on the http writing once I have collected some suitable material, if that's ok? It will depend on how much material is collected...and at this rate, that will be a while.

But this will happen! Even if I have to go it alone...

Jeff, thanks for the assistance. I'm envisioning a link on the JREF (similar to the existing one, except with useful resources for a wider range of education bodies) which will have several unit plans / work schemes. They will be subsequently linked to assessment pieces, activity suggestions and worksheets, suggested books, texts and videos, useful websites etc. It would make a simple, one-stop site for educators who are interested in either creating a unit that fits their curriculum or simply grabbing some critical thinking resources for their already existing unit.

I'm aiming to have the basic framework ready after this half-term (I'm teaching at the moment, so have thin time to do a lot very quickly).

Athon
(oh, and for the mod' who made this a sticky...thanks!!)

 

[Dr Adequate]

It's quite easy to teach kids to dowse, and then to show them that they can't really. That should make quite a good lesson, I'd have thought, and teaches all sorts of things about subjectivity, bias, unconscious use of knowledge, how to conduct a double blind trial and why you must conduct a double-blind trial. That's a lesson for life.

What's the educationist's mantra? "I am told and I forget, I am shown, and I remember, I do and I understand."

If you don't know much about dowsing, I'm sure there are web resources, but here's an extract from an account of my own home experiments:

The present crop of New Agers prefer pendulum dowsing, and use it for getting all sorts of information: the crystal healer will use it for diagnosis, the psychic who "helps" (annoys) the police will use a pendulum to dowse over a map to locate the bodies of missing people; the crop-circle-ologist uses it for detecting alien presence, the chiropractor for detecting subluxations. There is a heartbreakingly large* community of people who have mistaken the anomalies in their digital cameras for a glimpse into an Unseen World. What finer tool than dowsing to investigate this "phenomenon" further?

The photos were taken at various locations, under various weather conditions, and some unusual shooting conditions. Because of that they can display themselves differently. You'll also see the Heart shaped Beings in the Snow chapter, and a chapter devoted to Babies. We've also included a chapter of Dowsing Questions and Answers Regarding some of the different Orbs.

--- www.orbsbybeans.com

Given all this enthusiasm, of course I had to try dowsing myself, though in doing so, you'll be surprised to learn, I risked falling into the clutches of the Prince Of Darkness and losing my immortal soul. One of the stranger laws of nature states that for every New Age guru, there is an equal but opposite religious fundamentalist, who is just as convinced that the touted miracle, from crystal healing to ouija boards, is a genuine supernatural phenomenon but caused by Satanic power. In the United States, indeed, there is an unholy alliance by which fundamentalists advertise the efficacity of the New Age, while denouncing it as Satanic, while the New Age produces supposed miracles which, by confirming the existence of Satan, increase the faith of the fundamentalist. In researching this chapter, for example, I have made some use of an article by one John Weldon, published by the Christian Research Institute (who knew?) entitled Dowsing: Divine Gift, Human Ability, Or Occult Power?. It is informative, well-written and occasionally witty, but its great fault is revealed in the title, which should have been Dowsing: Divine Gift, Human Ability, Occult Power, Or Just A Bunch Of Bleedin' Idiots With Forked Sticks?

This is by the by. I just wanted to warn you that if my head starts spinning round in later chapters, and I begin to vomit ectoplasm and grow horns, you must regard me as the first martyr to popular science writing.

Pendulum dowsing is easy, and almost anyone can do it, though you're most likely to be successful if, like me, you have a pronounced muscular tremor and are highly suggestible. First, you will need a pendulum; as I do not own a magical crystal pendant blessed by a guru, I used a bunch of keys tied to a bootlace. The method of using the pendulum is simplicity itself: you should ask the pendulum, out loud, any question with the answer "yes" or "no". More detailed information can be extracted by means of the scientific procedure known as "playing Twenty Questions".

It is of course the motion of the pendulum which gives the yes or no answer, usually by moving backwards and forwards for "yes" and side-to-side for "no" --- like nodding or shaking the head. Some people get different reponses, so my textbooks advise me to calibrate the pendulum by asking it questions, for example about my name, to which I know the answer. If you find anything funny about a grown man asking his front door key if he's called Jane --- go ahead and laugh. People laughed at Columbus, you know*. And at the Wright Brothers.

And also at Bozo the Clown.

The results of the experiment were, in any case, succesful: laugh that off if you will. There is something undeniably impressive about seeing a pendulum change the direction of its swing in response, seemingly, to a spoken question. After establishing my name, I went on to extract perfectly accurate information on geography, history, sport, and the French language. I also found that it gave a "nod" over full glasses of water, and a "shake of the head" for empty ones. This was most encouraging. Finally, I tested it by asking it ten question to which I didn't know the answers...

