Materi 4 TLCT The Practice

Chapter 3
Chapter
and Learning in a Community
Teaching and
Teaching
of Thinking: The
of Practice
The Practice
A community of thinking is a framework for teaching and learning that is meant to

communitybecause it brings together
transform traditional classroom practice. It is a community
a group
group of learners to grapple with a common problem in accordance with agreed-
upon rules, in a climate of reciprocity and mutual understanding; it is thinking
upon thinking
because the main work of the group
group of learners is thinking or the systematic concern
with knowledge.
Teaching and learning in a community of thinking passes passes through three stages:
(1) fertile inquiry,, (3) concluding performances
question,, (2) inquiry
fertile question performances –— team and commu-
nal. The transition through these three stages is accompanied by two continuous
nal.
supports: initiation and feedback.
feedback. This pan the book will describe each of these
part of the
the supports that underlie the framework of the
stages and the the community of thinking
(Harpaz 2005b).
Fertile Question
n
atio
Research
Research Research
Research Research
Research Initi
Question Question Question
Research
Research Research Research
Research
' ' ‘
Team Team Team,
Team
concluding concluding eoneiuding
concluding
perfernaanoe
performance performance performance Feed
, , _
Feedback
back
Communal Concluding Performance
Y. and Learning
Harpaz, Teaching and
Y. Harpaz, of Thinking:
Learning in a Community of Thinking: The Third Model,
Model, 89
Springer Science+Business
10.l007/978—94—007—6940—3_3, © Springer
DOI 10.1007/978-94-007-6940-3_3, Media Dordrecht
Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2014
90 3 Teaching of Thinking: The
Communityof
Teaching and Learning in a Community Practice
The Practice
3.1 and Education

Community and
Community Education
The sociology of the second half of the nineteenth century is sometimes called a
“sociology of losses”: Marx wrote of the the loss of ownership of productive labor;
Durkheim, the loss of community; and and Weber,
Weber, the loss of enchantment. Among these
appears that the loss of community is the one that has been most lamented
three, it appears
in the past decades, as indicated by how how frequently the term appears
appears in academic
and public discourse. If only we could restore the communal life we had lost, lost, it is
solve all the problems of modern and postmodern times –
said, we could solve
said, — the problems
apathy, loneliness, and anomie —

of alienation, egotism, apathy, – and perhaps the problem of
well. Zygmunt Bauman wrote that the word “community” is “a word
education as well.
2001,, pp.
that feels” (Bauman 2001 pp. 1–2),
1—2), that is, a word that makes us feel — – longing for
the warm and lost bosom of community.
In the context of education, the term “community” refers to a concept both outside
and inside the school. In the first
the first sense, it refers to the community that surrounds the
school, supports it, or is supported by it; in the second sense, it refers to teachers and
students who administer and experience community life as expressed in patterns of
teaching and learning and in social relations.
With the advent of thethe third model, the concept of community is laden with par- par-
ticular and radical pedagogical meaning. At the very very heart of that meaning is the
Lev Vygotsky,
idea of Lev Vygotsky, who claimed that the higher mental faculties are are neither
exposure or ripening; rather, they
inborn nor the product of exposure they are the product of a
are the
certain cultural and historical development in which a person lives and acts (Eilam
person lives
2003,, pp.
2003 366—367). People, according to Vygotsky, are
pp. 366–367). are born in a preformed envi- envi-
ronment that contains natural and man-made objects, including cultural or symbolic
tools. These cultural and symbolic tools —– such as language —– are are acquired and
internalized by means of reciprocal social relationships. These tools are integrated
within cognitive processes
processes —– thinking, learning, memory,
memory, attention, and others —– that
facilitate and shape them.
West’s discovery of Vygotsky, some 50 years
The West’s years after his death, and of the the con-
nection between the development of human consciousness and society and culture
has aroused great interest and stimulated much and varied research, which has split
into numerous sub-streams. Common to all this research and the the sub-streams
sub—streams is the
activity.‘1 This idea was “translated” in
idea that thinking is a social and cultural activity.
education as follows: “Our thinking improves when it ‘bumps into’ others: it is
‘bumps into’
clarified
sharpened and clarifi ed when theythey ask for an explanation, it expands when they they
propose
propose new perspectives, it examines itself when they
they level criticism. Hence,
thinking is a kind of inner discourse that reflects the outer discourse to which the
reflects the
individual is exposed and in which he or she participates” (Lefstein 2000a, p. 33). 33).
From here the path is short to designing educational frameworks to structure social
1
1
Of course
Of course the idea that the individual
individual and her thinking
thinking are shaped
shaped profoundly
profoundly by reciprocal
reciprocal rela—
rela-
tions with the society
tions culture is not Vygotsky’s
society and culture alone; it expresses
Vygotsky’s alone; trend in the history
general trend
expresses a general history
of ideas in the second
of half of
second half of the last century. Postmodernism went “all the way”
century. Postmodernism way” with it, with the
notorious proclamation
notorious of the “death
proclamation of of the subject.”
“death of
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
Pedagogy of Questioning 91
91
cognitive activity –— various types of communities of learners/inquiry/knowledge

building/thinking and the the like.
like.
However, these pedagogical and didactic communities
However, communities are not solely
solely the result of
hard-boiled academic considerations
considerations (to form the thinking of the individual
individual by struc-
tured group discourse). They also express
group discourse). express longing community. In place of the
longing for the lost community.
classroom, where each student thinks and is evaluated
competitive classroom,
competitive evaluated in isolation (the
relative, so the success
grade is relative, individual student depends on the failure of his
success of the individual
educational thinkers,
peers), educational thinkers, researchers, practitioners sought to plan and operate
researchers, and practitioners
classroom grounded in a different
a communal classroom different spirit. (ibid., pp.
spirit. Lefstein (ibid., pp. 34–41)
34—41) set
this new spirit
this five
spirit on fi foundations: dialogue
ve foundations: dialogue,, expressed truth, rooted
expressed in the pursuit of truth,
knowledge; intimacy
in mutual respect, and free of authority over knowledge; expressed in group
intimacy,, expressed group
relations, by relating to each person and with emotional involvement;
person in her fullness and involvement;
decisions,, expressed
cooperation in decisions expressed in participation of the community members in its
administration; cooperation in action
administration; action,, expressed
expressed in the various forms of cooperative
cooperative
thinking; and identifi
learning and thinking; identification, expressed in the sense
cation, expressed sense of belonging to the
group. existence of such communal foundations
The existence
group. The foundations in a community of thinking does
solely, or even
not depend solely, framework but also,
principally, on the dictates of the framework
even principally, and
also, and
fundamentally,on the communal quality of the entire
fundamentally, educational environment.
entire educational environment.
One more comment before concluding this brief introduction to community and
the concept of community gives new meaning to the central concept of
education: the
this book —– learning. Learning is grasped in a new new way
way in the context of community.
According to Anna SfardSfard ((1998), contemporary theories of learning depend explicitly
1998), contemporary
and implicitly on two metaphors: the acquisition metaphor and the the participation
metaphor. The former enjoyed unchallenged supremacy supremacy for a long time, and we
would not mention it, were it not for the advent of the the second metaphor. According
to the former, learning is acquisition, accumulation, and absorption of information;
latter, “learning a subject is now
according to the latter, now conceived of as a process process of
becoming a member of a certain community. This entails, above all, the ability to
all, the
communicate in the language of this this community and to act according to its particular
(1998, p. 6). Thus,
norms” (1998, “While the AM [acquisition
Thus, “While [acquisitionmetaphor] individual
stresses individual
metaphor] stresses
mind and what goes ‘into it’,
goes ‘into it’, the PM [participation metaphor] shifts the the focus to
the evolving bonds between the individual and others. While AM emphasizes the
inward movement of the object known as knowledge, PM gives gives prominence to the
aspect of mutuality characteristic of the the part-whole relation” (ibid.).
Thus, the framework presented below —– the community of thinking —– advocates
a new concept of learning with a new new meaning: participation.
The Pedagogy
3.2 The 0f Questioning
Pedagogy of Questioning
Questioning —– the intellectual activity of inventing questions —– is a decidedly human

trait; it embodies the special creativity of people. Humans, in addition to being
Homo sapiens classified
sapiens,, as Carl Linnaeus classifi us; Homo faber
ed us; faber (man as producer), as
Karl Marx called us; Homo ludensladens (playing man), as Huizinga called us; us; Homo
Communityof
The Practice
us; Homo combustus (burning man), as envi-

symbolicus,, as Ernst Cassirer called us;
symbolicus envi-
ronmentalists call us; Homo internetus us; Homo narrans
internetus,, as media researchers call us; narrans,,
homines,, might be called
as we termed it in the previous chapter; and other sorts of homines
Homo intrigens –— creatures who invent questions in their relentless quest to under-
world.
stand themselves and the world.
Questioning has several interesting characteristics that, in turn, have educational
consequences:
consequences:
Questioning CreativeActivity:
Questioning Is a Creative Activity: Contrary to the common assumption that question-question-
insignificant,
ing is an insignificant, sometimes
sometimes annoying, does not attest to especially
annoying, activity that does especially
impressive human abilities,
impressive questioning is a wonderfully
abilities, questioning creative activity.
wonderfully creative Questions
activity. Questions
are human inventions; exist as objects
inventions; they do not exist world. Objects
objects in the world. Objects in the world –
world —
buildings,
mountains, buildings, people –
— do not appear
appear along with
with the questions that relate to
them. On the contrary,
them. they appear
contrary, they The ability to ask
totality. The
appear complete and in their totality.
questions about objects in the the world is the ability to go
go beyond them – beyond what
—
questioning,
is present. In the act of questioning, that which is present is seen
seen as incomplete, puz-
incomplete, puz-
mysterious.
zling, and mysterious.
zling, The
The incompleteness,
incompleteness, the puzzle, and
and the mystery are not expe-
expe-
rienced on the same experience the object;
same level as we experience object; they
they go beyond it and
overshadow it. The act of questioning
overshadow questioning displaces what is in favor
favor of what is not but
could explain that which is. For example, when somebodysomebody asks,
asks, “Why did the child
dream?” he is going beyond what is there
laugh in his dream?” there and present
present —– the child’s laugh —–
therefore, points to
Questioning, therefore,
toward its possible causes, which are not present. Questioning,
invents it, strives
what is not, invents strives toward it, and creates “nothingness”
“nothingness”out out of what is.
Questioning as Knowledge
Knowledge of Order:: It is commonly thought that someone
of a Higher Order
who doesn’t know will ask questions. Questions, therefore, are generally thought to
character. A student doesn’t
indicate ignorance, even weakness –— of intelligence or character.
know because he can’t or doesn’t want to know. Talented and diligent students
have answers; untalented, weak students have questions (they (they didn’t listen to the
they didn’t prepare
teacher, they prepare homework, they were absent from school or, even
worse, they listened, prepared, and were present, but are unable to learn).
short, asking questions has a dubious image in schools and outside of them. It is
In short,
seen as thethe deplorable result of “absences” – — of the body (the student was not in
school) or of the mind (the (the student didn’t paypay attention in class) or, perish the
However, at least in part, questions
(the student cannot learn). However,
thought, of ability (the
actually derive from presence
presence and not from absence, from involvement in and
understanding of the subject. Such questions have a special quality. Questions of the
first
fi are trivial, seeking to obtain information that was
rst kind –— questions of absence –— are
missed because of some absence; questions of the second kind —– questions of
presence —– illuminate the subject with an interesting light and open
presence open up
up thought to a
new horizon. Questioning that belongs to this this category of involvement and under-
standing is knowledge or understanding performance of a high order. order.
Questioning Shapes the Answer: appears to be an absolute gap

Answer: There appears gap between ques-
ques-
and answer: the question is known, and the answer is unknown and possibly to
tion and
be discovered somewhere not inherently connected to the question. However,
However, in
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
some sense the answer is encoded in the the question itself (and vice versa — – as Dewey
said, we learn what the problem was after we fi find it). The assumptions
nd a solution to it).
implicit in the question make it possible and shape the conceptual framework of the
answer. For example, when somebody in an ordinary context asks, asks, “Where does
Peter Jones live?” to a great extent the question dictates the answer and what would
be considered an appropriate answer.
answer. The question assumes that people live live in
the dwellings have addresses, that the addresses enable us to locate
dwellings, that the
the people who live there, and so on. An appropriate answer would be, “Peter lives
at 5 Main Street, apartment 5B.” An inappropriate answer would be, lives in
be, “Peter lives
his own world.”
world.” Moreover, thethe assumptions and concepts implied in the question
shape the hypotheses —– possible answers that have not yet been confi confirmed
rmed —– that the
questioner wishes to examine. Hence, questioning is not merely the the processing of
prior knowledge; it also determines the fatefate of new
new knowledge, of the answer that
will be supplied.
These traits explain why it is so hard for students to ask good questions (ques-
tions of presence): good questions are the result of creative thought (nothing from
something) based on deep understanding of knowledge. Indeed, they they explain why
good questions play such a central role in learning and investigation: formulating a
question is midway to fi finding
nding the answer; the wording of the question determines
the answer will be found or invented. For these
the direction and the tools by which the
reasons, the pedagogy of questioning invests great effort in guiding teachers and
the creation of good questions. The pedagogy of
students toward the of questioning places
places
good questions
questions,, not correct answers center.. It acts in different ways
answers,, at the center ways at every
every
stage of the community of thinking. Let us now now describe the first
the first station.
3.2.1 The Fertile

Fertile Question
The community of thinking begins with a fertile question. The teacher-facilitator

invents a fertile question and presents it at the first
the first meeting of the class. In advanced,
experienced communities of thinking, students-learners will invent and propose propose
their own fertile questions (henceforth, we “facilitator,” “learner,”
we will use the terms “facilitator,” “learner,”
“meeting,” and “community of thinking” instead of “teacher,”
“meeting,” “teacher,” “student,”
“student,” “lesson,”
“lesson,”
and “class”).
A fertile question has six characteristics: it is open,open, undermining, rich, con-
nected, charged, and practical.
open question is one that, in principle, does not have a single decisive or
An open
conclusive answer; indeed, it has several answers; the the answers can be contradictory
or at least different from one another. Let us explain. It is necessary
necessary to distinguish
between a question that is open
open in principle and one one that is open fact. For example,
open in fact.
the question of whether there is intelligent life on other planets is open fact; in
open in fact;
principle it could be answered, e.g., first
e. g., the first alien to land on our planet will provide
the question of what is a just society,
a conclusive answer. In contrast, the society, for example,
open in principle. A conclusive answer will never be found.
is open
Communityof
The Practice
Questions that are open

Questions open in principle interesting ones from a
principle are the most interesting
philosophical
philosophical and existential point of view. View. (In the opinion of Albert Camus, in the
Myth ofof Sisyphus open in principle, that of suicide,
Sisyphus,, there is only one question that is open
whether or not it is worth living this life. To phrase Camus’ gloomy question differ- differ-
ently, in a more positive way,
ently, way, there is only oneone question that is worth anything — –
However, Camus got a bit carried away;
what is the meaning of life? However, away; some other
are also worth asking.) Of course, questions that are open
questions are open in fact can also
be fascinating and veryvery important. In some circumstances — – for example, in com-
munities of thinking in the natural sciences —– one can ask fertile questions that are
open
open in fact. necessary to distinguish between two kinds of open-
fact. In that case, it is necessary open-
ness: openness
ness: the community of scientists (they
openness to the (they have not yet found the
the answer)
openness to learners (scientists have found the
and openness the answer, but the
the learners don’t
know it yet, themselves).2
yet, and they have to discover it by themselves).
2
The openness
openness in principle of a question does not deprive the effort to answer it of
give equal value to all the
value, nor does it give the answers. Indeed, the openness
openness in prin-
ciple of a question has a democratic, pedagogical function: the facilitator does not
know the correct answer (knowing the right answer would vest her with authority
and control); therefore, she is a partner in the community’s efforts to fi find
nd answers.
An undermining question is one whose purpose purpose is to upset the learners’ precon-
precon-
ceptions, their axiomatic assumptions, “Such ruling opinions which are no longer
themselves seen, but that through which everything else is seen” (Talaska 1992
themselves 1992,,
p. 251). The purpose
p. purpose of undermining is to motivate learning, on the assumption
(see the previous chapter) that learning is a mechanism for restoring the cognitive
equilibrium that was the undermining was caused
was lost as a result of the undermining; the
by the collapse of schemas (concepts and expectations) in their encounter with the
world. Undermining creates “question distress,” which seeks “resolution” in an
“satisfies
answer that “satisfi es the mind.”
The principle of undermining causes a shift in the direction of teaching. Ordinary
teaching in schools seeks to make the unfamiliar familiar; teaching by undermining
seeks to make the familiar unfamiliar. School seeks to provide knowledge; the the prin-
“knowledge,” mainly commonly accepted
ciple of undermining seeks to challenge “knowledge,”
truisms, what goesgoes without saying. Of course, there has to be some initial knowl-
undermine.3
edge so that there can be something to undermine. 3
The principle of undermining
common knowledge, therefore, depends on the principle of acquiring knowledge
and vice versa; undermining stimulates motivation to acquire knowledge.
Undermining is a vital didactic strategy for developing critical thought and a
skeptical attitude to conventional truths, but it also entails dangers. Undermining
2
Originality is relative.
2Originality Suppose intelligent
relative. Suppose aliens from
intelligent aliens from an advanced
advanced planet discovered the theory
planet discovered theory
of relativity
of Einstein wasn’t
relativity ages ago. Would that mean that Einstein wasn’t original?
original?
33A
teacher complained
history teacher
A history complained to me that he had taught the Zionist
had taught colonialist
movement as a colonialist
Zionist movement
movement, and not a single
movement, student in his class objected.
single student objected. “I slaughter
slaughter the sacred of Zionism,”
sacred cows of Zionism,”
he said, “and the students
students are indifferent.
indifferent. They simply know about
simply don’t know about the sacred
sacred cows that graze
graze
fields
in the fi of our history.”
elds of
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
that is done too forcefully, with a sledgehammer, can drive drive students to closure and
aggression. Therefore, facilitators should refrain from presenting “astonishing”
provocations or from irresponsible slaughter of sacred cows. cows. They must apply the
strategy of undermining with sensitivity and take responsibility for rehabilitation.
tact.44
There is no substitute for pedagogical tact.
The strategy of undermining can be promoted with various tactics: to ask an
unexpected question, to cast doubt on an accepted truth or a sanctifi sanctified
ed value, to
conflict
create a confl ict between precious truths or values (liberty or equality? loyalty to a
transformng it?),
friend or to a principle? education for adaptation to society or to transforming
difficult
to present diffi cult dilemmas in various fi fields,
elds, to express
express a unique and surprising
and so on.
position, and on.
It must be remembered that undermining is a relative matter: something that
undermines the facilitator does not necessarily undermine the learners, and what
undermines one one learner does not necessarily undermine the others. For this reason,
it is helpful to ascertain students’ initial beliefs and assumptions during the the process
process
of initiating them into the fertile question: these beliefs and assumptions are those
that we seek to undermine. Generally speaking, after several years years of conventional
schooling, learners tend to become immune to undermining, because it might crack
the shell of indifference and require engaged learning (students, according to
Perkins [[1992],
1992], tend to run a parsimonious learning economy).
A rich question is one that can’t be answered from one
A day to the next;
one day next; it is a
question that demands fundamental, prolonged research. It is rich because it is
significant
directed at highly signifi essential problems
cant content —– big ideas or essential problems (below we
will discuss the pedagogical unit of knowledge and see that a rich fertile question is
addressed to insights
addressed of knowledge).
insights —– to the heart of knowledge). The rich fertile
fertile question
question has
very important characteristic with respect to ongoing work in a community of
a very
thinking: it breaks down into secondary questions; it is pregnant with sub-questions.
establish research
possible to establish
This tendency makes it possible research teams organized around
questions –— research questions —– that relate to various aspects of the fertile
sub-questions
sub-
question (see below).
A connected question is one that obeys the (old but rarely applied) educational
A
dictate, “Start from where the the child is!”
is!” The connected question tries to connect
with the learners’ interests, to create a reverberation in the learners’ mind. At the
same time, “where the child is” is not static; it includes the ability and desire to
new places. Thus, the educational connection with the place where the
depart for new
child is implies connection to levers that can move him beyond that place, beyond
4Willingness
4
undermine and to be undermined
Willingness to undermine undermined apparently influenced
apparently is infl cultural character.
uenced by cultural character.
Australian teachers,
In our work with Australian noticed that it was hard for them
teachers, we noticed them to ask undermining
undermining
which seemed
questions, which
questions, seemed to be at odds
odds with their easy-going
easy—going temperament.
temperament. In one case we told
teachers in Catholic
teachers schools that they had
Catholic schools their fi
had to poke their fingers into the open
ngers into wounds in the body
open wounds
of Australia
of attitude toward
Australia (the attitude toward the Aboriginals and immigrants,
Aboriginals and sale of
immigrants, sale uranium to China,
of uranium China,
welfare state), the way the doubting
dismantlingthe welfare
dismantling Thomas stuck his fi
doubting St. Thomas nger into Jesus’
finger wounds
Jesus’ wounds
after He rose
rose from the tomb.
Communityof
The Practice
him or herself. the child but also to her social

