My Critical Thinking Lesson and the aftermath

[TwoShanks]

On Thursday I decided to digress from the current topic of study with my Year 10 Set 2 class and did a lesson on critical thinking.

The lesson involved several demonstrations - I gave out identical horoscopes (thanks to Athon) and revealed them to be the same after getting ratings of 8 or 9 out of 10, did a "psychic" trick (again thanks to Athon), and showed them the ideomotor effect using a pendulum. The other demonstrations were about homeopathy. I bought some homeopathic sleeping pills and took one every two minutes for the hour of the lesson, after explaining what homeopathy involves and why this should not be done by pupils. I also showed them how to make a homeopathic remedy using food colouring in a 6C solution.

The response to the lesson was generally very enthusiastic, we discussed the placebo effect and the class enjoyed the demonstrations. One girl became very angry, since her mother is "studying homeopathy", and claimed that I "don't know what I'm talking about".

The following day I was informed that the girl's mother had phoned to complain on several grounds. Pleasantly enough she accepted that as a science teacher I would be against homeopathy and had no problem with me demonstrating this. However, she claimed that pupils in the class may think that I had shown it was acceptable to take huge amounts of any pills with no effect. Additionally she was "concerned that time was being spent on irrelevant topics" rather than on Electricity in the Home. She had also been told by her daughter that I had said I would bring a ouija board to class, which is patently nonsense.

Yesterday the class asked if we could do something similiar today, so I told them that we were going back to the Electricity topic because of complaints about the lesson. Several of them were very disappointed, saying that they liked the lesson because it was about things they could use rather than things most of them would never need to know.

I thought the lesson was quite successful, but due to complaints I've been told not to do it again.

[Kevin_Lowe]

"Complaints" plural?

Was it just the woo-woo homeopath who complained, or were there other complaints? If it's just one woo-woo and you got told not to do it again then your school administrators are invertebrates.

The complaint about you giving students the idea it was okay to take a bottle of pills is just hilarious.

[TwoShanks]

Just the one complaint from the homeopath, that's all.

[Jeff Corey]

Is a "year 10 class" a high school junior level? What does "set 2" mean?
It sounds that you don't enjoy academic freedom where you teach if one wooish complaint can get your administrator to tell you what you can't teach.
What if you had answered a question about UFOs by saying they were unidentified, but that there was no evidence that they were alien spaceships. If a parent who was convinced they had been abducted and probed complained, would you be reprimanded?

[Diamond]

Is a "year 10 class" a high school junior level? What does "set 2" mean?
It sounds that you don't enjoy academic freedom where you teach if one wooish complaint can get your administrator to tell you what you can't teach.
What if you had answered a question about UFOs by saying they were unidentified, but that there was no evidence that they were alien spaceships. If a parent who was convinced they had been abducted and probed complained, would you be reprimanded?

What is this "freedom" you refer to?

[Mojo]

Several of them were very disappointed, saying that they liked the lesson because it was about things they could use rather than things most of them would never need to know. So why do you think the homoeopath didn't like it? ;)

[Terry]

Wow, that sounds like a great lesson, TwoShanks. I'm sorry that you caught some flak for it. A pity that you've been asked not to do it again.

--Terry.

[Mojo]

However, she claimed that pupils in the class may think that I had shown it was acceptable to take huge amounts of any pills with no effect. OK, this is possibly a valid criticism. So don't do the bit with the pills again, but what other objections were there?

Additionally she was "concerned that time was being spent on irrelevant topics" rather than on Electricity in the Home. Critical thinking is not irrelevant to ther study of science. In fact it's vitally important. One of the major problems with science teaching is a tendency to teach science as a series of facts rather than teaching how to think about the facts and draw conclusions. If they can't think properly they can't do science.

She had also been told by her daughter that I had said I would bring a ouija board to class, which is patently nonsense. And she finishes off with a false complaint!


I've been told not to do it again. I agree with Kevin_Lowe. Your administrators are pathetically spineless.

[Shrinker]

I sounds like a great lesson, but I'm not surprised by the pills complaint. You're teaching them that its okay to ignore the advice printed on a label if you think it's wrong. That could have nasty consquences for kids who don't know how evaluate mediacal advice for themselves. I think one of the first lessons for critical thinkers is to always be aware that you could be wrong.

[jimlintott]

You could play the battle of the complaints. If the students who wanted to learn more could convince their parents to call and complain that you should be allowed and or encouraged to teach this stuff the administrators might be forced to change their stance.