............

...Three out of ten is a fairly dismal record: but now that I know the answers, the pendulum can get ten out of ten! To summarise, rougly, the further results of my experiments, I found:

() The pendulum can only accurately provide answers which I already know. So I'm providing the answers, and not some supernatural force.
() The pendulum doesn't move when I have any sort of support for my wrist. So it's driven by my own muscular tremor and not by some supernatural force
() When I ask a question and look away from the pendulum for a while before glancing down at it, I find that it swings in a random direction, usually neither back and forwards nor side-to-side. So it's my eyes and judgement providing the guidance, and not some supernatural force.

* Because all digital cameras work in much the same way, and because there's a sucker born every minute.
* This is, of course, because he was wrong.

For more on testing dowsing, see the million dollar challenge forum and ask KRAMER on the JREF method of how to make water-dowsing properly double blind.

That's just one lesson, but as I said, I think it's a good one.

By the way, the extract above is from a book I'm trying to write, also for educational purposes, though more for adults than children. Could you let me know what you think? I know what I want to say, but not if I'm saying it well. I'm also trying to be funny --- it will be ghastly if I fail. And people don't know, do they --- how am I doing?

 

[Dr Adequate]

NB: aspirant literary critics should PM me so as not to derail this thread.

More thinks: I remember one poster likes to give kids horoscopes for the wrong months and rate them for accuracy. I can't remember who, though, but I do remember that the results are good.

Me, I'd have divided them randomly into two groups... well, you get the idea.

I realise these are more scetches for lesson plans than existing resources... but there are plenty of horoscopes on the Internet.

I do think it's important for them to exercise their critical thinking on what they can see in front of them.

You mention games. I don't quite see what you have in mind. What do you have in mind? Can you give an example? Puzzles, yes. There are some puzzles that every child should have to think about. I'll see if I can find some links.

I was sumoned here by your postings on another forum. I do think this is a very important topic. I hope these random musings are of some use.

 

[H3LL]

This guy is a hero in my book.

darylscience.com

 

[Kiless]

Thank you Athon - when I get home in early February, I'll get moving on this and will add the work I've already been doing.


Did I mention you're a legend?

 

[athon]

More thinks: I remember one poster likes to give kids horoscopes for the wrong months and rate them for accuracy. I can't remember who, though, but I do remember that the results are good.

Thanks Dr. Adequate. The horoscope thing may have been me, although it's hardly something I can call my own. I've done it a few times to demonstrate probability and the human mind. And yes, it's a perfect exercise and one I intend to include.

As to say what I mean by 'games', I think any exercise which has a demonstratale purpose coupled with either a competitive or 'fun' element.

As of this moment, to make this an achievable project, I've decided to organize it as follows:

1) Construct the skeleton of a unit differentiated as per -

a) Ages 10 to 14
Upper Primary school (Aus) / KS3 (UK) / Primary School (US)
b) Ages 14 to 16
Middle School (Aus) / KS4 (UK) / Junior High School (US)

For senior schooling / KS5 or college level, people are more than welcome to contriute however I feel that we'll leave such a database for later. The reason I say this is because I've seen a few 'higher' level plans and resources, for example aimed at introductory university course students, but not a lot of units aimed at the middle years of education (when it would, arguably, work best).

2) Link to this unit a selection of resources, some of which are downloadable as worksheets and activity sheets.

While seeing what other educators have done is fantastic (and useful), I'm also after interactive web sites for students. I will also wish to include a list of 'myth-busting' sites such as snopes.com, so reference sites will be of use.

Thanks folks

Athon
(as for the 'Legend' status, Kiless, what happened at TAM3 stays at TAM3... )

 

[SezMe]

I met a guy at TAM2 who was writing a critical thinking book and had spent a lot of time digging for resources. If you want, I can see if I can find his e-mail and send it to you.

 

[athon]

I met a guy at TAM2 who was writing a critical thinking book and had spent a lot of time digging for resources. If you want, I can see if I can find his e-mail and send it to you.

Please do!! That would be fantastic.

Athon

 

[Dr Adequate]

Thanks Dr. Adequate. The horoscope thing may have been me, although it's hardly something I can call my own. I've done it a few times to demonstrate probability and the human mind. And yes, it's a perfect exercise and one I intend to include.

Do the dowsing thing too!

Try it yourself... it's so easy.

There's a great piece somewhere in the Commentaries about learning dowsing at school... just as they were being all impressed, the teacher ponted out that they'd detected water only where they thought it was, and missed it where they didn't know about it... and then left it to the kids to figure out what was going on. This apparently instilled life-long scepticism in, at least, the guy who wrote to Randi.