herself.55 Questioning is connected not only to the
environment as well as to thethe teacher and to the subject being studied.
AA charged question is one that has an emotional, ethical, or existential dimen-
engages the learners and motivates them to ponder it. The previously men-
sion; it engages
tioned characteristics of a fertile question –— open, undermining, rich, and connected –—
probably guarantee that a fertile question willwill be charged; nevertheless, this
this charac-
teristic is included in the list in order to emphasize its importance.
AA practical question is one that makes for fertile inquiry. It is worded clearly and
in a stimulating way, leam-
way, appropriate to arouse the interest of the facilitators and learn-
ers, directing them to resources and available sources (laboratories, experts, real and
ers,
books).66
sites, books).
virtual sites,
A few
few comments on the fertile question and its characteristics:
•- Among the the characteristics of the fertile question, there is a partial overlap: they
they
depend upon
upon one another and reinforce one another, but they
they do not render each
superfluous.
other superfl uous. Nevertheless, there is nothing sacred about them.
may be added to or removed from the fertile question.
Characteristics may
•0 The characteristics of a fertile question derive their power power from the circum-
stances in which the question is applied: for example, if it is introduced by a
facilitator who knows howhow to pose the learners’
pose a question so that it stimulates the
interest and connects with them (with a bit of malicious exaggeration, one might
say that there is no such thing as an infertile question; there are are only infertile
facilitators); if the learners tend to be undermined, be connected, be charged,
etc.; the educational environment allows for and encourages
etc.; and if the encourages teaching and
learning in a community of thinking. Hence, being undermined is not an internal
Characteristicof
characteristic the question but primarily of the context in which it is asked.
of the
•- The fertile question is particularly important to the the teacher-facilitator; she must
know the
the characteristics of a fertile question and how to invent one,
one, how
how to initiate
it, how to help learners extract research questions from it, and so on. on. For their
55The
where exactly
question is where
The question Kieran Egan
exactly the child is. Kieran claims that teaching
Egan claims curriculum
teaching and the curriculum
adopted four ad hoc
adopted hoc principles without suffi
principles without sufficient “Educational development
cient scrutiny. “Educational development proceeds,
proceeds,
these principles
these inform us, from the concrete
principles inform concrete to the abstract, from the simple
abstract, from simple to the complex, from
complex, from
known to the unknown,
the known unknown, from active manipulation
manipulation to symbolic
symbolic conceptualization”
conceptualization” (Egan 1986,
(Egan 1986,
rejects these principles
p. 6). Egan rejects demonstrates that young
principles and demonstrates children are capable
young children capable ofof abstract,
abstract,
complex thought
complex derives from the unknown
thought that derives unknown (the imagination)
imagination) and the symbolic.
symbolic. That is, the
child is not in the place
child determined for him
place determined educational conventions.
him by the educational conventions.
6t"Neil
Postman and Charles
Neil Postman Charles Weingartner
Weingartner suggested
suggested checking
checking the characteristics of good (fertile)
characteristics of (fertile)
questions by asking
questions asking the following
following questions: increase the learner’s
questions increase
questions: “Will your questions learner’s will as
well as his capacity learn? Will they help to give him
capacity to learn? him a sense of of joy in learning?
learning? Will they help
learner with confi
provide the learner
to provide confidence
dence in his ability leam? In order
ability to learn? order to get answers,
answers, will the
learner be required
learner make inquiries
required to make further questions,
inquiries (ask further questions, clarify
clarify terms, make observations,
terms, make observations, clas-
clas—
sify data, etc.)? Does each question
etc.)? Does alternative answers
question allow for alternative (which implies
answers (which alternative modes
implies alternative modes
of inquiry)?
of inquiry)? Will the process
process ofof answering
answering the questions
questions tend to stress the uniqueness
uniqueness of of the
learner? Would the questions
learner? questions produce different answers
produce different answers ifif asked
asked at different
different stages of the learner’s
stages of leamer’s
development? Will the answers
development? answers help
help the learner understand the universals
learner to sense and understand universals in the
human condition and so enhance
human condition enhance his ability closer to other people?”
ability to draw closer (Postman and
people?” (Postman
1969, p. 66).
Weigartner 1969,
Weigartner
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
part, the learners must know the characteristics of a research question, how to
one, how to conduct the inquiry that follows from it and to return to it,
generate one,
(see below).
and so on (see
•- The traits of a fertile question —– especially openness
openness —– make it more appropriate
to the humanities and social sciences than to the natural sciences. Nevertheless,
it is possible to “fertilize” questions in the natural sciences by placing them in a
principled or ethical context. For example, “Is the human genome genome project good
or bad for mankind?” demands both scientifiscientificc and ethical treatment. However,
However, as
noted, it is also possible to ask questions that are are open fact, such as “why is the
open in fact,
sky blue?” or “why do people sleep?” (open in fact to the students or to the
the research community).
teacher or to the
•- The fertile question binds the community of thinking together. A community of
thinking begins with and revisits fertile questions. It should be displayed in
prominent places in the classroom and corridors, framed and reframed, and
charged with new However, remember that the
new meanings. However, the learners concentrate
on their research questions and not on the fertile question. From time to time,
they must be brought back to the fertile question to make certain that their
research question maintains a connection with it and, thereby, to the the other
research questions and to the other learners.
•- The fertile question is not thrown at the learners: “This is our fertile question.
Now generate research questions from it!” The fertile question is presented grad-
ually in a process
process of initiation (see below).
•- The fertile question is an encompassing question —– it must include content from
the curriculum. In other words, the fertile question is not presented in a vacuum;
it plays on a specifi field
specificc fi eld —– the curriculum. It must cover at least some of the
curricular topics.
•- The learners do not grapple directly with the fertile question question but with the
questions that areare derived from it or relate to it — – research questions that they
they
However, it is certainly possible that a few
themselves generate. However, few of the learners
might grapple with the the fertile question itself. Consequently, it is important for
the fertile question to be practical —– to be susceptible to inquiry.
Below is a list of fertile questions formulated by facilitators in a community of
(Table 3.1
thinking (Table 3.1).
).
Let us demonstrate briefly few of the questions
briefly some of the contexts in which a few
asked:
were asked:
The fifirst
rst question was asked in a Jerusalem high school (the
(the Rehavia Gymnasia)
with the aim of examining the political slogan, “Jerusalem that has been joined
together.” A majority of Jerusalemites believe that the city
together.” city has been united. This is
official
the official national ideology. The two facilitators who guided this group
group of (tenth
grade geography) thinkers began the the community meeting at the Institute for the
Study of Jerusalem. The students posed the question to two geographers from the
institute. One of them said that, by conventional criteria, Jerusalem was
was united; the
second said that Jerusalem was wall.” A student
was a city divided by an “invisible wall.”
expressed amazement that two respected professors couldn’t give give a clear answer to
Communityof
The Practice
Examples of
Table 3.1 Examples of fertile
fertile questions invented by community
were invented
questions that were of thinking
community of facilitators
thinking facilitators
Israel, Australia,
in Israel, Zealand
Australia, and New Zealand
Schools in Israel
Schools
✓ Is Jerusalem united? (geography)
Jerusalem united? (geography)
✓ Is a “New
xxxx
“New Middle
Middle East”
East” possible?
possible? (geography)
(geography)
✓ When
When was life better Middle Ages
better —– in the Middle today? (history)
Ages or today? (history)
✓ Why did the peasant class accept
peasant class accept the rule of the nobility
rule of church, although
nobility and the church, although those
classes oppressed
classes them? (history)
oppressed them? (history)
x How did it happen
✓ happen that the generation
generation that fought
fought World War I (“the war to end all wars”) wars”)
started World War II within
started within two decades?
decades? (history)
(history)
x Why should
✓ should we study the nineteenth
nineteenth century
century at the beginning
beginning of of the twenty-fi
twenty—first century?
rst century?
(history)
(history)
✓ Has “progress” advanced humanity?
“progress” advanced (history)
humanity? (history)
✓
xxx Has the Zionist succeeded? (history)
project succeeded?
Zionist project (history)
✓ Israel’s of Independence
Israel’s War of Independence is the Nakba Nakba (disaster) of the Palestinians
(disaster) of Palestinians —– is that inevitable?
inevitable?
(history)
(history)
✓ Can a Jewish
Jewish state be a democratic
democratic state and vice versa? versa? (civics)
(civics)
✓ What
What is love? (from sociological,
sociological, biological, historical points
psychological, and historical
biological, psychological, points ofof view)
view)
✓ Israel
Israel – years multidisciplinary question)
— the next 50 years (a multidisciplinary question)
✓ Who is the “Other,” and why, if if at all, do we need him? (sociology
(sociology and anthropology)
anthropology)
✓ Why do people marry? (sociology
people marry? (sociology and anthropology)
anthropology)
✓ What
What is true friendship?
xxxxxxxxxxx
friendship? (interdisciplinary)
(interdisciplinary)
✓ What
What makes
makes a story good? (literature)
good? (literature)
✓ Kings
Kings vs. prophets
prophets –— who was right? (Bible)
right? (Bible)
✓ The human
human genome project –
genome project — blessing curse? (biology)
blessing or curse? (biology)
✓ Why do people (biology)
people sleep? (biology)
✓ Can we save the environment
environment without
without changing social structure?
changing our social structure? (biology
(biology and sociology)
sociology)
Islamic Teachers
Al-Qasemi Islamic
Al—Qasemi Teachers’’ College in Israel
Israel
✓
/ Does the status of
Does of women Islam and in the modern
women in Islam modern age compare conflict?
compare or conflict?
✓/ Does democracy
Does democracy fifitt Islamic
Islamic doctrine
doctrine or collide
collide with it?
✓/ Is there
there a Palestinian
Palestinian people?
people?
/Schools in Australiaand
✓
Schools in
Israel a democratic
Is Israel democratic state from the Israeli
Australia and New Zealand
New Zealand
Israeli Palestinian
Palestinian perspective?
perspective?
✓ Immigration —– what should Australia

Immigration about it? (interdisciplinary)
Australia do about (interdisciplinary)
✓ Australia west? (interdisciplinary)
Australia —– east or west? (interdisciplinary)
✓ advance our values?
Olympics advance
Do the Olympics
xxxxxx
values? (interdisciplinary)
(interdisciplinary)
✓ What lies beneath
What beneath the truth?
truth? (interdisciplinary)
(interdisciplinary)
✓ What, if anything,
What, if Australia owe the Aboriginals?
anything, does Australia Aboriginals? (interdisciplinary)
(interdisciplinary)
✓ if anything,
What, if
What, anything, does New Zealand Maori? (interdisciplinary)
Zealand owe the Maori? (interdisciplinary)
the question. The meeting elucidated the characteristics of the question and loaded
the second stage —
it with meaning. At the the learners generated vari-
– that of research —– the vari-
ous research questions that would be probative of whether the the city
city was united or
divided from various aspects, which they investigated: budget allocations to t0 the
the city; the kind of encounters between the
eastern, Arab part of the the residents of the
city; subdivisions of the western (secular, national-
eastern and western parts of the city;
religious, ultra-orthodox) and the eastern parts of the city; city; cultures and styles of
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
etc. They presented the results to an audience of

the city; etc.
buildings in the parts of the
students, parents, and experts in a communal concluding performance on Jerusalem
Day. (The city, they
Day. they found, was far from being united.)
“New Middle East” possible? —
The second question —– Is a “New the ninth
– was asked in the
grade at the time of the Oslo Agreements when many many people in Israel (much less so
in the surrounding Arab states) were talking about a New Middle East. The two
the learners in this community of thinking examined the chances for
facilitators and the
the Middle East to be a united geopolitical unit (like(like the European Union), based on
mutual interests and on a shared tradition and vision. The answers that the research
groups provided showed that the situation in the
groups the Middle East is very
very complex and
that a New Middle East might yet have a long time to wait. wait.
the history community (the Gvanim School in the
The facilitators in the the Menashe
District of Northern Israel) tried to place the Middle Ages in a context that provoke
thinking and argument and asked when it was better to live —– in the Middle Ages or
today. Together with the learners, they
today. developed a quality of life index (based on
they developed
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs), and they
Maslow’s the learners to compare
they asked the compare the periods on
that basis. The learners formulated research questions that related to various aspects
such as women in the Middle Ages and today, today, children in thethe Middle Ages and
today, the attitude toward the environment then and now,
today, now, the perception
perception of the
meaningfulness of life then and today, and so on.
meaningfulness on. The concluding community per- per-
formance was a public trial in which the research groups groups were called upon
upon to testify
for the prosecution and the defense, for or against the two periods. The surprising
impression conveyed by the testimony was that life in the Middle Ages was no
today. The parents in the audience, who were invited to the concluding
worse than today.
communal performance, were appointed as the jury and asked to deliver a verdict.
By votes, they decided that life today is better.7
By a margin of just a few votes, better.7
The facilitators of another history community (in the Branco Weiss Weiss school in
Beit Shemesh) asked why they should study the nineteenth century in the the beginning
twenty-first
of the twenty-fi and, in fact,
rst century and, fact, why
why study the present
study history at all given that the
will be extremely different. The learners showed that most of
and the future are and will
scientificc discoveries, and technological inventions that characterized the
the ideas, scientifi
twenty-first
early twenty-fi rst century dated to thethe nineteenth century and that the present is the
the past –
product of the — a basic insight into the discipline of history. The learners’
research concentrated on the the historical sources of present-day ideas, discoveries,

inventions.88
and inventions.
7
In a follow-up investigation performed
follow—up investigation performed by the disappointed
disappointed proponents
proponents ofof life in the Middle
Middle Ages,
Ages,
discovered that the parents
it was discovered according to family
parents voted according family loyalties. Those arguing
loyalties. Those of the
arguing in favor of
Middle presented better
Middle Ages may have presented arguments, but evidently
better arguments, make the case force-
evidently they did not make force—
enough to make the parents
fully enough children.
against their own children.
parents vote against
88The
communal concluding
The communal concluding performance
performance was a fi film, which depicted
lm, which cabinet meeting
depicted a cabinet which
meeting at which
Prime Minister,
the Prime Minister, in shock, announced a grave development
shock, announced Shemesh: at the beginning
development in Beit Shemesh: of
beginning of
the twenty-fi rst century,
twenty—first school students
century, high school students were studying nineteenth century.
studying the nineteenth “Because of
century. “Because of
Prime Minister
that,” the Prime Minister argued,
argued, “we will not be able to prepare young people
prepare young millen—
people for the new millen-
nium, to cope with the unprecedented
nium, unprecedented challenges of the future.
challenges of future. We are a small country, surrounded
country, surrounded
enemies, and our only resource
by enemies, resource is the brains of our young
brains of young people. squander that
people. We must not squander
100
Communityof
The Practice
group of facilitators (in the Rehavia Gymnasia in Jerusalem)

An interdisciplinary group
decided to examine the question, “What is love?” from the the viewpoint of the
the school
they teach. They concluded that love
subjects they love is an entirely different phenomenon
from the perspectives of the different disciplines. For example, from the the point of
view of evolutionary biologists, it is a mechanism in the
view the service of procreation; from
the sociologist’s point of view, it is a social construct; and from the the psychologist’s
viewpoint, it is the result of projection, sublimation, and other unconscious pro- pro-
cesses. This demonstrated that the reflect
the disciplines refl view on the
ect different points of view
phenomena in the world or, as Nelson Goodman said, said, that they
they are ways
ways of creating
the world. (Whereas interdisciplinary learning in schools is problematic since it is
hard enough to gain disciplinary, let alone interdisciplinary, thought; multidisci-
plinary study is possible and desirable, not only because it illuminates a phenome-
View but also because it sheds light on the disciplines
non from different points of view
themselves).
1998, when the Israeli Ministry of Education declared that the
In 1998, the central subject
“The First Fifty Years”
of study should be “The Years” of the State of Israel, the
the facilitators in
the multidisciplinary community of thinking decided to examine how how Israel would
years and what had to be done to assure its future.
look in the next 50 years future. The facilitators
and the learners examined various research reports that dealt with long- long-range
range plan-
ning and formulated a systematic position paper paper that included a description and
recommendations regarding various aspects of life in the the country.
In the Islamic teachers’ college Al-Quasemi students were asked to research
“explosive” questions about Islam and modernity —– Islam’s attitude to democracy,
human rights, women, and so. The joy of freedom to ask critical questions on the
most sensitive subjects was palpable. The students, as they they themselves commented,
involved in an academic course.
never were so involved
Without recounting the story behind each of the examples presented above, we
the “pedagogical poems” that fertile questions
can state that these stories illustrate the
can create. Each community of thinking is a world unto itself, and each one rein-
vents the framework of the community of thinking in its own way. way.
Let us look briefly
briefly across the Pacificc at Australia and New Zealand, where a
the Pacifi
handful of schools have adopted the communities of thinking model. In Glen
Waverly Secondary College they
Waverly they asked thethe question “Immigration — – what should
Australia do about it?” as one the most urgent and tragic dilemmas the developed
one of the
world faces and will face more fi fiercely
ercely in the future as a result of climate change.
(In his book What
What’s’s the Point of School?
of School ? pp. 140—141, Guy Claxton describes some
pp. 140–141,
of the educational and public results of this community of thinking.)
resource!” learners were led to trial in the Supreme

following scene, the learners
resource!” In the following Court in Jerusalem.
Supreme Court Jerusalem.
After a judge repeated
After similar accusations,
repeated similar learners were
accusations, the learners asked to defend
were asked defend themselves.
themselves. The
research teams rose
research teams other and proved,
rose one after the other proved, on the basis of their
basis of their research, trends,
research, that the trends,
ideas, inventions that underlie
ideas, and inventions underlie the present nineteenth century.
originated in the nineteenth
present age originated century. They
showed that they were learning
showed about the present
learning about future by means
present and the future means ofof the past
past —– and they
were cleared
were of all charges.
cleared of charges.
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
101
“Australia, east or west?” was asked in a junior high school in

The question “Australia,
Melbourne to grapple with Australians’ identity crisis: culturally Australia is
Western, but geographically it is in the Far East; the the Orient is growing stronger
define
(China) and pressuring Australia to defi ne itself. Large-scale immigration from the
intensifies
East intensifies questions of national identity.
Australia seems to be the most enthusiastic sports-loving
sports—loving country in the world.
During the 2004 Summer Olympic Games in Athens, teachers and students dis- dis-
cussed the events with great excitement in class and during recess. At one of the
workshops, Adam Lefstein and I suggested to the the facilitators that they should plan
a community of thinking around the fertile question, “Do the the Olympics advance our
purpose was to examine just what values the Olympics do promote.
values?” The purpose
Sledgehammer”; a true
One of the facilitators said that it was “undermining with a sledgehammer”;
Australian couldn’t bear questions that undermined their love love of sports. In the
the com-
munity of thinking (in an elementary school in Melbourne) that formed around this
question, the research teams dealt with questions such as: What happens to the losers?
questions such
What happens to the winners (after the moment of triumph on the platform)? What
the countries that host the Olympics? Who really profits
is gained by the profits from the
Olympics? What values are transmitted by competitive physical activity? This com-
munity of thinking somewhat “poisoned” the the facilitators’ and learners’ experience
of sports, but it taught them something worthwhile (much knowledge, much pain).
New Zealand, students in a primary school examined the advantages and dis-
In New dis-
advantages of establishing a united country (“We (“We would have a great football
team!”). Another community of thinking examined the the complex relations with the
New Zealand.
Maori –— the indigenous inhabitants of New
In Australia, too, a community of thinking examined the complex relations with
the Aboriginal inhabitants of Australia.
3.2.2 Playing Field