Remember that most administrative types are spineless and will aquiesse to the majority regardless of what is right or wrong.

[Loon]

Critical thinking is not irrelevant to ther study of science. In fact it's vitally important. One of the major problems with science teaching is a tendency to teach science as a series of facts rather than teaching how to think about the facts and draw conclusions. If they can't think properly they can't do science.

You are way understating the case.

[logical muse]

Hey TwoShanks we need more teachers like you! Those kids are lucky to have a teacher who understands the importance of critical thinking. You'd think it should be the norm, but alas, I fear it's the exception.

Is there any way you can continue with this type of lesson, despite the one complaint? Perhaps a mediation session with the complainant and your school pricipal to see if an arrangement can be made? You promise not to take a whole bucket of homoeopathic pills but you will discuss the science aspects (or lack thereof) of homoeopathy. Hell, why not get her in to do her own presentation to the class, teach the kids how to make homoeopathic 'medicine' and engage the students in a discussion. It seems like you've got a bright bunch, and you've already exposed them to the ridiculousness of homoeopathy, so they might end up teaching her what a load of bunk it is.

Year 10 kids are pretty smart. When they see her take a drop of something and dilute it a bajillion times... actually... scrap that whole idea. It's not fair on the daughter.

Still, I hope you can give your class more of these lessons. At the very least, point them to the JREF site!

[Kopji]

critical thinking is so much like sex

[thaiboxerken]

Screw that homeopathic quack. If she doesn't like reality being taught in a science class, so what?! Tell her that when she can demonstrate taht homeopathy really works, you'll change your mind.

[Kevin_Lowe]

I sounds like a great lesson, but I'm not surprised by the pills complaint. You're teaching them that its okay to ignore the advice printed on a label if you think it's wrong. That could have nasty consquences for kids who don't know how evaluate mediacal advice for themselves. I think one of the first lessons for critical thinkers is to always be aware that you could be wrong.

I have to disagree forcefully with you.

It's a powerful demonstration of the uselessness of homeopathy precisely because everyone including children understands that taking a lot of sleeping pills can be very dangerous.

There are things you can be wrong about, but the effectiveness of homeopathy is not one of those things. You might as well worry about Thor smiting you.

If you want to absolutely bend over backwards to placate the idiots, you can simply give the usual "don't try this at home" disclaimer. Science teachers regularly demonstrate dangerous things.

[clarsct]

Agreed.

Hmmmmmmm.

Any way magnetism could be worked into that 'Electronics' section? Teach the kids what magnets can and cannot do?

Seems like a good time.

Yeah, most school admins ARE spineless because they hate being sued. Let's put the blame where it belongs, squarely on the shoulders of the parents.

There's a million ways a experiment can be made 'different' while teaching the same thing. Persevere, my friend!

Good Work, BTW.

[Shrinker]

I have to disagree forcefully with you.

It's a powerful demonstration of the uselessness of homeopathy precisely because everyone including children understands that taking a lot of sleeping pills can be very dangerous.

There are things you can be wrong about, but the effectiveness of homeopathy is not one of those things. You might as well worry about Thor smiting you.

If you want to absolutely bend over backwards to placate the idiots, you can simply give the usual "don't try this at home" disclaimer. Science teachers regularly demonstrate dangerous things.

My point is that the first thing a potential critical thinker needs to understand is the possibility he/she might be wrong. Guzzling a bottle of pills is not compatible with that outlook. To me, that says, 'I'm 100% right about this.'

A classroom experiement, bit of logical thinking, and the word of a single authority figure should not be enough to form an absolute concrete opinion, especially for kids who might not have all the facts. After all, without a good guiding influence you can use those things to conclude that Global Warming is a myth, man never went to the moon, the holocaust never happened.

Using dramatic stunts to teach kids homeopathy doesn't work is okay, but teaching them the ability to critically assess their own conclusions is much more important. IMO...

[moopet]

I've mentioned this before. Re: the sleeping pill taking - according to homeopaths, taking less of one of their preparations increases the effectiveness. So if you'd accidentally swallowed a homeopathic sleeping pill, logically the way to reduce its effect would be to swallow a hole lot more. The reason you don't fall asleep or die may well be because it's just sugar pills or pure water but the homeopaths will claim that it's doing *exactly* what it should when taken in excess - nothing. And nothing, of course, has no bad side effects.

How is this a good example of anything?