I was looking over my sceptical/scientific/critical books at the weekend... I was going to suggest maybe Darryl Huff's How To Lie With Statistics... it's still in print, but looking it over, dated... $25,000 a year is no longer affluence, and I'm pretty sure no-one says "Negros" any more. But the problem with most such books (including that one) is that they don't have exercises (least of all practical exercises). For example, it would be nice to have a worksheet along the lines of "here are ten badly-designed experiments, find the errors"; "here are ten pieces of flawed statistical analysis, find the errors"; but you don't get stuff like that at the back of each chapter of Martin Gardner, say. There are plenty of books you might give a smart child for Christmas, but that's not the question, is it? That's for people who can read, on their own, and understand for themselves, by themselves. But... resources for a classroom setting? If it hasn't been done, you may be the first to do it. My hero! Anything I can do to help...

Like SezMe's friend, I've been writing a book --- I wouldn't describe it as "sceptical" as such but it's about the scientific method, and there's lots of overlap there --- I've got large collections of people being wrong; contemporary woowoos, errors in the progress of mainstream science, etc... if there's any specific type of error in thinking that you want illustrating, I have one of the finest collections of nuts this side of Brazil. Just say the word.

 

[athon]

Do the dowsing thing too!

Try it yourself... it's so easy.

There's a great piece somewhere in the Commentaries about learning dowsing at school... just as they were being all impressed, the teacher ponted out that they'd detected water only where they thought it was, and missed it where they didn't know about it... and then left it to the kids to figure out what was going on. This apparently instilled life-long scepticism in, at least, the guy who wrote to Randi.

There's a few exercises such as this which work well at promoting a skeptical view of selected beliefs. One or two of these would be useful in a defined part of the unit (such as 'applied' critical thinking), but there is a danger after too many such exercises, the unit could become more about debunking than skills in critical thinking and skepticism. It's a fine line.

For example, it would be nice to have a worksheet along the lines of "here are ten badly-designed experiments, find the errors"; "here are ten pieces of flawed statistical analysis, find the errors"; but you don't get stuff like that at the back of each chapter of Martin Gardner, say. There are plenty of books you might give a smart child for Christmas, but that's not the question, is it? That's for people who can read, on their own, and understand for themselves, by themselves. But... resources for a classroom setting? If it hasn't been done, you may be the first to do it. My hero! Anything I can do to help...

Pretty much the point behind this whole exercise. Text books are one thing, but aside from 'Hoaxes, Myths and Manias' by Richard Buchanan, there's not a lot out there with Q&A. Even that book is aimed more at a college / university level.

Kiless has some texts which are more of what we're after, and there are authors such as Edward de Bono who write books on critical thinking, which are of use. Such things are out there. And of course, we should be willing to design our own worksheets etc. Who knows; perhaps there is a series of skeptical classroom books we can print in association with the JREF...it's not out of the question.

Like SezMe's friend, I've been writing a book --- I wouldn't describe it as "sceptical" as such but it's about the scientific method, and there's lots of overlap there --- I've got large collections of people being wrong; contemporary woowoos, errors in the progress of mainstream science, etc... if there's any specific type of error in thinking that you want illustrating, I have one of the finest collections of nuts this side of Brazil. Just say the word.

LOL, I'm sure there's something we can use nuts for. Nut is, afterall, a synonym for woo-woo...

Thanks.

Athon

 

[athon]

I've been doing some rearranging of the notes I've already taken on this project, and have come to a conclusion I want people to comment on.

I feel that any complete unit we create has to be easily broken down into several basic components. This will serve the unit better, and allow others to pick and choose sections of it to use within their own modules or units.

I'm thinking that we should follow this course:

Section A) Fooling the Mind: A section demonstrating how both the senses and the mind can be tricked. Here there will be exercises covering illusions (mostly optical, but other sensory illusions would be even better) and magic.

This could also cover media topics such as the use of language to influence the bias of information, the use of statistics to alter perceptions and the use of colour and light to influence mood. There's a whole lot that can be done here.

Section B) Thinking Critically: The scientific method and its uses. In other words, what tricks are there we can use to avoid being fooled. Double Blind tests, protocols, Occham's Razor etc. would work here.

Experiments and surveys could dominate the exercises of this section, with students testing each other for probability and repeated trials under scientific conditions.

Section C) Hoaxes, Lies and Pseudoscience: Like the title suggests, a covering of weird things that people believe. Care must be taken here, though, that it is not a sub-unit we we dictate what is true and what is myth. Rather, this is where we present arguable claims and, well, argue them. At the end of the day we're not about saying 'homeopathy is bunk', but rather 'there are two sides to the debate, let's explore them rationally'.

This could contain a brief history of science, with a focus on what was 'true' in the past, and why we don't believe it any more.

Urban Myths could come under this section, with students writing an assignment on a particular urban myth, using web sites and maybe a survey as resources.