The Playing Field of
of the Fertile Question:
Question: The Unit
of
of Pedagogical
Pedagogical Knowledge
In principle one could ask a fertile question and establish a community of thinking
without a curriculum. Many think tanks operate that way way very effectively. They ask
very effectively.
a central question; split up
up into research teams that investigate aspects of it; and
the research teams from time to time to share the
assemble the they have
the knowledge they
developed. Indeed, the principal and teachers of a school could act as a community
fact, when we are invited into a school to guide teachers in turning
of thinking. In fact,
classrooms into communities of thinking this is one one of our strategies: we
we ask the
principal and the teachers to establish a community of thinking. The fertile question
that we propose “How can we adjust our school to the values and needs of our
propose is, “How
school’s community of teachers divides up
times?” Then the school’s up into research teams
the various aspects of the
that examine the the school —
– the educational purposes
purposes and goals,
the organizational structure, the system of assessment, the curriculum, discipline
102
Communityof
The Practice
Table 3.2 Components of the

Components of
pedagogical
pedagogical knowledge
knowledge unit Insight
Insight Concepts
Concepts
Skills Controversies
Controversies
Purposes
Purposes
problems, relations
problems, relations with parents,
parents, and so on – knowledge
knowledge. From the knowledge
— and share knowledge.
they have constructed, the community of teachers produce practical recommenda-

tions for school improvement.
However, when we are introducing a community of thinking in a school, we have
However,
to take account of the applicable constraints; one of them is a mandated curriculum. curriculum.9 9
In reality, the fertile question is not simply posed; it is posed in the framework of a
given curriculum. The fertile question thus “plays” on a certain fi field,
eld, and in order to
well, we must understand the structure of that fi
play well, field.
eld.
field
The fi eld upon the fertile question plays is a certain unit of knowledge that
upon which the
is included in a certain school subject. What is a pedagogical knowledge unit
pedagogical knowledge unit,, and
subject?
what is a school subject ? We have redefined
redefi ned these concepts according to our educa-
tional goals. Let us begin with the fi first.
rst.
For the purposes
purposes of teaching and learning, we dissect every every unit of knowledge
five
into fi ve component parts and create a pedagogical knowledge unit
pedagogical knowledge five
unit.. The five parts
insights, concepts,
are insights , concepts, skills,
skills , controversies,
controversies , and purposes
purposes (cf. Karmon 2000). When
2000 ).
a facilitator wishes to teach some unit of knowledge —– for example, the the structure of
the atom, the industrial revolution, and currents in modern art —– she must decon-
struct the unit of knowledge in order to develop the pedagogical knowledge unit
(Table 3.2
(Table 3.2).).
By
By insight we refer to the pedagogical heart of the the unit of knowledge, its “soul.”
“soul.”
Insight is deep and inflinfluential
uential understanding that the facilitators of the the community
of thinking want the learners to carry carry with them over time, even after those learners
have forgotten most of the details included in the the unit of knowledge. The facilitators
want this insight to accompany
accompany the learners over time because it explains a lot and
also because it will make them, in some sense, wiser and better people. Insight,
therefore, is a formative idea, an idea that makes a signifi significant
cant change in the wayway a
person grasps
person grasps and relates to important subjects. It touches not only on what the
learners understand but also on who they will be. Of course, it is impossible to
guarantee the formation of insights —– insights are are formed spontaneously and they they
9
Of course,
Of could ignore
course, one could constraints—– the curriculum,
ignore the constraints matriculationexams,
curriculum, matriculation tried
exams, etc. We tried
effect far-reaching
to effect change, but within
far—reaching change, within the constraints. clear that we were
constraints. It is not clear were right. Perhaps
right. Perhaps
implementationof
the implementation of our ideas
ideas requires more radical
requires a more approach. We adopted
radical approach. adopted an approach
approach we
called “pragmatic
called radicalism,” meaning
“pragmatic radicalism,” going as far as possible
meaning going within the given constraints,
possible within constraints, but
more we proceeded
the more with our experiment,
proceededwith more we recognized
experiment, the more need for greater
recognized the need greater radical—
radical-
ism and less pragmatism. Instead of
pragmatism. Instead of trying framework to the school’s
adjust the CoT framework
trying to adjust school’s structure,
structure,
should adjust
we should school’s structure
adjust the school’s framework of
structure to the framework of CoT.
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
103
have a subjective kernel that cannot be controlled —– but it is possible to supply the
essential conditions for their emergence.
emergence.
Insight is a formative idea (1) with great explanatory power; power; (2) with an under-
mining element, contrary to common sense sense“);
10
; (3) central to the discipline; (4) inter-
esting and important to the facilitator; (5) likely to be interesting and important to
the learners; and (6) important for subsequent investigation and learning that will be
conducted on and connected to pre-existing learning and investigation.
Insight is not an isolated entity; it takes place on a platform of concepts concepts.. The
facilitator must choose the the concepts connected logically to the desired insight,
emergence. But concepts have a
which are also likely to support its “spontaneous” emergence.
value of their own, they should be understood in the framework of the unit of
own, and they
knowledge unit being learned, even if if they
they are not ultimately useful in promoting
the desired insight. The concepts are are the bricks from which the pedagogical knowl-
edge unit is built.
The pedagogical knowledge unit includes not only “knowing that” (concepts)
but also “knowing how” ((skills). are general skills (logical thinking skills,
skills). There are
skill at paying attention, expression, and the the like), and there are disciplinary skills
(to multiply and divide in arithmetic, to use a map map in geography, to perform an
experiment in physics, and the like). In the framework of dealing with a certain unit
defines
of knowledge, the facilitator defi nes other skills —– general and/or disciplinary —– and
inculcates them because they are vital for understanding the unit of knowledge,
because they
they promote the development of insights, and also because they have value
own.
of their own.
The pedagogical knowledge unit is not a closed and static unit (an object); it is
more or less basic controversies
replete with more controversies.For example: Do
. For example: D0 leaders
leaders create historical
create historical
circumstances or vice versa? Does art imitate reality or vice versa? Is survival the
result of purposeful adaptation (Lamarck) or chance mutation (Darwinism)? And
other controversies —– not all of which are so “big.” “big.” It is also a good idea to include
controversies that have been resolved in the unit of
controversies of knowledge, demonstrate
knowledge, to demonstrate
the dynamic, sometimes dramatic character of the emergence emergence of knowledge.
People create units of knowledge
People knowledge to answer question or to act more
answer some question intelligently
more intelligently
in the world. Units of knowledge thus have a human purpose. purpose. In Perkins’ words,
knowledge is a design, meaning that it is the product of a plan or intentional activity.activity.
Contemplation of the unit of knowledge
Contemplation knowledge from the viewpoint
viewpoint of its purpose
purpose —– from the
viewpoint of the question it is meant to answer and of the things it is meant to
make possible —– implies contemplation of knowledge from the the “meta” level or from
the outside. The purpose
purpose of purpose
purpose is to show that knowledge is human –— created
by people so they can understand better and act more reasonably.
Now, having described the structure of
Now, of the playing fifield the pedagogical
eld —– the
knowledge unit —– upon
upon which the fertile question plays, let us see see how the fertile
question adapts to it. Let us take one of the fertile questions listed above, the
‘0
10
Insight can be consonant
Insight consonant with common intuition, but the insight
common sense or our intuition, of a pedagogical
insight of pedagogical
discipline refers
discipline contradicts or undermines
refers to one that contradicts undermines them.
them. The goal of of undermining arouse
undermining is to arouse
motivation to learn
motivation learn and to advance
advance thinking
thinking to a higher,
higher, disciplinary
disciplinary level.
104
Communityof
The Practice
question asked by the facilitators of the community of thinking in the Gvanim

School in the eighth grade history curriculum, the subject of of the Middle Ages:
“Why did the the peasant class accept the rule of the nobility and the church, even
though those classes oppressed them?”
The insight that the facilitators in this community sought to arouse is that,
throughout history, oppressed people have accepted and condoned the economic,
social, and cultural order that oppressed them. This insight contradicts the the intuition
of young
young learners and undermines their common sense. According to the common
sense intuition of most of them, oppressed people rebel against those who oppress oppress
them, and they, too,too, the students, certainly would do so! This insight explains many many
phenomena: the relative stability of regimes where a small minority oppresses oppresses the
majority; the wayway that mentality (religion, ideology, prevailing opinions) serves the
interests of the oppressor
oppressor class; thethe complex relation of the oppressed to deprivation
of their freedom (the escape freedom); and so on. It also explains
escape from freedom); many historical
explains many
phenomena; hence, it is central in the discipline of history. Moreover, it also explains
the “transparent” oppression that characterizes our liberal, democratic, capitalist
societies, which elevate the values of freedom and equality; and we learn about the
past in order to understand the present and what is likely to develop from it. (At a
meeting of the community of thinking that dealt with this question, one learner said
that this insight also explains the oppression of students in school. This comment
aroused a stormy debate in which learners and facilitators revealed the various scho-
lastic mechanisms of oppression. In the end it was was decided that some learners would
propose a suitable alternative for schools, in which there was no oppression.)
propose
concepts,, some of them general and some depen-
The insight is connected with concepts
specificc historical context. The facilitators of the
dent on the specifi the community dealt both
with concepts of the fi first
rst kind —– such as hegemony, rationalization, ideology, means
of production, oppression, and exploitation –— and with those of the second type such
chivalry, serfdom, and the Catholic church. The guiding idea was
as feudalism, chivalry, was to
teach the general concepts in a specifispecificc historical context.
The facilitators chose to concentrate systematically on certain skills that seemed
vital to them for dealing with the the unit of knowledge — – both general skills and those
related to the field.
the field. For example, one general skill skill that was
was chosen was the ability to
summarize an article or a book and present it in a clear and interesting way. way. A skill
related to the fifield
eld was to interpret a historical event from several points of view —–
economic, cultural, and so on. on.
facilitators did not indoctrinate
The facilitators indoctrinate the learners with the thesis of oppression.
oppression. They
They
sought to promote controversy
controversy about it. They views or reser-
contradictory views
They presented contradictory reser-
vations and encouraged
vations encouraged the learners to relate to them critically fact, people some-
critically (in fact,
times do rebel against those who oppress them; they
oppress them; they don’t merely condone them).them).
Central to the fi fifth
fth component of the pedagogical knowledge unit —– the purpose purpose
of the unit of knowledge –— was the hypothesis that oppressed people tend to accept
and condone their oppression. This issue was discussed in various ways ways with the
aim of revealing the questions that the unit of knowledge was meant to answer and
the phenomena it was was supposed to explain.
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
105
Thus, the fertile question plays on a fi fivefold

vefold fifield, the fi
eld, the ve-part unit of knowl-
five-part
edge. The unit of knowledge is not presented in its entirety in the curriculum; it is
produced by creative interpretation of the subjects contained in the the curriculum.
In the case discussed just now, for example, the curriculum subject was was the Middle
Ages, but the pedagogical knowledge unit –— the Middle Ages from the standpoint of
the thesis of oppression —– was designed by the facilitators. They made it into what
it was with a fertile question. (The facilitators in a community of thinking do not
copy
copy the curriculum; rather they See Table
they create it. See Table 2.2
2.2)) Thus, the fertile question
the curriculum just as it is shaped by it. The curriculum, if
shapes the if you
you will, is the
the form.
matter; the fertile question is the
One further comment before concluding the section on the pedagogical knowl-
unit: creation of the unit is not based solely on the understanding that we
edge unit: we want
encourage in the lesson or series of lessons but also on what the learners have in
to encourage
their minds. That is, in planning the pedagogical knowledge unit according to its
five
fi the facilitator must estimate what the learners think, their intuitive or
ve parts, the
naive theories. In thethe example presented here, the the naive, intuitive theory held by
most of the learners is that oppressed people tend to revolt against their oppressors
oppressors
strive for freedom. This theory imparts the
and to strive the undermining impact to the fertile
question and the unit of knowledge. Thus, the the general rule is that learners are
are not a
tabula rasa; they come to the encounter equipped with pseudo-theories about the
world. They already “know” what war is, why objects are attracted to the earth, why
the summer and cold in the winter,
it’s hot in the winter, why couples divorce, and so on. When
a unit of knowledge is planned and and taught, one must try to gauge
gauge what the learners
already “know” and to connect with that and undermine it. it.“
11
3.2.3 A Climate of Questioning

of Questioning
In The Unschooled Mind (1991), Howard Gardner describes a pedagogical dream

(educators have strange dreams): he appears and asks the
appears in a school and the students, in
they dealing
are they
class and during recess, what question disturbs them, what question are
with? Instead gawking at him in amazement and wondering whether to call for help,
the students answer him immediately, as if if nothing were more natural, and share
1‘
11
Piaget investigated
Piaget investigated the naive theories of children,
theories of recently they have
children, but recently have been rediscovered, as it
been rediscovered,
were, and have been
were, subject of
been the subject of much
much fascinating
fascinating research. Gardner (1991)
research. Gardner (1991) was impressed
impressed by
the persistence
persistence ofof these
these ideas. Students, he wrote,
ideas. Students, wrote, slam the door behind them when
behind them when they leave
school; the act of
school; of slamming
slamming the door shakes the dust off off their naive theories
theories —– the theories
theories with
which they came to school
which school —– and they once again minds. Twelve years of
again take over their minds. of school,
school, so
theories with which
change the theories
it seems, did not change which they arrived
arrived in school.
school. Here are some naive beliefs
beliefs
held before encounter with the disciplines,
before schooling, before the encounter it’s hot in the summer
disciplines, which he lists: it’s summer
winter because
and cold in the winter because the earth
earth moves nearer farther from it; heavy
nearer to the sun and farther objects
heavy objects
attracted to the earth
are attracted earth with greater acceleration than light objects;
greater acceleration evolution is a purposeful,
objects; evolution purposeful,
intentional process
intentional Lamarckism or simply
(belief in Lamarckism
process (belief theism); wars break
simply theism); break out because leaders
because bad leaders
attack tranquil
attack nations; a work of
tranquil nations; of art is good when
when it describes
describes reality exactly.
reality exactly.
106
Communityof
The Practice
their questions with him. An Intel-Lect School based on communities of thinking is

fulfill
an attempt to fulfi the children deal with ques-
ll Gardner’s dream. In such a school, the ques-
tions and struggle with them all the time with the help of facilitators and colleagues
(okay, not all the time; one
(okay, they also deal with other things, but for a large
one hopes that they
they are involved in efforts to answer questions posed to
part of their study time they
them and others which they themselves raise).
Since people tend to be lazy (as Nietzsche wrote at the beginning of his book,
Educator), and since students in school are educated to be lazy,
Schopenhauer as Educator),
Schopenhauer
“to do school” with the minimum effort, it is no easy
easy matter to encourage
encourage learners
to pose
pose meaningful questions. Questions consume mental energy; energy; they unsettle
the mind and require the questioner to struggle, to investigate, to locate knowl-
edge, to understand knowledge, to create knowledge, and to articulate ideas. In
order for learners to ask questions without inhibition, a climate that encourages
encourages
questioning must be created. To that end, one can employ various strategies. For
example:
Making Questioning an Explicit TopicTopic:: To make vigorous use of terms and state-
field
the semantic fi “questioning,” “aa
cc
ments taken from the eld of questioning. For example, “questioning,”
open question,
77 ‘4
fertile question,” “a barren question,” “an open question,” a
“a closed question,” “an
undermining question,” “a predictable question,” and also “what questions can we
are the questions that the text is asking us?”
ask about the text?” or “what are
Central:: To start every
Making the Question Central every meeting with a question —– of the facili-
the learners. For example, “At this
tators or of the this meeting, I want to ask the
the following
“Let’s start this
question. . .”; “Let’s
question…”; this session with the challenging question that Sara asked
the central
every session, a possible answer to the
last time.” And at the conclusion of every
question should be given or possible answers to questions that branched off from it.
To Undermine by Means of of Questions
Questions:: To motivate discussion by casting doubt on
accepted truisms –— prevalent truisms or those that learners agree
agree upon
upon during a
meeting. To preserve the cycle of undermining: undermining preconceptions, cre-
preserve the
ating a new consensus (or restoring the cognitive equilibrium), undermining it,
consensus. . ..
creating new consensus….
Questions:: Instead of giving lectures about knowledge,
To Turn Knowledge into Questions
pose questions that will lead to knowledge —– the unknown part of it. The point is
pose
not to interrogate —– to ask a question with the purpose
purpose of getting to the “correct”
answer that the teacher has in mind. (Answers areare not hidden treasures. One stand-
up
up comic, responding to a teachers’ strike, said that ifif the government would pay
pay
the students the correct answers.) Rather they
they would tell the
the teachers better, they
are open
open questions that provoke controversy, and the answers to them are not
predictable.
To Establish a Question
Question Bank: document the good
Bank: To document good questions
questions that arose during a
arose during
meeting on a poster or smart board and to invite learners
learners to “borrow” research ques-
“borrow” research ques-
tions “bank” (they will be returned
tions from the “bank” interest: good answers).
returned with interest: answers). To encourage
encourage
learners to increase
the learners increase the bank’s
bank’s capital depositinggood
capital by depositing questions.
good questions.
3.2 The Pedagogy
The of Questioning
107
To Excavate thethe Archaeology ofof Knowledge:

Knowledge: Where there is now now knowledge, there
were once questions, but the questions became petrifiedpetrified and were forgotten, and
the knowledge is transmitted as though it were detached from them. We must exca-
vate that knowledge and lay
vate the remnants of the questions that produced it.
lay bare the
These remnants should be presented, and it should be shown how knowledge relates
show that knowledge is an answer to questions that disturbed people and
to them, to show
still disturb them —– and that can still disturb learners.
To Make Questioning an Ongoing TaskTask:: To ask the
the students to generate questions on
various occasions. To invent questions during classroom discussion, in homework,
and in research. For example, an extra credit
in an examination (if there is one), and
question in a take-home examination might be: be: “Write a question that puts the topic
light.”
of study in an interesting light.”
Even Proscribe Answers:
Suspend or Even
To Suspend Answers: Not to rush to offer answers
answers or to provide
answers at all. (Why
answers (Why make “correct” answer in the
make an effort if the teacher will give the “correct”
Someone once
end? Someone school is the only
once said that a school world where somebody
only place in the world somebody
knows asks
who knows asks somebody doesn’t know.)
somebody who doesn’t transfer the function
know.) To transfer function of providing
providing
students. Not to be afraid
answers to the students.
answers afraid of long silences. And,
long silences. And, even more, forbid
more, to forbid
giving answers.
giving students away
answers. To wean the students dependenceon answers
away from dependence answers by forbidding
time. To reward only the
them from giving answers for a certain time. the fi
finding questions.
nding of questions.
And, most importantly,
And, immediatelyjudge
importantly, not immediately judge answers “correct” or “incorrect.”
answers as “correct” “incorrect.”
Questions:: To give
To Celebrate Good Questions give enthusiastic, positive feedback to good ques-ques-
tions asked on various occasions. For example, “Great question, Henry! It’s one of
the questions that has disturbed many the board.” One
Let’s write it on the
many thinkers. Let’s
could also shake Henry’s hand. “A fi fine
ne question, Anne! It sheds new new light on the
subject.” (The entire session could be devoted to Anne and her question.) Celebration
subject.”
must be accompanied by an explanation of what makes the question so good —–
what’s the reason for celebrating?
However, for all their importance, the tactics for encouraging questioning cannot
However,
by themselves create a climate of questioning; the entire educational environment
must help. Organization of the space
space and time, the method of assessment, relations
between facilitators and learners, patterns of leadership and administration, the con-
nections with the parents, and so on —– all of these are vital for promoting a climate
of questioning, of study steeped in thought. In such a climate, the the facilitators and the
learners think, inquire, discuss, and philosophize because they are interested,
because they
they want to understand, and because “life
“life without investigation isn’t worth
living.”
living.”
The pedagogy of questioning is the living pulse of the community of thinking; it
the research, the concluding
throbs in all of its components –— in the fertile question, the
performances, in initiation, and in feedback. We will encounter it repeatedly as we
deal with these components. The questions —– the fertile question and the research
questions —– are not given in advance. They have to be invented. Hence, the the answers
and solutions are also not given in advance, and they, they, too, must be invented. All
this gives the community of thinking a spontaneous character, unexpected and
108
Communityof
The Practice
Table 3.3 From given problems solutions to invented

problems and solutions invented problems solutions
problems and solutions
Problem
Problem Means
Means Solutions
Solutions
Level
Level 11 Given Given Given
Level 2 Given Given To be found
found
Level 3 Given To be found
found To be found
found
Level 4 To be found/invented
found/invented To be found/invented
found/invented To be found/invented
found/invented
improvised to a large degree. This requires a period of time –— at least two years
years —– for
adaptation on the part of the facilitators and learners. The leap from Level 11 (see
Table 3.3
Table typifies
3.3),), which typifi es teaching and learning in a traditional classroom, to Level
typifies
4, which typifi es teaching and learning in a community of thinking, calls for a leap
of both faith and practice. Just as one cannot expect a smooth and painless transition
years of playing in a military band to playing in a jazz ensemble, one cannot
from years
expect such a transition from the framework of a traditional classroom to that of a
community of thinking.
The Pedagogy
3.3 The Pedagogy of Inquiry
The second stage the community of thinking is that of inquiry.