[thaiboxerken]

I think the pill taking thing is ok, provided that the kids learn to actually look at the label for ingredient content first. I suspect there are alot of drugs out there that actually have a substantial amount of active ingredients that are homeopathic by name only.

[rjh01]

Lucky there the sleeping pills did not contain nay real drugs to put you to sleep.

[Kevin_Lowe]

My point is that the first thing a potential critical thinker needs to understand is the possibility he/she might be wrong. Guzzling a bottle of pills is not compatible with that outlook. To me, that says, 'I'm 100% right about this.'


Absolutely, and this is the correct message to send in this case.

The chances of being hurt (or helped) by a homeopathic remedy are, as I just said, on the same level as the odds of being struck down by Thor.

It's not skepticism in the sense we normally use it to say "I will not tell kids that that Thor does not exist, because Thor might be real and that might offend Him". I would call that stupidity myself. Homeopathy is very much in the same basket as Thor.


A classroom experiement, bit of logical thinking, and the word of a single authority figure should not be enough to form an absolute concrete opinion, especially for kids who might not have all the facts.


It depends on the opinion. I could show you with a brief experiment using blocks and some simple mathematical logic that 2+2=4, and I could back it up with my own authority. Similarly I could show you that tap water is harmless, and that a "solution" of any substance diluted to the extent that it is identical to tap water is also harmless, and I could back that up with my own authority.

Entertaining skepticism at that point would be stupidity more than skepticism.

Philosophically it is conceivable that someone might show me evidence that homeopathy works as advertised and that 2+2=5, and as a good skeptic I would have to take that evidence into account. But I'm more likely to win the lotto every day for a year than I am to ever see such evidence.


After all, without a good guiding influence you can use those things to conclude that Global Warming is a myth, man never went to the moon, the holocaust never happened.


Some issues are complicated, like these. Others are simple matters of fact like the existence of Thor, the usefulness of homeopathy and the sum of two and two.


Using dramatic stunts to teach kids homeopathy doesn't work is okay, but teaching them the ability to critically assess their own conclusions is much more important. IMO...

I don't see any strong reason to teach one to the exclusion of the other, especially since they are complimentary.

[rjh01]

2+2=5. I have a spreadsheet that proves it. Cannot post it.

[Mojo]

I've mentioned this before. Re: the sleeping pill taking - according to homeopaths, taking less of one of their preparations increases the effectiveness. So if you'd accidentally swallowed a homeopathic sleeping pill, logically the way to reduce its effect would be to swallow a hole lot more.But what if I don't take any homoeopathic sleeping pills? Will I juszzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz..........

[BillHoyt]

Two Shanks,

Your OP moved me to enlist Randi's support. Your lesson should not have to be abandoned because of a woo's complaints. This was my email to Randi, sent moments ago:

Randi,

I thought you might like to pursue this story from "Two Shanks." He writes of teaching a critical thinking class in which, among other things, he repeats your Congressional homeopathy demonstration from a while back. One student's mom was a budding homeopath and (shocking, I know) complained to the school. "Two Shanks" was asked not to repeat that class lesson. I don't think this "gag order" should go unchallenged, and I don't think "Two Shanks" wants to risk his/her job over it. On the other hand, I think "Two Shanks" could use some high-powered support to teach such a valuable class lesson.

Post can be found at: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=1330580#post1330580

Best Regards,
Bill Hoyt

[BillHoyt]

I sounds like a great lesson, but I'm not surprised by the pills complaint. You're teaching them that its okay to ignore the advice printed on a label if you think it's wrong. That could have nasty consquences for kids who don't know how evaluate mediacal advice for themselves. I think one of the first lessons for critical thinkers is to always be aware that you could be wrong.
No, sir, TwoShanks is teaching them that people lie. That even manufacturers of pills lie. Moreover, TwoShanks is teaching them that they must think crtically. While I agree that TwoShanks needs to be quite cautious with the pill demonstration and must ensure the kids don't take home the wrong message, this has little to do with the "you could be wrong" admonition.

[BillHoyt]

My point is that the first thing a potential critical thinker needs to understand is the possibility he/she might be wrong. Guzzling a bottle of pills is not compatible with that outlook. To me, that says, 'I'm 100% right about this.'
I can't say with 100% certainty that gravity exists. Should I not take a step on a windy day for fear of being blown off the planet?

[LordoftheLeftHand]

So Two Shanks; any new developments in the story? Anything else from the administrators, parents, or students?

LLH

[jj]

**sigh** This is really quite offensive. Due to one false complaint, you're told not to teach science in a science class?