These are the three main blocks I can come up with after looking through my notes. I'm sure there are others, and there's no limit to sub-units (although more than four would be getting excessive, IMHO). Of course all three units will further break down, which I will get around to doing in coming weeks.

Thanks once again.

Athon

 

[H3LL]

Section B) Thinking Critically:

IMO should be first, not second, assuming all sections would be covered.

The tools are then in place to evaluate what is covered in the other sections.

 

[athon]

Hmm, good point. Although it's always good to draw students in with a good reason to listen to your subject material. If you can always go back to 'remember when you were fooled' as to a reason why such things as the scientific method exist, it works better than just piling on the thinking tools too early.

Ultimately it will be up to the educator to decide, so I guess the order is merely suggestive and not a concrete plan.

Regardless, I suggest this is where we start. Topics and related resources aimed at each of these three sub-units.

Wow. Progress...

Athon

 

[athon]

Progress to date: 31/1/05

I've decided to fix these three sub-unit topics as the main backbone of the unit. Having given it a lot of thought, asked a few other teachers and education consultants and left it open to debate here, I'm making the call to base all relevant units on these three sections.

Following here is how I'm planning on further breaking Sub-unit One and Two down (sub-unit three will follow when I have time to write it here). Each topic will be covered over a relevant number of lessons, which will be suggested at a later date but ultimately will again be up to the teacher to implement.

What do I need from you people?

I need feedback. Have I missed a topic? Have I inserted a topic that should not be here? Is something irrelevant? Do you have an opinion on how a topic should be covered?

Secondly I need resources. They are the bread and butter of this project, which will cover this framework. Suggestions only at this point, although I will collect site addresses and book titles / ISBN.

Section 1: Fooling the Mind

The Senses and the Brain

* What are they?
* How do they work?
* Nature of 'sensation' versus 'perception'
* How does the brain work?
* Making patterns
* Psychosomatic responses

The senses are what we use to detect changes in our environment. For surviving in this world they work well. For analysing reality, we encounter problems. How many senses do we really have? How do they work together to create a picture of the world? What is 'perception' and how does it differ to 'sensation'?

Limitations of the Senses

* Colour and Perspective
* Art and optical illusions

Our senses can let us down. The stimuli we detect are only a small part of the universe. Worse than that, what we detect does not always reveal the true nature behind our observation. This part of the unit should be practically based with a lot of illusions, and some work on colour and perception in art (dimensions, depth, etc.).

Being Tricked

* Magic and sleight of hand
* Using language to convey meaning and observation
* Using statistics and numerics to convey observation

People can lie and deceive us. More than that, they can tell the truth using words that give a bias, confusing us into accepting beliefs without question. How can word have two meanings? What is misdirection? What do numbers really mean? Graphs and statistics, opinion essays, advertisements and of course magic tricks are all good resources here that will demonstrate to the student that 'truth' is more complicated than it first appears.

Section 2: Critical Thinking

Logical Fallacies

* The arguments people use that initially seem logical, but on second glance fall apart.

How should we appeal to authority? What is a strawman argument? Is it ever a good thing to admit you don't know something? Teaching students how to state their beliefs with strength and conviction is a key part of thinking critically.

Scientific Thinking

* Evidence builds a picture (there are no 'answers' in science)
* Probability versus certainty: when is 'probably' a good enough answer?
* Occham's Razor

Science gives us the tools to make a chaotic world more predictable. Unfortunately, it does not declare what WILL happen. It is difficult for people to grasp that science can provide the wrong prediction, which does not make the process itself wrong. Science builds on itself, constantly addressing what is true and reevaluating it when more evidence comes along.

The Scientific Method

* What are the steps involved in addressing a question in science?
* What is deductive and inductive reasoning?
* Hypothesis, theory and fact; what's the difference?

Science always starts with a question...but where does it end? There are no answers but there is a process where we can always attack what we know.

The Experiment

* Meaningful evidence
* Fair testing
* Double Blind tests

Here we stitch together what we know from sub-unit 1 with sub-unit 2. How can we make sure we're not fooling ourselves? This topic will use a range of tests and experiments to address how experiments are to be set up with collecting objective evidence in mind.


This is a rough look at the first two of the three units. Obviously some parts will be moved about, dropped, changed and other bits added.

I'll put up section three's breakdown within the next week or two when I find time.

Athon

 

[Girl 6]

Athon,

How long do you envision these units taking?

I'm thinking of a different approach where people like me who aren't educators can come into a school and do some sessions before, during lunch, or after school.

I say this because I see that a lot of teachers in the U.S. don't have time to add things into their mandated curriculum. I want to approach the problem from a community aspect where people outside of the school system can come in and do this.

G6