stage in the inquiry.12 12
the most
This is the
difficult
important and diffi stage to implement. After the facilitator has presented the
cult stage
fertile question
fertile initiatedthem
learners and initiated
question to the learners initiation, see below),
them (on initiation, below), the learners
generate research questions and organize around them in research teams of two two to
three researchers. (If a learner insists on working alone, that’s okay. okay. Though we
support team work sincesince it enhances each one’s
one’s intelligence and willingness to share, share,
“introvert” students who work better alone.) The research questions relate
there are “introvert”
to the fertile question and are derived from it; they are its its sub-questions.
sub-questions. One of
attributes of a fertile
the attributes fertile question noted, that it is rich,
question is, as noted, tends to be
rich, that is, it tends divisible
be divisible
sub-questions (the question
into sub-questions indeed fertile
question is indeed fertile —
– pregnant sub-questions).
pregnant with sub-questions).
3.3.1
3.3.1 The Research
Research Question
A research question has four basic characteristics: it is interesting, open,

open, connected,
and practical.
Interesting: A good research question is an interesting question both subjectively
Interesting:
Subjectively, it simply has to grab the learners. Often learners ask
objectively. Subjectively,
and objectively.
questions that don’t really interest them —– because they the facilitators,
they want to please the
because the questions seem easy easy to them, and/or because they
they don’t know what
12In
12
educational literature
In educational literature that seeks to encourage investigative learning,
encourage active investigative learning, three terms are
current: research,
current: discovery, and inquiry.
research, discovery, inquiry. For our purposes, there is no need to go into the slight
purposes, there
differences among
differences them. In our context
among them. context the goal is not to produce future researchers
produce future researchers but to make
the process of learning
process of learning as meaningful
meaningful as possible.
possible.
3.3 The Pedagogy
The of Inquiry
Pedagogy of Inquiry 109
109
interests them.
interests them. Objectively, good research
Objectively, a good question has
research question has to arouse general or principled
arouse general
view on the subject, turn thinking
new point of view
curiosity. That is, it must offer a new
like.
around, suggest new hypothetical issues, and the like.
openness of a fertile question and that of a research question are similar

Open:: The openness
Open
but not identical. open research question is essentially
identical. An open essentially one has no unequivocal
one that has unequivocal
answer that depends on missing knowledge that can be supplied. Such a question
requires taking a position: “What do I think about thisthis matter?” “Why do I disagree
with that position?” “What is my my interpretation of the text?” and so on.
the on. Students in
schools tend to engage
engage in what Bereiter and Scardamalia (1987)
(1987 ) call “report writing,”
writing,”
the essence of which is to collect an assortment of factual fi findings.
ndings. The facts don’t
the writer.
affect the writer. They are described in books or other sources, and the writer recy- recy-
cles them. The openness
openness of a research question seeks to wean learners away
away from
this refusal to take a position and to force them to state and justify what they they think
one might imagine).
(and this is harder than one
Connected:: This characteristic refers to the connection of the research question to the
Connected
field
field of knowledge being studied and to the fertile question. Our experience shows
that learners tend to leap to all sorts field
sorts of questions that aren’t connected to the field of
knowledge or to the fertile question. The connection of the research question to the
fertile question is one way
way to discipline student thinking (disciplinary thinking is
guided by the rules of a given fifield
eld of knowledge, and therefore, it is disciplined).
Practical: the research question is identical to that of the fertile
Practical: The practicality of the
question. Here, too,
too, our experience shows that learners generate questions without
considering time and space
space limitations, limitations of their ability and that of others,
and similar constraints. But practicality is not a given; what seems impractical at
first
fi rst glance could seem practical after some actions have been taken in the right
direction. Making a question practical is part of the processing of of the question
question..
characteristics do not ensure that a good research question will
These four characteristics will be gen-
gen-
erated. It is not enough to tell the learners, characteristicsof
learners, “These are the four characteristics of a good
research question; get to work!” Making the learners’
learners’ initial question into a research
sometimes a prolonged process
question is sometimes systematicallyupgrading
process that requires systematically upgrading the
question.. In the process
question upgrading the questions,
process of upgrading facilitators help the learners refor-
questions, facilitators refor-
questions, erroneous
raw questions,
mulate raw questions (questions
erroneous questions (questions that imply faulty conceptual
faulty conceptual
knowledge), trivia] questions into good research questions.
knowledge), and trivial facilitators work
questions. The facilitators
with each learner andand research team,
team, and they invite the whole group
they invite group of learners to
discuss the research questions that the various teams have raised. In processing the
question, care must be taken to avoid avoid generating a model research question so far
removed from the initial
initial question that the learners have lost interest in it. 13
it.13
‘3
13
lesson on the history
One girl in a lesson of the Middle
history of Middle Ages
Ages suggested
suggested the question: “How many
question: “How doors
many doors
castle?” The teacher
were there in a castle?” teacher understood
understood that what interested
interested the girl was life in the castle —–
just how did people within its walls?
people live within walls? The question about the way of
question about of life in the castle
castle was
upgraded into a question
upgraded about the history
question about of castles:
history of castles: what caused
caused the rise decline (with the
rise and decline
invention of the cannon)
invention of of the castle
cannon) of castle in the Middle
Middle Ages?
Ages? The girl wrote excellent research
wrote an excellent research
subject.
paper on that subject.
paper
110
110 Teaching and Learning in a Community
3 Teaching of Thinking: The
Communityof Practice
The Practice
community0fthinking
Learning in a community the cycles of
of thinking is based on the ofwork
work in teams and
whole group.
work in the whole group. The whole group
group is enlisted at various stages to help the
research teams. During the discussion of the the teams’
teams’ research questions, for example,
the teams present their questions, and the whole community examines them in the
light of agreed-upon criteria, improves them, or suggests alternative questions.
the research question is critical for the research to which
As noted, the quality of the
it leads. Hence, a great deal must be invested in processing it. However,
However, even after
investing the processing, the connection with the research question can be severed.
Research teams can “divorce” a research question in favor of a better one or theythey can
change their research question in various ways.
ways.
the research question are
Like the characteristics of the fertile question, those of the
they can be changed, added to, or whittled down.
not carved in stone; they down.14
14
3.3.2 The Research

Research
After the facilitator

facilitator and learnershave
and the learners approved the research questions,
have approved questions, the research
themselves according to the following
teams set to work by themselves following general guidelines:
guidelines:
your research question.
1. Formulate your
1.
2.
N . Suggest hypotheses, assumptions, and preliminary speculations that answer the
research question.
3.. Divide the research question into sub-questions.
4.. List available and possible sources of information.
your research tools.
5.. Identify your
OOQQUl-Pb.)
6.. Present preliminary research proposals.

7.. Make a preliminary decision regarding the concluding performance.
define
8.. Set a schedule and defi ne the long- and short-range tasks; divide tasks amongamong
ability.
yourselves according to interest and ability.
9. Examine your
your research question again —– is it interesting, open,
open, connected, and
practical?
10. Prepare a list of theoretical and practical questions for the
10. the facilitator in order to
receive assistance as the work proceeds.
These guidelines intentionally combine instructions derived from a version of
scientificc method and instructions derived from the
the scientifi the need to work effectively as
individuals and groups.
groups. Remember: the goal of the community of thinking is not to
produce future researchers –— physicists, historians, sociologists, etc.
etc. –
— for society;
14Once
14
when I was guiding
Once when teachers in a workshop
guiding teachers fertile questions,
workshop on fertile teachers were
questions, the teachers were not satis-
satis—
fied
fi fertile question
ed with the fertile because it lacked
invented, because
question they had invented, lacked one characteristic.
characteristic. I told them
them that
the question fertile, even though
question was quite fertile, lacked that characteristic.
though it lacked characteristic. One teacher
teacher said, “But it’s
written in the article
written article that a fertile
fertile question
question has six characteristics!”
characteristics!” I told her, “It’s okay. I wrote
wrote the
article.” That didn’t make much
article.” much ofof an impression
impression on her. “It says six, and we have to fifind question
nd a question
that has six!” she insisted.
insisted.
3.3 The Pedagogy
The of Inquiry
Pedagogy of Inquiry 111
111
its purpose
purpose is to enable the the learners to develop while dealing with knowledge — – to
work with knowledge, to work with other people, to plan, to take responsibility, to
think independently, to discover areas of interest and meaning, and so on. on. Therefore,
the above guidelines do not derive only, only, or mainly, from the research methods of the
disciplines but also, and principally, from pedagogical considerations.
The fi first
rst guideline calls for formulation of the the research question. It is not at all
clear what the question is and whether the members of the the group
group like it. The second
scientificc method, where it is common practice to formulate
guideline is akin to the scientifi
a hypothesis and to try to confi confirmrm or refute it by experiment and observation.
However, this guideline is written somewhat loosely,
However, loosely, because the goal is to help the
teams think and investigate, not to implement the scientifi scientificc method. The initial
hypotheses speculations play an important role in the the process investigative learn-
process of investigative
ing, because they they guide it and lay lay the foundation for surprises when different or
contrary results are attained. The third guideline does for the the research question what
research questions did for the fertile question. The goal of dissecting the question is
to make the the work systematic and also to enable each student on the research team to
concentrate on a single question, which is a sub-question of the research question.
The fourth guideline seeks to distinguish between available sources of information
library, another library,
(the school library, library, home, the Internet, etc.) and sources of informa-
tion that areare not available but which can be accessed with some imagination and
effort.15
effort. 15
The fi fifth
fth guideline is quite rigid methodologically. It calls for thethe investiga-
tors to explain what tools they they plan to use to create knowledge that will answer their
research question, because the the research tools vary
vary from discipline to discipline. The
sixth guideline sets sets a primary goal.
goal. It is important to recall that a community of
thinking, like other frameworks of the third model, is “freedom within a frame-
work.” That is, the
work.” the learners have many
many levels of freedom (to fi find
nd or generate research
questions, to manage
manage the research in various ways, ways, to initiate a concluding perfor-
mance, and so on), but this this freedom is subject to a strict framework of rules of work,
schedules, and intellectual standards. Regarding the schedule, it is important that
first
the fi rst proposal be submitted on the set date. After the fi first
rst proposals have been
presented to the the facilitators, the whole community of thinking meets to discuss
them, mainly from a positive point of view –— what might be done to improve the
planned research? The The seventh
seventh guideline influences
guideline influences the character of the research. It is
possible desirable) to submit a written research
possible (and desirable) concluding
research report for the concluding
performance, but it is possible to produce a fi lm, organize a seminar, hold a public
film,
trial, and the likelike (see below). The eighth guideline is intended to make the the work
efficient.
more effi cient. The ninth invites the investigators to reexamine their question and
research proposal: do they still approve approve of them, or do they they want to rethink the
whole business? The fi final
nal guideline directs the investigators to continue their work
full steam ahead.
A research
15A
15
community of
research question in a community of thinking
thinking in an Israeli school asked what would happen
happen in
Hong Kong when it was restored of the learners traveled to Hong Kong, inter-
1997. Three of
restored to China in 1997. inter—
viewed some experts, surveyed opinions in the street, and brought back video evidence from the arena
of events (most of
of of them predicted a catastrophe). Intemet.
catastrophe). Today such a trip could be made on the Internet.
112
The Practice
In their application, the guidelines are infl influenced

uenced by the the area of knowledge
within which the research is being conducted. The questions, the the hypotheses, the
sources of knowledge, the tasks, the concluding performance, the the research tools, the
confirmation
tools for confi rmation and refutation —– all of these depend to one one degree or another
on a given fi field
eld of knowledge and its internal standards for what is regarded as
knowledge. Nevertheless, fi fidelity field
delity to the fi eld of knowledge is not the the sole or even
the most important criterion for evaluating the the research. The measure of successful
research should focus on the learning processprocess of thethe student investigators and what
they have achieved personally.
The guidelines, likelike the
the characteristics of the the fertile question and the research
question, are the product of our experience in facilitating communities of thinking.
In a different context, one can expand or limit the guidelines.
Gail Talshir (2000a) has described several models of team research. According
first
to the fi the autonomous model —
rst model —– the the community of thinking breaks up
– the
into research teams, and each one managesmanages its inquiry in its own own way. This “classic
model” raises typical problems, such as the diffi difficulty the facilitators to reach
culty of the
each group
group and guide it, the the possible disintegration of the the common denominator of
the community, and more. It appearsappears that this model is suitable for advanced com-
munities of thinking, where the facilitators and learners have already accumulated
many hours of experience in a community of thinking. The other models, which
many
restrict the freedom of the research teams, also present typical problems. The second
scafiolding model –— structures the
model –— the scaffolding the stage of inquiry according to the
stages of writing the report: the facilitator teaches how to formulate a research
question —– and the teams meet to do so; then she teaches how how to raise a hypothesis —–
and the teams meet to develop hypotheses. The teams have freedom with respect to
the content, but the scaffolding is common to them all. all. According to the breadth
model facilitatorsmake
model,, the facilitators several basic demands upon
make several upon all of the teams,
teams, for example,
to formulate a research question and defend it (to show show why it is a good research
prepare a research program
question) and to prepare program and bring it to the plenary for discus-
like. The methodological model structures the community according to
sion, and the like.
the research method. For example, in a community of thinking in sociology, sociology, one can
surveys, and observation as three methods of research that
choose deep interviews, surveys,
are to be learned and with which one one gradually progresses.
progresses. The disciplinary model
of the research stage is arranged around a certain discipline. In a community of
thinking in biology, for example, the teams choose an ecological project, and they they
might be asked to present an analysis of non-biotic and biotic factors, an analysis of
the food chain, a description of an ecological problem, and a description and
analysis of human’s infl influence
uence on thethe ecological system. According to another
model, the jigsaw model,, each research team concentrates on part of the fertile
jigsaw model
question, and the sum of the parts completes the picture. There are are other models and
they can be combined. Some models make decentralization possible and grant
maximal autonomy to the research teams, and others are centralized and directed by
the facilitators. The framework of the community of thinking can thus be opened
and closed, decentralized or centralized, depending on the the circumstances and the
facilitators’ judgment.
3.4 The Pedagogy
The of the Concluding
Pedagogy of Performance
Concluding Performance 113
The research stage is the hardest to orchestrate and guide. At the stage of the
the traditional structure of the class is more or less preserved —
fertile question, the – one
teacher teaches manymany students. At the research stage, this structure disintegrates.
library, at academic institutions,
The learners work in teams in the classroom, the library,
observation posts, and in other places, and the facilitators help them with
at observation with organiza-
tion and guidance. Since leaving the school grounds may may pose difficulty,
pose a diffi the school
culty, the
must be properly equipped for the activity of the the communities of thinking — – with a
rich library,
library, computers, work spaces, etc. Above all, there must be a culture
spaces, experts, etc.
of inquiry in which the learners assume increasing responsibility and and initiative.
Communities of thinking stand or fall at this this stage –— that of research. There are
many difficulties:
many diffi ages do not know how to work individually and in
culties: learners of all ages
groups;
groups; the facilitators fifind difficult
nd it difficult to reach the research teams frequently enough;
students, and facilitators, lose the plot; leaving the school for laboratories, observa-
sites, interviews with experts, etc., is complicated and expensive. Undeniably,
tion sites,
there are problems!
problems! However, the essence of the problem does not derive from
the situation we are striving to attain, where most of the learning takes place in the
framework of largely autonomous research teams. This is a situation that some
schools have achieved, and it works well, well, sometimes very diffi--
impressively. The diffi
very impressively.
culty derives from the transitional stage between a traditional school and an Intel-
Lect School (see below). People have to know how how to implement and handle that
transitional stage. Impatient principals, facilitators, and learners, with no vision,
find
fi difficult
nd it diffi they rush back to the teaching
cult to negotiate the transitional stage, so they
and learning familiar to them. Indeed, the gravitational fi field
eld of the familiar is
extremely powerful.
After the research question has been formulated and the program has
the research program
been presented and conficonfirmed,
rmed, the teams begin research, the purpose
purpose of which is to
answer the question in accordance with their research plan. Work in the whole
group continues in parallel with the
group the research work of the
the teams. It is dedicated to
various manners of initiation, central to which is the mutual presentation of the the state
teams’ research. The cycle of work in the teams, assembling with the
of the teams’ the whole
group,
group, then work with the the teams again, epitomizes the dynamics of work in a com-
munity of thinking.
The Pedagogy
3.4 The the Concluding
Pedagogy of the Performance
Concluding Performance
The main goal of the third stage

stage in the community of thinking is to encourage
encourage the
upon knowledge by organizing it in order to present it to
learners to act with and upon
others –— according to the rules of organization and presentation of knowledge in the
field.
given fi (also) organize
are interconnected: we (also)
eld. Organization and representation are
knowledge so that we can present it comprehensibly to others. The organization of
knowledge is performed according to the rules of given genres field
genres —– research in one field
one area or another, and so on. The knowl-
or another of knowledge, a work of art in one
edge is presented according to rules of presentation —– the principles of a lecture, of a
114
The Practice
dialogue, and so on. In the concluding performance, the learners build their insights
by organizing and presenting them to an audience in various various ways – an academic
ways —
research paper,
paper, a position paper, film,
paper, a fi like.
lm, a conference, a debate, and the like.
The fifinal
nal performance is intended to replace the traditional examination, the
pencil-and-paper exam, which represses
represses work with and upon upon knowledge. The
examination expects thethe person
person being examined to recycle knowledge; it is the low-low-
est level of the learning that preceded it, because that learning might have included
cognitive activity more sophisticated than accumulating knowledge. Moreover, the
examination is bound up up with common anxieties, which stifl stiflee thinking and make
learning burdensome. The concluding performance, by contrast, encourages encourages cre-
ative activity by means of knowledge, and it has the capacity of making learners
opportunity to provide learners with further feedback –—
fond of learning. It is also an opportunity
formative feedback and not a summative grade (see (see below) – — regarding their
achievements.
While the concluding performance occurs at the the end of the research process,
process, it
the process:
shapes the process: the decision about the character of the concluding performance
dictates the character of the research –— the method and also the content. To a large
degree, therefore, the concluding performance dictates the curriculum.
3.4.1 Concluding Performance