I agree that the "war of complaints" might be the way to go, but then again, the administrator might simply decide that the problem is the person being complained about, which wouldn't be good at all.

But in any case, I wonder if you're looking for a job elsewhere...

[jj]

Idiot net lag.

[BillHoyt]

TwoShanks,

Check out Randi's latest commentary. Your OP is part of it, sir.

[sphenisc]

2+2=5. I have a spreadsheet that proves it. Cannot post it.

Cell A1 enter 2.4
Cell A2 enter 2.4
Cell A3 enter =A1+A2

format cells to 0 decimal places

:)

[rjh01]

Cell A1 enter 2.4
Cell A2 enter 2.4
Cell A3 enter =A1+A2

format cells to 0 decimal places

:)

Correct. Great fun to give the spreadsheet to some people who are not very bright. They just do not understand it.

[athon]

TS, welcome to the life of a teacher who teachers critical thinking in a UK school. Think of this as a sort of 'initiation rite'. I've had the same battle, and unfortunately met with much the same criticism.

Don't give up the good fight. I need to know somebody is still changing Essex from the root-level up, dammit! Subtlety is the key; weave the critical thinking in, stand by your beliefs. There's no way they'll fire your arse. They know they can't afford to lose a good teacher.

Well done, dude! I'm proud of you.

Athon

[Hindmost]

TwoShanks:

I also take an occasional lesson in my classes and do “Bad Science.”

I use James Randi’s “Secrets of the Psychics” video and the occasional Mythbuster’s show. (lately, I have shown the TAM3 dvd—the challenge is to see how Banachek is not psychic!) The students do appreciate the info and have even suggested a new class on the subject. I have a blast teaching it too.

I encourage you to keep doing the lessons. Just use different subjects—dowsing, the moon hoax and crop circles are good subjects that I have used successfully before. I avoid chiropractic stuff--may step on some toes--wait, that's what they do...sort of. (now, I have not been contacted by parents yet…but I am sure it will happen soon.)

glenn:boxedin:

[blutoski]

There's a million ways a experiment can be made 'different' while teaching the same thing. Persevere, my friend!




I think that's a very good point. I used to want to be a highschool science teacher for just this reason: I wanted to teach the material in context.

In terms of teaching critical thinking, I had some opportunity to sit in a friend's science class (he taught grade 12 biology) and my critical thinking demonstrations did not use specific ongoing scams such as homeopathy, specifically because I didn't want to introduce hostility. Sometimes it's the kid who's into homeopathy - not just their parent - and this would make them feel like a target.

What I did instead was take a page from Ray Hyman and I did some magic tricks, and a homeopathy analogue.

The point of the magic tricks is: "I saw it with my own eyes" is not good enough. I do a trick with a magician's egg, show them how it's done, and when I demo it the second time I do it a different way without reveal so they also understand that there are many ways to do the same illusion. It's also entertaining.

The homeopathy analogue was to test how far you had to dilute an acid to eliminate its effect. We started with a concentrated solution, and the students reported their observations when pouring the acid dilutions over a coin. At the end of the experiment, I revealed that there was no acid in the original mixture before dilution, and any observation of erosion was caused by expectations alone. Some kids understood the lesson, others remained convinced that there was acid in the original mixture, even though I drank it in front of them.

In any case, I also recommend against mentioning specific books or websites, if they're not publically managed. eg: NSF, NASA are OK, but JREF would not be a choice IMO.

[rjh01]

Only glad some student did not put acid in the original liquid.

[LordoftheLeftHand]

The homeopathy analogue was to test how far you had to dilute an acid to eliminate its effect. We started with a concentrated solution, and the students reported their observations when pouring the acid dilutions over a coin. At the end of the experiment, I revealed that there was no acid in the original mixture before dilution, and any observation of erosion was caused by expectations alone. Some kids understood the lesson, others remained convinced that there was acid in the original mixture, even though I drank it in front of them.

So what % of students reported erosion? Just curious.

LLH

[blutoski]

So what % of students reported erosion? Just curious.

I don't have the charts around right now, but as expected, it diminished as we diluted. They worked in groups, and some groups had difficulty reaching a consensus even on the first dilution.

I did ask them not to consult with other groups, but you could see which ones collaborated. It was very informal.

Actually, I sort of gave it away to one of the more astute kids, because I called it 'placebic acid', and got eye contact and a big smile immediately. So, her group had the closest results to straight zeros.