The Concluding Performance as a Complex
Demonstration of
Demonstration Understanding
of Understanding
The team and community concluding performances are are complex demonstrations of
understanding.
understanding. As noted (see Sect. 1.2),
1.2 ), demonstrations
demonstrations understanding repre-
of understanding repre-
sent thinking with and about knowledge. In the words of Tina Blythe: “The perfor-
mance perspective says, in brief, that understanding
perspective says, understanding is a matter of being able to
do a variety of thought-provoking things with a topic, such as explaining, fi finding
nding
evidence and examples, generalizing, applying, analogizing, and representing the
1998,, p. 12).
new ways” (Blythe 1998
topic in new 12). To understand a concept or principle means
to be capable of explaining it in a clear and original way, to present examples of it,
to apply it in various contexts, and so on. on. Perkins, the father of the performance
conception of understanding, proposes seven performances of understanding; we
proposes seven
have expanded his list to 18,
18, divided into three categories. There can be a slight
overlap among
among the performances included in each category (Table (Table 3.4
3.4).).
These understanding performances do not exhaust all the the possibilities for such
performances, and it is doubtful whether the the possible understanding performances
“understanding.”l6
exhaust the mental phenomenon we call “understanding.” 16
However, even if
However,
l"Grant
16
Wiggins and Jay McTighe
Grant Wiggins McTighe writewrite that there are six “facets of understanding.”
“facets of understanding.” A person
person
understands when
understands when she can explain
explain:: provide
provide a comprehensive well—grounded report
comprehensive and well-grounded about a
report about
phenomenon; interpret,, tell signifi
can interpret
phenomenon; can significant stories, offer a fi
cant stories, fitting
tting translation, provide a historical
translation, provide historical or
personal dimension for the ideas
personal dimension ideas or events, make it a personal
events, and make accessible topic
personal and accessible means
topic by means
of images,
of anecdotes, analogies,
images, anecdotes, analogies, and models;
models; can apply
apply,, use the concept, principle in
idea, or principle
concept, idea,
3.4 The Pedagogy
115
Understanding performances
Table 3.4 Understanding performances
To think on and with criticize and create
To criticize create
To present knowledge
present knowledge knowledge
knowledge knowledge
knowledge
express knowledge
To express knowledge analyze and synthesize
To analyze synthesize reasons and justify
To give reasons
in your own words knowledge
knowledge knowledge
knowledge
explain knowledge
To explain knowledge To apply knowledge
knowledge To expose contradictions
expose contradictions
tensions in knowledge
and tensions knowledge
To suggest interpretations
suggest interpretations To suggest example, metaphor,
suggest example, metaphor, question knowledge
To question knowledge
of knowledge
of knowledge analogy, and comparison
analogy, comparison
model for
To build a model detailed
generalize from detailed
To generalize To reveal
reveal basic assumptions
basic assumptions
knowledge
knowledge knowledge
knowledge of knowledge
of knowledge
represent knowledge
To represent knowledge contextualize knowledge
To contextualize knowledge formulate contradictory
To formulate contradictory
various ways
in various knowledge
knowledge
To present perspectives
present perspectives predict on the basis
To predict basis create knowledge
To create knowledge
knowledge
on knowledge of knowledge
of knowledge on the basis of knowledge
basis of knowledge
“understanding is a complex process 1991,,

process which is not itself understood” (Gardner 1991
179), the performance conception of understanding is productive from the
p. 179), the peda-
gogical and didactic point of view, and it makes it possible to deepen and sharpen
understanding.1717
the learners’ understanding.
various contexts;
various contexts; can have perspective, listen to opinions
perspective, listen critically and see the big picture;
opinions critically picture; can
empathize,, fi
empathize find
nd value in whatwhat others
others might
might see as strange unlikely; and can have self
strange or unlikely; -knowledge,
self—knowledge,
be aware of of the style, prejudices, projections, and patterns
prejudices, projections, patterns ofof thinking
thinking that mold and block block her
understanding and, thus, to be aware of
understanding of what we don’t understand
understand and that understanding difficult
understanding is diffi cult
achieve (1998,
to achieve (1998, p. 44).44). The aspects of understanding
aspects of cannot be fully
understanding cannot fully reduced understanding
reduced to understanding
performances;
performances; they are more complex complex and general. Even performance
performance plus facets of of understanding
understanding
exhaust the phenomenon
do not exhaust “understanding.”
phenomenon we call “understanding.”
17
17A example of
A lovely example of understanding
understanding performances
performances appears Alexander Calandra’s
appears in Alexander Calandra’s “The “The
Barometer Story” ((Current
Barometer Story” Science,, Vol. 49, No. 14,
Current Science 14, January, 1964, pp.
January, 1964, pp. 6–10). Gell—Mann
Murray Gell-
6—10). Murray Mann
quotes this story in his book
quotes book The Quark and the Jaguar (1994):
Quark and “Some time ago, I received
(1994): “Some received a call
colleague who asked if
from a colleague if I would
would be a referee
referee on the grading
grading of of an examination
examination question.
question. It
seemed that he was about
seemed student a zero for his answer
about to give a student answer to a physics while the
question, while
physics question,
student claimed
student claimed he shouldshould receive
receive a perfect
perfect score and wouldwould do so if if the system were not set up
system were
student. The instructor
against the student.
against instructor and the student
student agreed submit this to an impartial
agreed to submit arbiter, and
impartial arbiter,
selected […].
I was selected went to my colleague’s
[. . .]. I went office
colleague’s offi ce and read the examination
examination question, which was
question, which
“Show how it is possible
“Show determine the height
possible to determine height ofof a tall building
building with the aid of of a barometer.”
barometer.” The
student’s answer was, “Take the barometer
student’s answer barometer to the top of of the building, attach a long rope
building, attach lower
it, lower
rope to it,
the barometer
barometer to the street, and then bring measuring the length
bring it up, measuring length of of the rope. length of
rope. The length of the
rope is the height
rope height of of the building.” answer, but should
interesting answer,
building.” Now this is a very interesting should the student
student get
credit for it? I pointed
credit pointed out that the student student really
really had
had a strong credit, since he had
strong case for full credit,
answered the question
answered question completely
completely and correctly.
correctly. On the otherother hand,
hand, if if full credit
credit were
were given, it
could well contribute
could contribute to a high grade student in his physics
grade for the student physics course.
course. A high
high grade
grade is supposed
supposed
student knows
certify that the student
to certify knows some physics,
physics, but the answer
answer to the question confirm
question did not confi rm this.
mind, I suggested
With this in mind, student have another
suggested that the student another try at answering
answering the question.
question. I was not
surprised agreed to this, but I was surprised
colleague agreed
surprised that my colleague student did. Acting
surprised that the student Acting in the
terms of
terms of agreement,
agreement, I gave the student student six minutes
minutes to answer question, with the warning
answer the question, warning that
answer should show some knowledge
the answer knowledge of of physics.
physics. At the end of of fifive minutes, he had not written
ve minutes, written
asked him if
anything. I asked
anything. if he wished
wished to give up, since I had another another class to take care of, but he said
no, he was not giving
giving up, he had many many answers problem, and he was just thinking
answers to this problem, thinking ofof the best
best
116
The Practice
The performance conception of understanding helps the community of thinking

at each stage of its work. It is a good idea to write the 18 18 performances of under-
standing in prominent places in the school, to discuss them with the learners, and to
set them as standards for understanding toward which one one should strive in discus-
the whole community and in groups,
sions in the groups, in the process
process of research, and in the
concluding performances.
understanding have an advantage in principle over ordinary
The standards of understanding
standards that check knowledge (the memory memory of knowledge) and skill (regulated
understanding —– in some fi
action —– often lacking understanding field):
eld): it is impossible to learn the
standards of of understanding in a technical, outward way, way, to be demonstrated
demonstrated in
tests, as is the case with ordinary standards, because the standards
standards ofofunderstand-
understand-
understanding that derives from
ing require understanding from independent and and creative thought
thought..
It is diffi cult to falsify understanding but easy
difficult easy to falsify knowledge (students make
a specialty of this during 12 years of study and reach a peak in the matriculation
12 years matriculation
exams). difficult, for example,
exams). It is difficult, example, to take an understanding
understanding performance
performance such
as “to repeat the idea in your words,” “to craft a metaphor,”
your own words,” metaphor,”or or “to create knowl-
knowl-
edge on the basis of knowledge.” standards of
knowledge.” The standards of understanding standards
understanding are standards
definitions
or general defi nitions that require achievement, but they do not stiflstiflee the learner’s
independent thinking and expression; moreover, they enable, guide, and encourage encourage
them to go go beyond information given. Therein they not only “save” learning from
the shallow, external experience of of the school; they also save teaching from
excused myself
one. I excused myself for interrupting
interrupting him and askedasked him please
please to go on. In the next minute,minute, he
dashed off
dashed off his answer, which was: “Take the barometer
answer, which barometer to the top of of the building
building and lean over the
edge of of the roof.
roof. Drop the barometer, timing its fall with a stopwatch.
barometer, timing Then, using
stopwatch. Then, formula s =
using the formula
l/Zat22 [distance
1/2at fallen equals
[distance fallen acceleration of
one—half the acceleration
equals one-half of gravity times the square
gravity times square ofof the time
elapsed], calculate the height
elapsed], calculate height ofof the building.”
building.” At this point, colleague if
point, I asked my colleague if he would
would give
conceded and I gave the student
up. He conceded student almost
almost full credit.
credit. In leaving
leaving my colleague’s office,
colleague’s offi ce, I
recalled student had said that he had other answers
recalled that the student answers to the problem, asked him what
problem, so I asked what
they were. “Oh yes,” said the student, “there are many ways of
student, “there of getting
getting the height
height ofof a tall building
building
with the aid of of a barometer.
barometer. For example, could take the barometer
example, you could barometer out on a sunny day and
measure height of
measure the height of the barometer, of its shadow, and the length
length of
barometer, the length length ofof the shadow
shadow of of the
building
building and, by use of of simple
simple proportion, determine the height
proportion, determine height of of the building.” “Fine” I said.
building.” “Fine”
others?” “Yes,” said the student.
“And the others?” student. “There
“There is a very basic
basic measurement
measurement that you will like. In
method, you take the barometer
this method, barometer and beginbegin to walk up the stairs. As you climb climb the stairs,
stairs, you
mark off the length
mark length and this will give you the height height ofof the building
building in barometer units. A very
barometer units.
direct method.”
direct method.” “Of“Of course
course ifif you want a more sophisticated method, you can tie the barometer
sophisticated method, barometer to
the end of of a string, swing it as a pendulum, determine the values
pendulum, and determine values ofof g;
g; the height of the building
height of building
principle, be calculated.”
can, in principle, calculated.” Finally, he concluded, “if you don’t limit
concluded, “if limit me to physics solutions
physics solutions
of this problem,
of problem, there are many other other answers,
answers, such as taking barometer to the basement
taking the barometer basement and
knocking superintendent’s door. When
knocking on the superintendent’s When the superintendent answers you speak to him
superintendent answers him as fol-
fol—
‘Dear Mr. Superintendent,

lows: ‘Dear Superintendent, here I have a very fi fine
ne barometer.
barometer. If If you will tell me the height
height ofof
building, I will give you this barometer.’”
this building, barometer.’”
From the understanding
From understanding performances
performances perspective,
perspective, the heart of of this story is not that the student
student
understood relevant concept
understood the relevant manifested it in various
concept and then manifested various ways (solutions), but that each
ways (solutions), each
(solution) is an understanding
way (solution) understanding performance mainly of
performance —– mainly of the creation
creation ofof knowledge
knowledge on the basisbasis
of knowledge
of knowledge – which is understanding
— which itself. We may continue
understanding itself. continue the discussion
discussion of of this case and ask,
student a good thinker?
is this student thinker? According Matthew Lipman
According to Matthew Lipman (1991, p. 116), 116), one ofof the character-
character—
istics of a good thinker
istics of thinker is “sensitivity context.” Our student
“sensitivity to context.” student lacks
lacks this virtue.
virtue.
3.4 The Pedagogy
117
“teaching for the sake of of standards,” that is, teaching whose sole purpose
purpose is to
prepare for the examinations that verify the meeting of standards (the inevitable
prepare
distortion that any
any system of standards imposes on teaching and learning).
As noted, the concluding complex understanding performance.
concluding performance is a complex performance.
understanding performances:
Indeed, it includes at least two complex understanding performances: the team con-
con-
cluding performance and the community concludingperformance.
community concluding The former is the
performance. The
team. It can be an academic research paper
product of the research team. paper or some other
second is a joint production of the community
product.18 The second
product.18 community of thinking, at which the
teams present their concluding concluding performances
performances. The two concluding performances are
understanding performances
complex understanding performances that incorporate
incorporate many understanding perfor-
many understanding
some of which are not purely cognitive.
mances, some example, arranging a conference
cognitive. For example,
around a fertile question includes planning, organization,
organization, and presentation which are
intellectual activities
solely intellectual
not solely activities but also practical tasks.
tasks. These actions create under-
under-
standing no less,
standing and perhaps more,
less, and than “pure”
more, than understandingperformances.
“pure” understanding performances.
3.4.2 Performance as a Motivation

The Concluding Motivation
for
for Learning
Carol Ames was not exaggerating much when she stated that there were three
important things to remember regarding education: the first
the fi the second
motivation, the
rst is motivation,
is motivation, andand the third is motivation (Ames 1990 1990,, p. 409). One can summarize
the efforts of enlightened educators throughout the generations and especially in
recent times as a frustrated effort to stimulate students’ intrinsic motivation to
learn.19
learn. 19
It is also possible to summarize all of those efforts as failures, because it’s
impossible to foster intrinsic motivation in a traditional school that forces students
(compulsory education, which is regarded as an achievement of modern
to be present (compulsory
states, destroys internal motivation), to follow a curriculum alien to their interests,
and to take examinations that breed anxiety.
concludefrom
One must not conclude proponentsof the second,
from this, as did the proponents child-centered
second, child- centered
children’s primary or authentic
model, that children’s
model, authentic motivations amenable to interven-
motivations are not amenable interven-
tion. In fact, they are, fi
tion. rst, because there
first, there is no such
such thing as authentic
authentic motivation
motivation –— all
motivations have
motivations acquired
have an acquired or cultural
cultural component
component –
— and second,
second, because it is
18
18II support “academic” and “conservative”
support “academic” “conservative” research
research papers of the position
papers of position paper genre. A position
paper genre. position
of a given situation,
description of
paper is a description
paper desired situation,
situation, the desired situation, and a series of recommendations
series of recommendations
transforming the present
for transforming situation into the desired
present situation desired one. My colleagues
colleagues have expressed more
expressed more
“advanced” positions,
“advanced” which one should
according to which
positions, according should allow the teams their research
teams to sum up their research in
various ways that fi
various fitt their propensities abilities —– to produce
propensities and abilities film,
produce a film, a play, a presentation,
presentation, a
conference, a trip, etc.
display, a conference,
display,
19
This book
ll’This minor part in this effort, but perhaps
book is a minor should give up this utopian
educators, should
perhaps we, the educators, utopian
Vision and be more realistic.
vision Alexander Sidorkin
realistic. Alexander Sidorkin (2002),
(2002), for example, claimed that
example, gave up and claimed
demand for the students’
since there is no demand students’ products, chance that they will be intrinsically
products, there is no chance intrinsically
motivated to learn.
motivated leam. (He offers instead
instead a more utopian
utopian Utopia school based
Utopia —– a school Buberian
based on Buberian
relations.)
relations.)
118
The Practice
of intrinsic
Table 3.5 Foci of intrinsic motivation
motivation
Stage of motivation
Foci of motivation
fertile question
The fertile question Undermining accepted
Undermining knowledge and beliefs,
accepted knowledge which thereby
beliefs, which motivates
thereby motivates
learning through
learning desire to restore
through a desire restore equilibrium;
equilibrium; presenting fertile
presenting the fertile
question as the program
question month(s), as
program for the next month(s), whole game
as the whole game
The research
research Choosing the topic of
Choosing of inquiry,
inquiry, investing “self ’ in the research
investing the “self” research topic
topic
(cathexis), gaining
(cathexis), interest
gaining interest
concluding
The concluding The process of production,
process of production, self-expression
self—expressionin front of of an audience
audience
performance
performance
of collaborating
And throughout there is the social interest of collaborating with one’s peers
nurture primary,
possible to nurture authentic motivations,
primary, authentic motivations, in the weak sense
sense — sense of
– the sense
motivations experienced
motivations experiencedby student as his own desires,
by the student desires that have
desires, desires have a relation
to his choice
choice of a life plan.
plan.
The framework of teaching and learning in a community of thinking accords a
central place to the effort to arouse primary motivations (in the weak sense) in the
students’ minds. At every one of its stages, the focus of motivation is in a different
every one
place. At the stage motivation is in undermining
fertile question, the focus of motivation
stage of the fertile undermining –—
the teacher must undermine the naive beliefs of the the students and upset their cogni-
tive comfort to motivate them to learn. The question itself is also supposed to
stimulate motivation to learn, because it presents the the plan for work during the com-
ing months and marks the horizon which one hopes to reach; in Perkins’ words, it
the whole game.” At the stage of research, the motivation is inherent in the
“plays the
very choice of the research question and in the gradual connection with the subject
very
of research; in Freud’s terms, it is in the charging of the object of research with
the stage of the
libido (cathexis). At the the concluding performance, the the focus of motiva-
process of producing the team and community events
tion is in the process events and in presenting
the research and the insights that the students have gained to an audience that
provides positive feedback (Table
(Table 3.53.5).).
Example of
3.4.3 An Example Team and
of a Team and Community
Let us take the example of the fertile question, “Has the Zionist project succeeded?”
this question and its answer are especially challenging. It was
These days in Israel, this
presented in an eleventh grade Zionist history class. The facilitators of the the commu-
nity decided to use this existential question to teach the the founding doctrines of
Zionism. The research stage of this exercise is presented in Table Table 3.6
3.6..
was
What was the concluding performance like? The facilitators of the community
asked each research team to present a written
each research with some
written report along with some demonstration
demonstration –a
—
film,
presentation, a fi lm, an exhibition, or the
the like.
like. The facilitators and their facilitators
were in favor of a written report for two reasons: (1) writing is an excellent tool,
3.4 The Pedagogy
119
Table 3.6 Example of the research

Example of research stage
Has the Zionist

Has Zionist Project
Project Succeeded?
From the point of

From of
From
From Herzl’s
Herxl’s of post-
view of post- or
point of view?
pomt of View? anti-Zionism?
anti-Zionism?
From Jabotinsky’s From the point

From
From Jabotinsky’s
of view?
point of view? of view of
of of
From the point of
From of scholars?
of the fathers
view of of
fathers of
religious
socialist or religious
Zionism?
Zionism?
perhaps the best one,

one, for developing conceptual thought, because it forces the the writer
to express
express herself and to think more abstractly and logically (spoken language, by
its nature and the actual context in which it takes place, allows for imprecise
expression and thinking), and (2) expression in writing is a vital Vital tool for success in
matriculation exams and in manymany real-world jobs.
“basic,” meaning that the teams presented their
The concluding performance was “basic,”
research papers
papers to the audience in brief lectures, most of them accompanied by
PowerPoint presentations. The audience included parents, students, teachers, and
guests. After the presentations, one of the the learners moderated an open open discussion
regarding the fertile question, the success or failure of the “Zionist project.” The
discussion was emotional, sometimes vociferous, and some of the learners realized
only then that the question wasn’t simply an “academic” one, one, but a question with the
capacity to stir the minds and emotions of adults.
Two caveats in connection with the concluding performance: (1) Since learning in
school tends toward “reduction to activities” (Bereiter 2002 2002,, 267),
267), we should bear in
the concluding performance is not an end in itself;
mind that the itself; it must advance learn-
ing,
ing, understanding, and inquiry! (2) In school, students relate to learning tasks as
has to be done, which has no goal beyond the doing; hence the vital
work that has Vital impor-
tance of an audience (from thisthis point of view,
View, a school actually does prepareprepare them
well for the labor market). Performing tasks,tasks, and not learning itself, becomes the
itself,
goal of the effort (Denise Pope [[2001] this “doing school”). To prevent the
2001] called this
deterioration of the assignments, “intentional learning” must be developed (Bereiter
1989),
and Scardamalia 1989 ), in which the students set their minds beyond the the tasks
tasks —
– to
meaningful concern with knowledge. In other words, the the facilitators and learners
Vigorous but empty activity around the concluding performances; one
must avoid vigorous one
must remember that the concluding performances are a means, not an end. end.
120
Communityof
The Practice
Initiation and
3.4.4 Initiation and Feedback
The three
The three stages teaching and learning
stages of teaching learning in a community
community of thinking
thinking are accompanied
accompanied
by two adjuncts: initiation and feedback.
adjuncts: initiation “initiation,” borrowed
feedback. The term “initiation,” borrowed from
R. S. Peters, refers to ushering learners into a specifi field
specificc fi eld of knowledge, a world
of concepts and skills with which they they must have basic familiarity to conduct
research in that fi field.
eld. The ultimate purpose
purpose of initiation is a primary level of “know-
ing your way
your way around,” a metaphor for understanding proposed by David Perkins
((1995,
1995, p. 243). What does “knowing your your way
way around” mean? When someone says, says,
“I’m familiar with my my neighborhood,” he means that he knows its buildings, streets,
many of the people who live there; that he is able to get to almost every
and many every place in
it, sometimes along familiar paths and sometimes with improvised shortcuts; that
there are places in the the neighborhood that he is especially fond of; of; and that there are
places he avoids. Familiarity with a fi field
eld of knowledge, like familiarity with a
neighborhood, is bound up freely, to think about it
up with the ability to maneuver in it freely,
flexibly,
flexibly, to combine concepts in the fi field
eld in response
response to chance circumstances, and
like. Familiarity with an area of knowledge is an open
the like. open task (unlike a closed task
such as fifixing flat
xing a fl at tire), in which one can constantly improve. It is not only an ideal
of initiation, but also of the the entire community of thinking. Initiation strives to bring
the learners to initial familiarity with the field
the field of knowledge —– two or three walks
around the neighborhood —– so they they can start the research, asking questions, locating
information, and thinking decisively with and about knowledge.
Initiation continues in everyevery stage –— initiation to the fertile question, initiation to
research, initiation to the concluding performance —– and it is performed in various
ways.
ways. At the stage of the fertile question, the the facilitators dissect thethe question to
reveal its concepts and supply appropriate background information, the sort of
information without which the fertile question would not be open, open, undermining,
rich, etc.
etc. At the research stage, the facilitators provide the learners with information
regarding thethe conduct of research in the the given fifield
eld of knowledge. At the stage of the
concluding performance, they they help the learners organize the the research for thethe pur-
pur-
pose
pose of presenting it and
and producing the community concluding performance.
Initiation is not necessarily the the direct transmission of knowledge, but such trans-
mission in appropriate amounts and contexts is defi definitely desirable.20
nitely desirable. 20
Talshir
Gail Talshir
(2000b) described some possible models of initiation, for example, the hologram
every meeting is a kind of mini-community: the facilitators present
model,, in which every
model
a question to the learners, and they they deal with it in the whole group teams;21
group and in teams;
21
and the colleague model model,, in which the initiation is based mainly on lectures and
instruction by the learners. Initiation is thus a fl flexible
exible stage during which it is pos- pos-
20“Teachers
20
“Teachers must continually choose between
continually choose teaching something
between teaching something directly leaving it to be
directly or leaving
acquired incidentally
acquired incidentally through indirect learning
through indirect activities. This ought
learning activities. ought to be a strategic issue, not an
strategic issue,
ideological one” (Bereiter
ideological 2002, p. 271).
(Bereiter 2002,
21Talshirwrites:
21
facilitators and the community
Talshir writes: “The facilitators satisfaction when,
community derived great satisfaction when, at the begin—
begin-
of one of
ning of of the meetings, learner complained
meetings, a learner complained that no question
question was asked at the beginning
beginning ofof the
facilitators dictated
encounter, and the facilitators
encounter, dictated ‘material,’
‘material,’ like in an ordinary 2000a,, p. 115).
ordinary class” (Talshir 2000a 115).
3.4 The Pedagogy
121
field
sible and desirable to bring the learners into a fi eld of knowledge in various ways.
ways.
Care must be taken to avoid prolonging initiation that is based entirely on frontal
the learners slack and cling
give the
instruction (inexperienced facilitators are afraid to give
to secure ways
ways of keeping the class together).
Generative feedback propose in principle for routine
feedback is the substitute that we propose
(the tail that
assessment in the school —– various kinds of tests. Scholastic evaluation (the
wags the dog) has three main functions: ranking the students, creating (extrinsic)
wags
motivation (or imposing discipline), and feedback to students and teachers. The
pedagogical logic of the community of thinking denies the necessity of these three
functions. There is a contradiction between ranking and learning, and we prefer
22
learning.22
learning. motivation,, which neutralizes intrinsic
Evaluation creates extrinsic motivation
motivation; we are in favor of intrinsic motivation. Students and teachers can receive
productive feedback sources.23
feedback from constructive sources. 23
22
Imagine that you watch
Imagine watch some television
television series regularly, nights between
Tuesday nights
regularly, let’s say on Tuesday between 9
and 10.10. The series is donedone well; it is insightful
insightful and enjoyable. Then, one night,
enjoyable. Then, someone knocks
night, someone knocks at
the door. A man comes comes in, wearing holding a briefcase.
wearing a gray suit, holding “Who are you?”
briefcase. “Who you?” you ask, angry angry
at being disturbed. “It’s nothing,
being disturbed. nothing, nothing. Don’t let me disturb
nothing. Don’t disturb you. I’ll just sit here quietly
quietly on the
observe you,” the visitor
side and observe visitor answers
answers politely. “What do you mean?”
politely. “What mean?” you object.
object. “Look,” he
answers,
answers, “I’m a taste examinerexaminer from the Minister
Minister of of Interior.
Interior. I was sent here just to see whetherwhether you
understand
understand the series that you’re watching watching —– if if you laugh
laugh at the right
right places, mumble correctly….
places, mumble correctly. . ..
At the end of of the program, questionnaire. That’s all. You can calm down
program, I’ll give you a short questionnaire. down and
back to the program.”
go back program.” What What happens
happens to your belovedbeloved program
program now? It becomes
becomes burdensome,
burdensome, a
source of
source of tension
tension and anxiety. And what what about learning? It becomes
about your learning? superficial
becomes superfi external.
cial and external.
demonstrate your
You’re all set to demonstrate understanding: you laugh
your understanding: laugh out loud “at the right places” places” to
examiner and you try to learn from the expression
impress the examiner
impress expression on his face what he is likely likely to ask
at the end of of the program. insight, to say nothing
program. All the insight, nothing of of the pleasure, formerly got from
pleasure, that you formerly from
the series has dissipated
dissipated irretrievably.
irretrievably.
23“This
23
paradox of
“This is the paradox of evaluating achievement of
evaluating the achievement of individual
individual students
students (with matriculation
matriculation
exams, example) or of
exams, for example) of an entire
entire school
school (international achievement tests):
(international achievement wants to be invisible
tests): it wants invisible
all-seeing, but it is visible
and all-seeing, visible and blind; evaluate a certain
blind; it wants to evaluate certain reality,
reality, but that reality detects
reality detects
itself especially
reorganizes itself
it and reorganizes Moreover, the evaluation
especially for it. Moreover, evaluation tools can only evaluate —– defi definene
certain aspects
measure —– certain
and measure aspects of of reality,
reality, so that even if if that reality didn’t detect
reality didn’t detect it, evaluation
it, the evaluation
would only
would consider certain
only consider certain aspects
aspects of of that
that reality, necessarily the most
reality, and not necessarily most important
important ones. ones.
If the evaluation
If evaluation does not evaluateevaluate what it aims to evaluate itself —– that is, the reality
evaluate but only itself reality that
itself specially for the evaluation or the aspects of
organized itself
organized of reality that it is capable of of evaluating
evaluating —–
should we evaluate
why then should evaluate at all? Who needs needs an evaluation
evaluation that distorts
distorts reality instead of
reality instead of reflect—
reflect-
There are two answers
ing it? There answers to this question
question – — one is naive, the other is cynical.
cynical. The naive answer answer
evaluation, although
is that evaluation, although it infl influences
uences reality, teaches us about
reality, teaches about something
something beyond
beyond that infl influence.
uence.
matriculation exams,
The matriculation evaluate not only the students’
example, evaluate
exams, for example, students’ ability matriculation
ability to take matriculation
exams;
exams; they also inform inform us about about the level of of understanding
understanding of of the content, about skills such as
content, about
reading comprehension, the solving
reading comprehension, solving of of problems mathematics, and so on, and about
problems in mathematics, about character
character
traits such as diligence,
traits diligence, perseverance,
perseverance, and the like. The cynical answer is that if
cynical answer if there
there werewere no
entire system
evaluation, the entire
evaluation, would collapse.
system would Students come
collapse. Students school in order
come to school order to get diplomas
diplomas that
institutions of
will gain them entry to institutions of higher education, which
higher education, which will provide them with further
provide them further cer-
cer—
tificates,
tifi which will avail them of
cates, which of a good profession. Without that incentive,
profession. Without students wouldn’t
incentive, the students wouldn’t
go to school —– they would,would, of of course, examinations. Evaluation,
course, study for the examinations. therefore, is important
Evaluation, therefore, important
because
because of of its byproducts.
byproducts. Is there there a better answer to why to evaluate?
better answer evaluate? The answer
answer to the question
question
‘Why evaluate?’ is ‘How
‘Why ‘How to evaluate?’
evaluate?’That
That is, it makes sense to evaluate if if you know how to evaluate –— to
evaluate in a way that will be benefi
evaluate cial both
beneficial evaluators and to those
both to the evaluators those who are graded” graded”
2007).
(Harpaz 2007).
(Harpaz
122
Communityof
The Practice
Formative feedback is inseparable

Formative feedback inseparable from the process
process of of learning,
learning, just as it is
integral part of
an integral of all its activities:
activities: we environment and receive
we act on the environment receive vari-
ous kinds
kinds ofof feedback,
feedback, some of of which
which we are aware and others others not, and they
actions and our personalities.
all shape our actions Feedback is different
personalities. Feedback different from judg-
mental evaluation
mental evaluation (an A- or the grade grade of of 87); it seeks to help, direct, to
help, to direct,
shape —– not to sort. Adam Lefstein Lefstein (2000b,
(2000b, 2000c) formulated ten rules
20000) formulated rules for
giving feedback of
giving feedback of this kind.
kind. Among them are the following: following: Refrain
Refrain from
from
judgment:
judgment : relegatejudgment
relegate judgment to the margins margins ofof the process, emphasize that
process, and emphasize that
your point of
it is your of view
View alone,
alone, subject change, etc. Ask many
subject to change, questions::
many questions
replace comments
comments with questions.
questions. For example,
example, “What is your central idea on
your central
subject?” “What would someone
this subject?” disagrees with you
someone who disagrees argue?” Listen
you argue?” Listen
learner:: don’t
to the learner talk a lot.
don’t talk understand his or her
lot. Try to understand her thinking and
judgment. CheckCheck now and then whether whether youyou have understood correctly by
understood correctly
making short, probing
making comments. Aim
probing comments. Aim at what can direct the
improved:: direct
can be improved
feedback to elements
feedback elements thatthat can be corrected
corrected and not to deep traits traits that the
learner cannot
learner circumstances. Encourage
cannot change under these circumstances. Encourage self self-criticism:
-criticism:
learner’s attention to some matter that warrants criticism
direct the learner’s criticism and let her
self-criticism from that point.
develop self-criticism point.
Under ideal
Under ideal circumstances,
circumstances, and according
according to the logic
logic ofof the community
community of of
thinking, it would be right to abolish
thinking, abolish examinations
examinations of of all kinds
kinds and exchange
exchange
formative feedback.
them for formative feedback. However, under under present circumstances, in which
present circumstances, which
evaluative environment
essentially an evaluative
a school is essentially environment and a classifying mecha-
classifying mecha-
nism, one must set realistic
nism, realistic goals. alter a famous
goals. (To alter famous saying,
saying, we might might saysay that
“reality is the last
“reality last refuge
refuge ofof scoundrels.”
scoundrels.” ThoseThose who don’t wish to change change
anything speak in its name: “Be realistic; there
anything there are constraints.”),
constraints”), which which means
means
minimize damage
to minimize examinations as full of
damage and to make examinations of thought
thought and under-under-
standing as possible.
standing possible. For the sake of of damage control, care must be taken not
damage control,
evaluation a central
to make evaluation central event thatthat preempts instruction and learning;
preempts all instruction learning;
students must be able to take the examinations
students examinations on a number
number of of different
different dates,
dates,
rich verbal comment
rich verbal comment must be given in conversation
conversation with the learners,
learners, and so
(Cf. Lefstein, ibid.).
on (cf. framework of
ibid.). In the framework of making examinations rich
making examinations rich in
thinking and understanding,
thinking understanding, an effort effort should
should be made to give open- open-bookbook
examinations and access
examinations access to a computer, questions that demand
computer, with questions demand deep
thinking and understanding
thinking understanding and, better,better, to replace examinations with
replace some examinations
research
research papers.
papers.
We have surveyed the three stages of the community thinking: the fertile
community of thinking: fertile
research,, and the concluding
question,, research
question performance. We have also described
concluding performance. described the
supports that accompany
supports accompany them: initiation feedback. An effort to learn how
initiation and feedback.
to apply these from our overview would be a bit like learning learning how to swim by
correspondence. Teaching and learning
correspondence. learning in a community
community of thinkingthinking demand
extensive experience, sometimes painful
experience, sometimes painful experience.
experience. Here is a fl flowchart
owchart of of what
we have surveyed in this part:
/
3.5 A Broad Picture of
Broad Picture of the Intel-Lect School
Intel—Lect School 123
123
Initiation
Initiation
fl
Fertile Question
Fertile Question
Initiation
Initiation
Open
Open Initiation
Initiation
fl Undermining
Undermining
Rich
Rich
Connected
Connected
ll
Charged
Charged
Practical
Practical
Team Research
Team Research Team Research
Team Research Team Research
Team Research Research
Team Research
Team Research
Team Research
Team
Question
Question Question
Question Question
Question Question
Question Question
Question
Initiation
Initiation Research
Research Initiation
Initiation
fl accordance with
In accordance
research
the research fl
methods of
methods of the
disciplines
Team
Team Team
Team Team
Team Team
Team Team
Team
Concluding
Concluding Concluding
Concluding
Performance
Performance Performance
Performance
Communal Concluding
Communal Performance
Conference. Book,
Conference,
Movie, Debate,
Magazine, Movie,
Magazine,
Public Trial, PowerPoint…
Public PowerPoint...
Presentation
Presentation
1.
1. question
The question
2‘
2. hypotheses
The hypotheses
3.
3. The process of
process of
research
research
4.
4. The answer
The answer
5.
5. What II learned
What learned
Broad Picture
3.5 A Broad Picture of the
the Intel-Lect
Intel-Lect School
We called our model for a school based on teaching and learning in a community of
thinking Intel-Lect School, in recognition of Intel, Israel’s support for the develop-
ment of the model. Whatever the the name of the
the school may be, one
may be, one thing is clear:
communities of thinking
communities thinking can succeed
succeed only in an appropriate
appropriate and supportive educational
supportive educational
124
Communityof
The Practice
environment. To become such an environment, a school must undergo far- far-reaching

reaching
organizational changes. The model of the Intel-Lect School offers the the general out-
lines of a school that supports and sustains communities of thinking.
Anyone who wishes to alter schools fundamentally must change the the two axes
upon
upon which they are constructed: the systemsystem ofof instruction and the organizational
organizational
structure.. Any
structure Any other change, such as a change in the content of the curriculum, is of
secondary importance and leaves the school intact (which is why school systems
like to change the curriculum –— to add or subtract a subject, to add or subtract a
chapter; it looks like a change). In the previous chapter, we explained the the impor-
tance of the system of instruction: “the“the medium is the message” — the system of
– the
the (true) content of instruction. That means that students learn from
instruction is the
the way
way they are taught more than what they are taught;
more than taught; and the way
way they are taught – —
by means of authoritative lectures or study in small groups groups or in communities of

thinking or in any other way – determines the meaning of what they
way — they are taught. That
is the reason why changing the organizational structure of the school is important:
the organizational structure can support a particular method of instruction or under-
mine it; a particular system of instruction demands a corresponding organizational
structure; moreover, like the method of instruction —
moreover, the organization itself —– like – contains
messages
messages with great educational inflinfluence.
uence.
this section we will concentrate mainly on one
In this one dimension, a critical one,
one, of the
environment’s organization: the institutional organization of
educational environment’s of knowledge
knowledge
(cf. Karmon 2000, 2007).
3.5.1 The Institutional Organization of

Institutional Organization of Knowledge
The teacher organizes knowledge for teaching and learning based on the knowl-
edge that was organized for him in the curriculum. That, so it seems, is the the whole
story of the organization of knowledge for the purpose purpose of teaching and learning in
schools. However, there’s more to it: beneath these two strata of the organization
of knowledge —– by the the teacher and by the curriculum – — there is another organiza-
tional stratum: the institutional organization of knowledge. The school itself orga- orga-
nizes knowledge and to a large degree dictates its pattern of organization to the
curriculum and, in turn, the teacher. In other words, a school is not a vacuum that
you
you can fi fill
ll with whatever you you want; a school is essentially certain organizational
patterns that shape everything that exists and takes place in the school, including
the knowledge.
It is also possible
possible to explain institutional organization
explain the idea of the institutional organization of knowledge
knowledge as
follows: every
follows: every act of teaching and learning requires the organization knowledge –—
organization of
specific
choice of specifi c content, processing of the chosen content, setting the pace
pace of
instruction and learning, the way way it is presented and treated, and so on. The pattern
of the organization of knowledge has far-reaching infl influence
uence on the meaning of the
knowledge, on the conception of the knowledge and, in general, on the ways ways it is
taught and learned. The The concept
concept “institutional
“institutional organization
organization of knowledge”
knowledge” is meant to
meant
125
point out the way that the school instructional institution

school or any other instructional institution organizes
organizes knowl-
knowl-
edge and shapes
edge content and conception;
shapes its content conception; to show how how this primary organization of
primary organization
knowledge influences
knowledge infl uences the secondary organizationof knowledge
secondary organization curricula and
knowledge of the curricula and the
well as the quality
teachers, as well
teachers, quality of teaching and instruction.
teaching and instruction.
Two institutions that deal with instruction —– the the school and the university — – have
created two prominent models of the the organization of knowledge: the school subject
the discipline
and the discipline.. The former is the organization of knowledge with the goal of
transmitting existing knowledge, and the latter is the the organization of knowledge
with the goal of creating new knowledge (especially in the pursuit of advanced
degrees). One can distinguish between these two models according to six basic
characteristics: preferred cognitive performance, the structure of the questions,
rules for choosing knowledge, sources of knowledge, the the distribution of knowledge
along the curriculum, and the the attitude to what is learned.
In more detail:
Preferred CognitivePerformance:
Preferred Cognitive Performance: Institutions that deal with education by means of
knowledge –— with the goal of transmitting or developing it —– determine the peak
cognitive performances according to which the performers, pupils or students, are
evaluated. These performances usually come at the end of the the educational process
process
the process
they affect the
and constitute its climax; they the start.
process from the start. The preferred cogni-
tive performance of a subject studied in school is thethe examination; the peak is the
matriculation exam. The preferred cognitive performance in the the university disci-
pline is the research paper. first
paper. The goal of the first performance is to reproduce knowl-
edge, and the goal of the second performance is to create knowledge.
The Structure of of the Questions
Questions:: The questions typical of a school subject are are closed
questions and those of a research discipline have the character of a scientifi
scientific c riddle.
The structure of the questions is veryvery important, because it creates the fi first
rst connec-
tion between the mind and information. The closed school question suits suits the charac-
authoritative instruction, the summative
teristics of the school —– authoritative summative assessment, the
cumulative curriculum,
cumulative curriculum, the fragmented schedule of instruction,
fragmented schedule instruction, and so on — indicating
– indicating
institutional organization
that it belongs to the category of the institutional organization of knowledge.
knowledge. A similar
fitt exists between scientifi
fi scientific
c riddles and the characteristics of a university
university institution.
scientific
The answers to the scientifi c riddles are unknown, and and they
they demand research, for
which thethe university environment is intended to supply the conditions.
university environment
Rules for
for Choosing Knowledge:
Knowledge: In thethe framework of a school subject, the rule is to
the conventional and basic knowledge in the given fi
choose the field;
eld; in the framework of
the rule is to seek differences of opinion and gaps
a research discipline, the gaps of knowl-
edge in the given area. Scholastic knowledge is presented as a multitude of details
of information gathered into a uniform continuum, without controversies. This, of
appearance, because not all knowledge is agreed upon
course, is a false appearance, upon and there is
university,
not always a consensus regarding the essence of basic knowledge. At the university,
on the other hand, knowledge is concentrated in areas of disagreement andand problems,
where there are inconsistencies between theories and data, among
among interpretations of
126
Communityof
The Practice
text, among
a text, among various theories and interpretations. In such areas research can
flourish.
fl ourish.
of Knowledge
Sources of Knowledge:: A school subject is nourished by secondary sources and a
research discipline by primary sources. A school creates a whole world of second-
ary sites, and the lectures of teachers. The sources of
ary sources –— textbooks, Internet sites,
information for a discipline are those that it establishes –— experiments in physics,
field
documents in history, the fi etc. The source of knowledge is not
eld in anthropology, etc.
the summaries of teachers and textbooks but “reality,”
“reality,” as it is conceived and con-
structed by researchers and the tools of their disciplines. Whereas the subjects stud-
stud-
ied in school transmit a smooth and comprehensive picture of knowledge, the
disciplines transmit a fragmented and diffuse picture of knowledge —– every every disci-
pline has its own world of knowledge.
Distribution of Knowledge
Knowledge Along the Curriculum:: The knowledge included in a
the Curriculum
school subject is distributed along the curriculum differently from that in a disci-
pline. The difference in distribution is connected logically to the various patterns for
the organization of knowledge in subjects and disciplines and the different epis-
temic manifestations that support them. Thus, for example, knowledge in schools
study, whereas knowl-
progresses to an increased number of topics and subjects of study,
progresses
edge in the university advances from a plurality of subjects and disciplines to fewer
subjects in one discipline (specialization).
The Attitude to What Is Learned: the attitude toward knowledge is a sub-
Learned: Although the sub-
jective matter, it also has an objective or institutional dimension: thethe institution
requires a certain attitude toward knowledge in order to function —– to implement its
pattern of action. It therefore assumes in advance a desired attitude toward knowl-
edge and binds its “clients” to it. The school subject forms an inert and pre- pre-
disciplinary attitude toward knowledge. That is to say, the the knowledge acquired in
school does not tend to move out of the context in which it is acquired into other
the “common sense” or the “natural intuition”
contexts; indeed, it is consistent with the
of the pupils and neither departs from them nor challenges them. By By contrast,
research disciplines create a disciplinary attitude toward knowledge, that is, an
interpretative conception of knowledge from the the point of view of a particular disci-
the subject leaves the pupils with knowledge essentially similar to
pline. Whereas the
they entered school, the discipline limits the researcher’s outlook to
that with which they
size of the
the size the window through which it observes the world.
In short, although the subjects and disciplines have the same names —– mathematics,
etc. —
chemistry, history, etc. – they are different patterns for organizing knowledge.
Neither, as wewe shall see below, seeks to develop
below, properly serves education that seeks
(Table 3.7
learning steeped in thinking and understanding (Table 3.7).).
environ-
The characteristics of the organization of knowledge create an epistemic environ-
ment that projects a certain picture of knowledge and also a picture of learning and
teaching that derive from it. The epistemic environment transmits hidden messages
messages
to the students regarding the nature of the knowledge —– what is regarded as knowl-
edge and what is not, the relation of the knowledge to the world and to
not, what is the
127
Table 3.7 Basic

Basic characteristics of school
characteristics of subjects and research
school subjects disciplines: the organization
research disciplines: of
organization of
knowledge
knowledge
organization
The organization
of knowledge →
of knowledge —>
Basic characteristics ↓i
Basic characteristics School subject
School subject Research discipline
Research discipline
Ultimate goal
Ultimate Transmitting existing
Transmitting existing knowledge
knowledge Creating new knowledge
Creating knowledge
Preferred cognitive
Preferred cognitive Matriculation examination
Matriculation examination Research paper
Research paper
performance
performance
Rules for choosing
Rules choosing Closed questions
Closed questions Scientificc riddles
Scientifi riddles
knowledge
knowledge
Sources of knowledge
Sources of knowledge sources
Secondary sources
Secondary sources
Primary sources
Primary
Distribution of
Distribution of From fewer topics
From fewer subjects
topics in fewer subjects From more topics
From more
topics in more
knowledge
knowledge to more topics more subjects
topics in more subjects disciplines to fewer topics
disciplines topics
discipline
in one discipline
Attitude toward
Attitude toward Inert and pre—disciplinary
Inert pre-disciplinary disciplinary perspective
A single disciplinary perspective
knowledge
knowledge
people, what knowledge is valued more or less, how how knowledge is produced, and
qualified
who is qualifi ed to produce it and also what are “true” learning and teaching.
The epistemic environment is formed by many many practices the learners’
that shape the
conception of knowledge and learning. (In the the school, for example, such practices
might include which lessons are are easily canceled and which are not, which subjects
day
are studied early in the day or the week and which at the the end of thethe day
day or the week,
are
which subjects are concluded with matriculation exams and which are concluded
simply with in-school examinations, and so on.) These general conceptions have
influence
far-reaching infl uence on the learners’ grasp
grasp of the world and on their development.
School practices transmit manymany conceptions – for example, that knowledge is a
—
snapshot of the world and that learning is the absorption of that photograph in the
mind. It is, of course, possible that manymany principals and teachers might have other
conceptions of knowledge and learning, but the the messages
messages embodied in the the daily
the school, messages
practices of the messages that are repeated day
day after day during all the years
years
of schooling, are far stronger than their verbal messages.
messages. (In other words, the hidden
influential
curriculum is more infl uential than the visible one.)
This distinction has consequences
consequences for the the strategy of change that should be
adopted: a fundamental
fundamental and permanent
permanent change in the school must concentrate on a
change in the practice of the school and
practice of and,, in the present instance
instance,, on a change in the
institutional organization of of knowledge.
knowledge . As long as the practical infrastructure of
the school exists, no real change can be effected in the the school. When, for example,
one brings learning by inquiry into the the school but leaves the characteristics of the
they
school subjects as they were, learning by inquiry cannot succeed; the institutional
organization of knowledge will reject it or cause it to wither. wither.
Change in the institutional organization of knowledge is a diffi difficult matter.
cult matter.
Schools are robust institutions. In the years
years of their existence, they
they have developed
maintenance mechanisms that reinforce them and reinforce one Take, for
one another. Take,
example, the teachers’ salary structure. In Israel it is calculated according to the
128
Communityof
The Practice
hours the teachers are actually present in the classrooms, because, according to the
prevailing educational world view, transmission of information is the the essence of the
teaching profession. While this world view View has been shaken, the the mechanism for
maintaining the salary structure has become established and autonomous; it does
not sanction initiatives based on other world views. It does not, not, for example, permit
multidisciplinary or interdisciplinary teaching that requires cooperation among among
teachers in the classroom (team teaching) and and outside of it (many meetings).
Consequently, necessary to reorganize knowledge in the school,
Consequently, it is necessary school, which means
school. We called the reorganization
to reorganize the school. knowledge the “pedagogical
reorganization of knowledge “pedagogical
discipline.” In some respects, this this name is problematic, because the concept of
discipline implies meanings from which we want to free ourselves, but in another
respect thethe term contains valuable meanings, especially this one: one: disciplines are the
best means we have to think think about the world and understand it it,, and any efiort to
any effort
forgo
forgo them entails forgoing
forgoing one of achievements of
of the most important achievements of human cul-
ture.. Hence, when one wants to understand the structure of matter, it is a good idea
ture
to consult physics, chemistry, and mathematics; when one wants wants to understand the
sociology, anthropology, and history; and
society, it’s smart to consult sociology,
structure of society,
when one wants to understand the the psyche, oneone should turn to psychology, literature,
possess better tools for understanding the world and ourselves.
art. We do not possess
and art.
However, the concept of “pedagogical discipline” opposes
However, opposes binding teaching and
learning closely with a discipline; it refers to teaching and learning with With a disciplin-
ary anchor,, meaning teaching and learning that emerge
ary anchor emerge from a dominant discipline
if there is a need –— from the
or that drift —– if the original discipline to others that can con-
tribute to the subject being investigated.
However, let there be no mistake: this does not refer to interdisciplinary
interdisciplinary teach-
unrealistic ambition in the framework of
ing and learning —– an unrealistic of school studies (a
person is capable of
person of interdisciplinary
interdisciplinary thinking if if she has mastered several disci-
plines, achievement) —– but rather teaching and learning
plines, and that is a rather rare achievement) learning
disciplinary anchor, which could be turned into multidisciplinary
with a disciplinary multidisciplinary teaching
learning. Multidisciplinary
and learning. Multidisciplinary teaching and learning learning exposes learners to
exposes the learners
various points of of view on the phenomena
phenomena of of the world and contributes
contributes to devel-
disciplines are essentially
oping the insight that disciplines essentially different points of of view on the
phenomena
phenomena of of the world (see above, the fertile question, question, “What is love?”).
Moreover, the addition of of the adjective “pedagogical”
“pedagogical” seeks to convey convey that the
guiding
guiding and and conclusive consideration
consideration is pedagogical,
pedagogical, meaning sensitivity to the
learner’s situation –— what his inclinations
inclinations and interests
interests are, what he is capable of,
disciplinary rigidity
and so on –— and not disciplinary well-known motto has it:
(as the well-known
rigidity (as it: “We
teach kids, not disciplines!”).
disciplinesl”).24
24
2“
24
David Olson
David writes: “Pedagogy
Olson writes: “Pedagogy is thought of in terms
thought of of the structure
terms of of knowledge
structure of itself or the
knowledge itself
modes of
modes of apprehension
apprehension that the child brings encounter” (Olson
brings to the encounter” 2003, p. 203).
(Olson 2003, 203). That is to say,
does pedagogy
pedagogy focus on knowledge content or process,
learning, on content
knowledge or on learning, material or on
process, or on the material
child? The pedagogical
the child? discipline organizes
pedagogical discipline organizes knowledge
knowledge by concentrating learner’s ways
concentrating on the learner’s
of thinking,
of thinking, feeling,
feeling, and learning.
learning.
129
Basic characteristics
Table 3.8 Basic of the pedagogical
characteristics of discipline
pedagogical discipline
organization of
The organization knowledge →
of knowledge —>
Basic characteristics ↓i
Basic characteristics Pedagogical discipline
Pedagogical discipline
Ultimate goal
Ultimate Development of
Development of the thinking,
thinking, understanding,
understanding, and identity
identity
of the learners
of learners
Preferred cognitive
Preferred cognitive performance
performance knowledge and grappling
Working with and on knowledge with the
grappling with
from various
question from
question various points of view, especially
points of especially that
of the learner-investigator
of learner—investigator
Character of the questions
Character of questions Fertile questions and research
Fertile questions questions
research questions
Rules choosing knowledge
Rules for choosing knowledge Choose knowledge on the basis
Choose knowledge of the structure
basis of of the
structure of
pedagogical knowledge
pedagogical knowledge unit
Sources of knowledge
Sources of knowledge Flexible, appropriate
Flexible, appropriate for the interests of the learner
interests of learner and
related to the discipline
related discipline
Attitude toward
Attitude toward knowledge
knowledge Positive (sympathetic,
Positive critical, and
defensive), critical,
(sympathetic, not defensive),
creative
creative
The pedagogical discipline is meant to replace the research or scientifi

scientific
c discipline,
education.25
was and remains the ideal of intellectual education.
which was 25
The ideal of the peda-
the transmission of knowledge (a school subject) nor
gogical discipline is neither the
the creation of disciplinary knowledge (a university discipline) but, but, rather, critical
and creative activity with knowledge for the the purpose
purpose of developing thinking and
understanding and creating a positive learning experience, an experience that will
lay the foundation for lifelong learning. These are the basic characteristics of a
lay
pedagogical discipline (Table
(Table 3.8
3.8).).
When the ultimate goal of instruction is the development of the the learners’ thinking
and understanding, that goal dictates the characteristics of the organization of
knowledge. The preferred
preferred cognitive performance
performance is neither test taking (as in a
school subject) nor producing a disciplinary research report (as with an academic
and personal research report that grapples with a
discipline) but, rather, a varied and
problem from different disciplinary points of view (more or less) and from a per- per-
sonal point of view —– What is my my opinion about thethe subject? What has grappling
with the subject done for me? What must I do as a consequence
consequence of conclusions that
I reached while dealing with it? For this reason, I prefer the the genre the position
genre of the
paper to that of the academic research report: it allows the
paper the writer to analyze the pres-
pres-
ent situation and to describe the desired situation —– there is a connection between
situ-
propose steps to improve the present situ-
these two descriptions, of course –— and to propose
ation, which means to commit oneself to act. act. The questions are not closed (as with
scientificc riddles (as in the
they scientifi
a subject), nor are they the university), but fertile questions
and research questions as defidefined
ned above. Knowledge
Knowledge is not chosen because it is
conventional and basic (a subject), nor according to areas of disagreement and
25
ideal relates
This ideal school subject
relates to the school subject as a discipline
discipline for beginners idealizes scientifi
beginners and idealizes scientificc think-
think—
of the scientist.
image of
ing and the image if this ideal is valid for some people,
scientist. Even if people, true scientificc research
true scientifi research
impossible in the school,
is impossible school, and any effort to perform
perform it in the school only produces various carica-
produces various carica—
of it.
tures of
tures
130
Communityof
The Practice
conflict
conflict (a discipline), but based on pedagogical considerations that are
are guided by
the components of the pedagogical knowledges unit (see above), especially the
insight. The sources
component of insight.
component of knowledge are mainly neither secondary
sources of secondary
(a subject) nor primary (a discipline), but fl
flexible,
exible, as dictated by pedagogical con-
his or her unique skills (or intelli-
are his
siderations —– what interests the learner, what are
gences), what is useful to deal with now, and so on. of knowledge
on. The distribution of knowledge
is not from less to more or vice versa, but according to three (or perhaps more)
communities of thinking that are are coordinated among
among themselves (see below). The
preferred the desire
knowledge is positive —– interest in knowledge, the
preferred attitude toward knowledge
to understand; critical —– healthy suspicion, suspension of judgment; and creative —–
the desire to innovate or improve knowledge (cf. http://yoramharpaz.com/pubs/en_
learning/good-contents.pdf).
learning/good-contents.pdf ).
are some guiding principles for dealing with knowledge in the framework
Here are
of the Intel-Lect School:
Long Meetings:
Meetings: Teaching and learning in a community of thinking takes time.
A meeting of a community of thinking can take as long as fi five
ve hours and a minimum
of three. Thus, it is possible to do away
away with the distinction between classes and
recesses and allow the learners to be in various places at various times, according to
the situation. Since the meetings (lessons) are long and the number
the demands of the
day to a single
of pedagogical disciplines is small, it is possible to devote an entire day
community of thinking, for example, Monday, the the community of thinking in history,
Tuesday, the community of thinking in physics. In an experiment we performed
and Tuesday,
the teachers became very
in a certain school, we found that the very creative in the ways they
ways they
taught when a lesson lasted fi five how long can the teacher lecture
all, how
ve hours. After all,
without interruption?
The Longitudinal Axis —– Up to Two Communities of
Two Communities of Thinking
Thinking per
per Year in a Single
Pedagogical Discipline
Discipline:: In one
one year
year it is a good idea to work in no more than two
communities of thinking in a single pedagogical discipline, that is to say, two fertile
questions, two research projects, and two concluding performances in a single peda-
gogical discipline. It is possible, and this might be the best option, to participate in
one community of thinking in one one area per
per year. Various combinations are
year. Various are possible,
such as a demonstration community of thinking in the fi first give the
rst trimester, to give
the framework, and a real community of thinking for the second
learners a taste of the
two trimesters. Of course such decisions, like all educational decisions, depend on
the particular situation.
The Latitudinal
Latitudinal Axis
Axis —– Up to Three Communities of of Thinking at the the Same Time
Time::
A student can be involved simultaneously in three communities of thinking and
three concluding performances. Beyond that the burden is likely to be too heavy.
heavy. In
any
any event, the facilitators must regulate the burden. For example, they
they can decide
that in one half year,
year, one community of thinkng
thinking will be the
the central one,
one, in which
are expected to submit deep research reports, and the two others will be
the learners are
are not strictly communities of
secondary. In an Intel-Lect School, even classes that are
131
thinking borrow many elements from that framework

many elements framework and are different
different from ordinary
ordinary
lecture-and—examination classes.
lecture-and-examination classes.
of Time for
Allocation of Teacher Work
for Joint Teacher Work:: Planning a community of thinking and
teaching in it are complex tasks that demand cooperation among the teachers.
among the
Teachers must plan the curriculum jointly and coordinate among
among the various com-
munities of thinking. Hence, the job of the teacher has to be redefined,
redefined, and a great
deal of time must be devoted to staff meetings, guidance of teams, and other com-
ponents that are not contact hours with students.
of the Principles of
Application of of the Community
Community of of Thinking
Thinking to the Organizational
Structure:: The
Structure The pedagogical principles underlying
underlying a community of thinking must be
entire school,
extended to the entire concomitant,
especially the principle of freedom and its concomitant,
school, especially
responsibility. Just as learners are free
responsibility. free to choose their research question and manage
manage
their research in the framework
framework of the community of thinking, which motivates
motivates them
responsibility for their learning,
to take responsibility learning, so, too, they have to be given maximal areas
they have
school, so that they
of freedom in the school, take responsibility
they will take responsibility for their learning (e.g.,
(e.g.,
communities of thinking to join and to include them in planning the
to choose which communities
communities of thinking and in producing the concluding
communities concluding performances).
performances).
Application ofofthe Principles
Principles ofofthe Community
Community of ofThinking Structure::
Thinking to the Physical Structure
The basic principles of teaching and learning in a community of thinking must also
be applied to other organizational dimensions of the school, including the physical
plan. One possible structure of this kind, which refl reflects
ects these principles, is that of
“houses,” “apartments,”
“houses,” “apartments,” and “rooms.”
“rooms.” Below is a schematic this form of
diagram of this
(Table 3.9
organization (Table 3.9).).
The diagram should be viewed as an ideal model and not a requirement: requirement: the num-
ber of learners can be increased and the number of facilitators
facilitators can be decreased.
decreased. This
This
model assumes a school with 900 learners.learners.26
26
So this is a rather big school (by Israeli
standards), though dividing
standards), dividing it up into buildings neutralizes its size and makes it pos-
buildings neutralizes pos-
sible various advantages
sible to enjoy various advantages of scale.
scale. The
The learners are divided into three
three two-age
houses –— one
one for grades 7 and 8, one one for grades 9 and and 10,
10, and one for grades 11 and
11 and
12 –
12 — and each house is divided
divided into four apartments;
apartments; each apartment
apartment is divided into
three rooms. Each house contains 300 learners, each apartment has 75 learners, and
every room has a community of thinking of 25 learners.
every learners. The
The basic unit is the apart-
apart-
ment,
ment, which is administered
administered by a community of six teachers – representing
— representing the disci-
studied. Each community
plines studied. community of teachers takes takes full responsibility apartment.
responsibility for the apartment.
conditions for the involvement
structure creates conditions
This structure involvementof education and
of the teachers in education
instruction and for fl
instruction flexibility
exibility in planning each week and the entire school school year.
2"’“Most
26
writers point
“Most writers point out that it is preferable school smaller. However,
preferable to make the school there is little
However, there little
agreement influences
regarding the infl
agreement regarding of the size of
uences of of the school
school or about
about the mechanisms
mechanisms by which
which the
of the school infl
size of influences teachers and students.
uences the teachers students. In a series ofof studies
studies that examined
examined the
influence
infl of the size of
uence of of the school on several variables, found that students
variables, it was found students learned
learned best
best in a
school with between
school between six and nine hundred students (that is to say, small schools,
hundred students schools, but not too small)”
small)”
2007, p. 54).
(Oplatka 2007,
(Oplatka
132
Communityof
The Practice
Table 3.9 Outlines of Intel-Lect

Outlines of School: houses,
Intel—Lect School: houses, apartments,
apartments, and rooms
rooms
House No.1, Model House
House House
House No. 2, House
House Composition
Apartment
Apartment Apartment
Apartment
A
A C
C
Students
300 Students
Teachers‘
Teachers'
Center
Center Apartments
44 Apartments
Teachers
24 Teachers
Apartment
Apartment Apartment
Apartment Administration
Administration
B D Laboratories
Laboratories
Library
Library
Gymnasium
Gymnasium
House No. 3, Model Apartment

Apartment
No, 11
COT No.
CoT
N0. 2
COT No.
CoT
Students
25 Students
25
No, 33
COT No.
CoT
Shared Space for Work
Shared Work
No. 4
COT No.
CoT
In conclusion, does consciousness change existence, as the the idealists claim, or

does existence change consciousness, as the materialists claim? This is an ancient
the
question, worded rather heavily, but nevertheless it is a rather fertile question. In the
earlier part of this book, emphasis was the consciousness —
was placed on the – we will change
they, in turn, will change existence: the
the atomic pictures in teachers’ minds – and they,
—
will change the

school. We will the pictures by undermining them and replacing them with
other pictures. This course of action was supported by a new new language, as shown in
Table 3.10.
Table 3.10.
The emphasis in this chapter has been on existence –— let us change the organiza-
tion of knowledge and all the practices that it embodies, and that will change the
consciousness of principals, teachers, students, and parents. Of course, the change
must take place on both of these levels and at the level of relations between them.
Moreover, the change cannot be solely on the level of the individual school; it
requires a general change in the system of education and, perhaps, even more
2000).
inclusive systems (cf. Ettinger 2000 any rate, our experience of 12
). At any 12 years
years and
the experience of others have taught us that changing a school on the level of con-
difficult
sciousness and existence is a diffi cult process, few have succeeded in carrying
process, and few
is
it through. It certainly possible that we, we, too, the developers of the the Intel-Lect
School and of the community of thinking, will join the long and respectable list of
disappointed reformers.
133
Table 3.10 The language of community

language of of thinking
third model
The third third approach
model,, the third third drive
approach,, the third meta—narrativeof
drive:: The meta-narrative of the community
community of of
thinking and the Intel-Lect
thinking School.
Intel—Lect School.
The atomic pictures: Basic
atomic pictures: images of
Basic images of learning,
learning, teaching,
teaching, knowledge,
knowledge, the mind,mind, and the purpose
purpose
of teaching
of teaching and learning guide the behavior
learning that guide behavior of of teachers
teachers and students
students in the school.
school.
These pictures
These pictures are the narrative
narrative ofof the community
community of of thinking School.
Intel—Lect School.
thinking and the Intel-Lect
The community of thinking:: The framework
of thinking framework of of teaching
teaching and learning
leaming that is intended
intended to replace
replace
traditional classroom.
the traditional classroom. Teaching
Teaching and learning based on posing
learning are based fertile questions
posing fertile questions (to the
community), research
community), teams), and team
research (in teams), team and community
community concluding
performances.
The fertile comprehensive question
question:: A comprehensive
fertile question question – overarching question;
— an overarching question; the community
community of of
deals with various
thinking deals
thinking various aspects
aspects ofof it by means
means of of research fertile question
questions. The fertile
research questions. question
characteristics: it undermines,
has six characteristics: undermines, it is open, connected, it is loaded,
open, it is rich, it is connected, loaded, and it is
practical.
practical.
Initiation: Creation of
Initiation: Creation of a knowledge
knowledge basisbasis and of of a culture
culture ofof learning, which are vital
learning, which vital for dealing
dealing
with the fertile question, with the research
fertile question, question, and with the concluding
research question, concluding performances.
performances.
Initiation continues
Initiation continues throughout
throughout the teaching
learning in the community
community of of thinking.
thinking.
research question
The research question:: The research generated by the research
question is generated
research question touches
teams and touches
research teams
upon certain aspect
upon a certain aspect of of the fertile
fertile question.
question. The research characteristics: it
question has four characteristics:
research question
interesting, open,
is interesting, connected, and practical.
open, connected, practical.
The pedagogical knowledge unit
pedagogical knowledge unit:: A concept organizes the knowledge
concept that organizes knowledge being studied for the
being studied
purpose of
purpose of teaching
teaching and learning, indicating the “playing
learning, indicating “playing fi field”
eld” upon which the fertile
upon which fertile
question unfolds. The pedagogical
question unfolds. pedagogical unit of of knowledge
knowledge has fi five
ve components: insight, concepts,
components: insight, concepts,
disagreements, and purposes.
skills, disagreements, purposes.
concluding peiformance:
team concluding
The team written report
performance: A written report or some otherother kind ofof performance
performance by the
research
research team that deals with a certain certain aspect
aspect of of the fertile
fertile question.
question. The workwork grapples with
grapples with
research question
the research question and builds
builds and reveals learners’ understanding.
reveals the learners’ understanding.
concluding performance:
The community concluding performance: An event produced learners in the community
produced by the learners community of of
include learners,
thinking to include
thinking teachers, and parents
learners, teachers, parents in their achievements.
achievements. The event builds builds and
reveals learners’ understandings.
reveals the learners’ understandings.
Generative feedback:
Generative complex of
feedback: A complex of actions
actions intended formative evaluation
intended to give formative evaluation to the learners.
learners.
Understanding peiformances:
Understanding Intellectual actions
performances: Intellectual actions on and by means means of of the knowledge
knowledge that revealreveal
the level of of the learners’
learners’ familiarity
familiarity with the subject which they construct
subject with which construct understanding.
understanding.
Pedagogical discipline:: The organization
Pedagogical discipline organization of of knowledge
knowledge with inner inner and outer characteristics
characteristics
whose purpose
whose development of
purpose is the development of the learners’
learners’ thinking
thinking and understanding.
understanding.
The Intel—Lect
Intel-Lect School: A supportive
: educational environment
supportive educational environment for teaching
learning in a
community of
thinking that embodies
embodies the principles
principles of of this framework
framework in its organizational
organizational
structure.
structure.
3.5.2 In
In Lieu of Conclusion: A Conversation Between
of Conclusion:
a Skeptical reader
reader and the Author
and the Author
At first
first glance, you drive, five
model, third approach, third drive,
you have a good story: third model, five
“atomic pictures”
“atomic pictures” of education versus five
of traditional education advanced education,
of advanced
five pictures of education,
and a working framework for
working framework teaching and learning —
for teaching community of
– the community ofthinking. But ifif
it’s all so great,
great, why
why doesn’t it work? Why isn’t the world covered with communities of of
thinking?
134
Communityof
The Practice
True, the world isn’t covered with communities of thinking. But what does that
prove? Maybe the model is good, but it hasn’t been applied properly? Maybe it’s
only good for certain schools? Maybe it’s good, but the educational system, in its
state, isn’t ready for it? Maybe it isn’t meant for immediate application, but
present state,
simply to establish a paradigm against which it is possible to observe the traditional
school and spark the development of alternatives. We never expected the the world to
be covered with communities of thinking. We wanted there to be some Intel-Lect
Schools here and there, based on classes that were transformed into communities of
thinking, and these would encourageencourage people to create different frameworks for
teaching and learning, better than the ordinary classroom and school, frameworks in
which the third model and third approach are applied in various ways. ways.
all, unlike
Still and all, you, II take your
unlike you, thinking school and a community
your idea about a thinking community
of thinking seriously and literally,
of literally, as a practical
practical framework
framework that should replace the
traditional school and classroom, and it simply
traditional won’t work! Because there are
simply won’t
matriculation exams,
matriculation exams, and there are crowded classes of of thirty or more students, and
there are students and teachers who aren’t ready for for such complicated learning and
teaching, and there are prejudices
prejudices –— what you “atomic pictures”
you call “atomic pictures” —– about learn-
knowledge, and so on,
ing, teaching, knowledge,
ing, on, that are deeply embedded in everybody’s mind.
everybody’s mind.
Listen,
Listen, with all duedue respect, it just won’t work!
just won’t
The factors youyou mentioned —– and you you could add a fewfew more — definitely
– defi nitely militate
against our proposal, but there are also factors that work in its favor. favor. For example,
more and more people think that the the existing schools do not suit the basic values of
democracy and the the demands of the knowledge society and that they they do not produce
graduates capable of and inclined towards independent thinking. Many people are
convinced that schooling is ineffiinefficient
cient and meaningless, which is a problem in itself,
but it causes a much more burning problem —– that of discipline. Because students do
not experience learning in school as meaningful, they are not willing to play the
they are
game
game of schooling. In many many schools there are discipline problems attributable to
lack of meaning, which makes makes school life unbearable. The schools are are gradu-
the public and parental trust that is vital to their functioning, and they
ally losing the they are
also losing the trust of teachers and students. I don’t want to demonize the schools.
Without doubt they they do important educational work. However,However, in general, it seems as
if the system is collapsing under its own weight.
if
I’m all convinced
I’m not at all convinced that “the“the system
system is collapsing under its own weight.” The
own weight.”
constant attacks of of people like you you are bringing the system down, and then you
system down, you
itself. But go
claim that it’s collapsing by itself. on, please.
go on,
Many of the factors you you mentioned are not fi fixed they can be changed.
xed givens, and they
You can fi find
nd some substitute for matriculation exams –— research works, for exam-
ple, or other concluding performances. A teacher-student ratio of one to more than
thirty is certainly a problem, but it is possible to fi find
nd organizational arrangements
that will improve that ratio and, and, of course, it is possible to increase considerably the
national investment in education. Perhaps the the use of laptop and tablet computers
programs will enable a more personal online relationship, not to
with appropriate programs
mention further changes in the patterns of teaching and learning that technological
advances could make. As to a community of thinking meeting the needs or
135
circumstances of all the teachers and students, there is no doubt that it isn’t suitable
everyone, but neither is a traditional classroom. A community of thinking is a
for everyone,
much more fl flexible
exible framework than a traditional classroom, so that it is likely to suit
more teacher and students. If it seems unsuitable, that’s because teachers and stu- stu-
dents have been trained over the years
years in patterns of teaching and learning, and these
patterns are regarded as normal. With respect to prejudices, it seems to me that their
grip on general consciousness is loosening. In professional educational discourse,
they have long since lost their grip. In short,
short, I agree
agree with you
you that implementing the
idea is not simple, but I think it’s possible, and the possibility depends mainly on our
will and not on external circumstances. Regarding our criticism and the criticism of
may hasten the collapse of the school and its replacement by a better
they may
others, they
educational framework, but I’m afraid you’re giving us credit that isn’t due to us.
Sorry, you
Sorry, convinced me that this
you still haven’t convinced this framework appropriate to differ-
framework is appropriate difier—
ent types difierent ages,
types of students and teachers, to students at different difi”erent subjects,
ages, to different
of the school,
to the structure of school, to the demands of of Education.
of the Ministry of Education… ..
The framework of learning in a community of thinking has to be adapted to come
the factors you
to terms with the you mentioned. The framework is undoubtedly suitable for
highly intelligent and motivated students; those are the ones who shouldn’t be
taught in any other way,
way, unless you
you intend to impair their intelligence and motiva-
tion. And who said that students with “average or below-average” intelligence and
motivation have to sit in a classroom, store meaningless information, and then be
tested on it? Students like that need more support so they they can reach a stage where
they can formulate a good question and grapple with it rationally and effectively, but
and effectively,
there’s no reason why they can’t reach that stage. stage. Aside from that, if all stu-
that, even if stu-
framewor ” (an expression whose meaning I don’t com-
this framework”
dents aren’t “suited to this
pletely understand), an effort has to be made to adapt them. Quite similarly, similarly, one
could say that not every
every student is suitable for independent thinking. If that’s so,
they have to be made suitable for it. After all,
all, education aims to change the students,
not to suit them. Students aren’t customers whose every every whim has to be satisfi
satisfied,ed,
though there is a tendency to relate to them and to their parents that way.
The same principle applies to different ages: ages: in the lower grades, more support
and direction must be given. (Our most successful communities of thinking were
actually in primary schools, far from the influence
the infl uence of matriculation exams.) As for
teachers, they, too, need support and direction: guided experience in teaching in a
community of thinking and internal and external arrangements in schools that will
allow and encourage
encourage them to teach differently, less egocentric and more dynamic
differently, in a less
way. (Instead of asking themselves before each lesson, “What am I going to say to
way.
them today?” the teachers should ask, “What am I going to help them do today?”)
they have to be recast into pedagogical disciplines,
study, they
Regarding the subjects of study,
they have to be adapted for teaching and learning in a community of
meaning that they
thinking. As I wrote earlier, by defi definition
nition pedagogical disciplines are are suited to
teaching and learning in a community of thinking. True, True, there is a difference among
among
communities of thinking in the the various subjects (pedagogical disciplines) and espe- espe-
cially between communities of thinking in the social sciences and the humanities,
one hand, and those in the natural sciences, on the other.
on the one other. However,
However, there is
136
Communityof
The Practice
nothing in the content of the various sciences to prevent teaching and learning them
in one or another manifestation of a community of thinking.
With respect to the school, its structure does indeed reject or distort any any educa-
tional logic or model of action different from its own logic and model of action.
Therefore, if if we want a community of thinking to function well, well, we have to change
the school and transform it into an Intel-Lect School.
As for the Ministry of Education (in Israel, at least), as a centralized government
bureaucracy, it prefers traditional, uniform schools, because it is easier to control
them, but it seems to me me that many
many people in thethe Ministry of Education also under-
stand that these schools do not serve society well, well, just as they
they do not serve well the
individuals who study in them. If a proper proper alternative were offered, I believe the
Ministry of Education would accept it. For the moment, it sends contradictory contradictory
messages
messages to the fi field.
eld. Most of these messages
messages imply imposed, uniform learning and
others, independent and fl flexible
exible learning. These mixed messages
messages are a sign of true
confusion. The
confusion. The Ministry Education –— here
Ministry of Education here I am speaking
speaking specifi
specifically
cally about Israel –—
has not managed to defi define
ne goals for the national educational system at the beginning
twenty-first
of the twenty-fi rst century. Not only does the reflect
the school refl the society,
ect the society, but so, too,
too,
does the Ministry of Education —– and it is confused. In the the terms of Zvi Lamm (see
Chap. 11),), we may
may say that thethe Israeli educational system (and other systems as well)
is suffering from triple schizophrenia —– it does socialization, speaks acculturation,
and thinks individuation.
Fine, fine, II understand. Would you
Fine, fine, you mind giving me shorter answers? So let’s let’s say
say
that all the students study, teachers teach, and subjects are taught in the framework framework
of a community
of community of of thinking.
thinking. Why do we need all this this sophisticated production – — the
fertile
fertile question, research, the concluding performance
performance? People can learn and inves-
.7 inves-
without all the rigid processes
tigate without processes you’ve developed
developed..
Our framework, like a good teacher, strives strives to makes itself superfl
superfluous.
uous. It is a
kind of scaffolding that can be removed and should be removed after indirect teach-
ing and good learning become a routine and self-evident matter for everyone. everyone. That’s
actually what happens. In advanced communities of thinking, where the teachers
and students have been experienced in different ways ways of teaching and learning for
two or more years,
years, teachers developed an intuition for fertile questions and no longer
needed the six characteristics that defi definene them, and learners developed intuition
regarding good research questions and effective management of research. In some
communities of thinking, the learners themselves proposed fertile questions. The
other instructions for research and the concluding performance were also absorbed
activity, and they
in the shared activity, short, after two or three years
they were forgotten. In short, years of
experience in a community of thinking, the whole business becomes quite fl fluid
uid and
functions on its own, own, without clinging to thethe dictates of the
the framework.
Okay, let’s saysay I’m
I’m interested. Do you
you have research on teaching and learning in
community of
a community of thinking convince me?
thinking that can convince
we’ve been negligent on that account. We never obtained a grant for
I’m afraid we’ve
research and evaluation. Here and there research has been done and studies have
been written about communities of thinking, but there’s no comprehensive, system-
atic research. We were satisfisatisfied
ed with the empirical evidence. In the places where it
137
worked, we saw saw teaching and learning of impressive, exciting quality; where it
work, we saw confusion and longing for the good old system. I’m convinced
didn’t work,
that when communities of thinking enjoy good conditions, they fl flourish;
ourish; there’s no
confirm
need for research to confi rm that. The reason why many many communities of thinking
foundered is the lack of the vital conditions for their success. In most cases, they they
acted within the framework of a traditional school and that context distorted their
meaning. For example, the the freedom that a community of thinking gives to students
was seen as an opportunity to go the lack of
go wild; the facilitation of the teachers and the
authoritative frontal lectures were interpreted as lack of skill and expertise in the
subject (I remember that students wrote feedback about two teachers in the com-
munity of thinking in sociology —– two university lecturers with doctorates —– to the
okay, but they
effect that “they were okay, they didn’t know the material”); the assignments — –
the concluding performances —– didn’t seem serious to them (a test is something
serious); and thethe work demanded of the students – — to ask a question, to locate, to
criticize, and to create knowledge —– was seen by them as unfair, as demanding too
much thinking and work.work. In short,
short, when the traditional school is the dominant para-para-
digm, it is very difficult
very difficult to teach teachers and students in the the school to work in a
different paradigm. But,
But, in any
any case, the whole model was was built on others’ research
nitely not research-less.
definitely
so it is defi
That means that the effort communities of
efiort to introduce communities of thinking in an existing
school and to change it itfrom within is doomed to
from within tofailure.
failure.
I’m afraid so, but I’m not sure. Schools have very very strong gravitational fifields,
elds, and
everything that enters the the schools’ force fifields
elds crashes there. I tend to think that if
we want a school where students learn and investigate out of real interest, we have
we
to erect it from the foundations to the the rooftop on the basis of the principle of creat-
ing conditions for good learning. A school based on that principle would be a very very
different institution from a traditional school, which is based on providing condi-
tions for a different kind of teaching. Of course, a school does not function in a
vacuum; it is subject to innumerable constraints. If IfII were the Minister of Education,
I would free selected schools from constraints such as the national curriculum and
matriculation exams and give give them a supplementary budget for several years, years, so
they could demonstrate that a different kind of learning is possible. I would attach
researchers to those schools and ask them to observe what was was going on there — –
whether a different kind of learning was developing, learning bound up up with
involvement and understanding. By the way, way, I’m not claiming that this kind of
learning doesn’t take place in existing schools. In many many schools it is possible to see
excellent classes in which high caliber learning takes place, learning connected with
lives of the students, building them up
the lives up and built up up by them. The challenge is to
make these chance occurrences routine in all the schools. In my my opinion this is the
educational challenge facing any any minister of education who cares about education
and not only about the political advantage that can be derived from it: to establish
conditions throughout the educational system in which students can learn and fl flour-
our-
ish in their interactions with knowledge.
Suppose, for
Suppose, for the sake of ofargument, that you
argument, that succeed. So what do you
you succeed. you get?A
get? A
knowledge. What’s
student who understands knowledge. efiort for?
What’s all the effort for?
138
Communityof
The Practice
That’s no small thing, if

That’s if the understanding is deep and the the knowledge is valuable.
Understanding is the the basis for good thinking — defi--
– critical and creative. But it’s defi
nitely possible that thethe understanding of valuable knowledge doesn’t justify all the
effort. Understanding has to motivate the the students to take meaningful action, to
make the world a better place. That means making their lives richer and more excit-
ing and making the the society better and more just. I think that motivation to action is
inherent in understanding and, if not, not, ways
ways must be sought to motivate action.
Understanding of great ideas and stories is not the only goal of education. There are
first
others. It is in the fi rst rank, but not necessarily fi first line. Along with intellectual
rst in line.
i.e., education for understanding, there has to be aesthetic education,
education, i.e.,
essentially the students’ participation in artistic activity –— cinema, theater, music,
dance, painting, and the like;like; there is social education, which is mainly motivation
for social involvement and responsibility.
Listen,
Listen, you
you still haven’t resolved several of of my principled
principled and practical
practical doubts
regarding your idea. II still
your idea. stillfind envision mass education administered in
find it hard to envision
Intel-Lect Schools and communities
communities of of thinking
thinking..
I also have doubts. I only propose let’s try, slowly and gradually, to
propose that we try —– let’s
build our educational system on the basis of the the principle of creating conditions for
good learning of valuable content –— learning of content that supports the intellec-
tual, emotional, and moral development of the students. An Intel-Lect School and a
community of thinking try to provide such conditions and content. There are other
frameworks for education, maybe better ones. The time has come to act upon upon them.

Materi 4 TLCT The Practice

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Materi 4 TLCT The Practice

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Chapter 3

A community of thinking is a framework for teaching and learning that is meant to

Communal Concluding Performance

3.1 and Education

apathy, loneliness, and anomie —

cognitive activity –— various types of communities of learners/inquiry/knowledge

Questioning —– the intellectual activity of inventing questions —– is a decidedly human

us; Homo combustus (burning man), as envi-

Questioning Shapes the Answer: appears to be an absolute gap

3.2.1 The Fertile

The community of thinking begins with a fertile question. The teacher-facilitator

Questions that are open

him or herself. the child but also to her social

✓ Immigration —– what should Australia

etc. They presented the results to an audience of

research concentrated on the the historical sources of present-day ideas, discoveries,

group of facilitators (in the Rehavia Gymnasia in Jerusalem)

resource!” learners were led to trial in the Supreme

“Australia, east or west?” was asked in a junior high school in

3.2.2 Playing Field

Table 3.2 Components of the

they have constructed, the community of teachers produce practical recommenda-

question asked by the facilitators of the community of thinking in the Gvanim

Thus, the fertile question plays on a fi ﬁvefold

3.2.3 A Climate of Questioning

In The Unschooled Mind (1991), Howard Gardner describes a pedagogical dream

their questions with him. An Intel-Lect School based on communities of thinking is

To Excavate thethe Archaeology ofof Knowledge:

Table 3.3 From given problems solutions to invented

The second stage the community of thinking is that of inquiry.

A research question has four basic characteristics: it is interesting, open,

openness of a fertile question and that of a research question are similar

3.3.2 The Research

After the facilitator

6.. Present preliminary research proposals.

In their application, the guidelines are infl inﬂuenced

The main goal of the third stage

3.4.1 Concluding Performance

“understanding is a complex process 1991,,

The performance conception of understanding helps the community of thinking

‘Dear Mr. Superintendent,

3.4.2 Performance as a Motivation

Table 3.6 Example of the research

Has the Zionist

From the point of

From Jabotinsky’s From the point

perhaps the best one,

Formative feedback is inseparable

environment. To become such an environment, a school must undergo far- far-reaching

by means of authoritative lectures or study in small groups groups or in communities of

3.5.1 The Institutional Organization of

point out the way that the school instructional institution

Table 3.7 Basic

The pedagogical discipline is meant to replace the research or scientifi

thinking borrow many elements from that framework

Table 3.9 Outlines of Intel-Lect

House No. 3, Model Apartment

In conclusion, does consciousness change existence, as the the idealists claim, or

will change the

Table 3.10 The language of community

That’s no small thing, if

You might also like