I wonder if anything has more impact on our future than the questions we ask?
First, if we take it on more of a micro-level, imagine going into any random meeting. You will see things differently and have a different experience if you are asking “How can I get out of this meeting as quickly as possible?” vs. “What meaningful things can I learn and/or contribute during this time?” vs “How can I make sure I don’t embarrass myself in this meeting like I did last time?”
The questions we ask reveal some about the assumptions we take into the situation, and also have an impact on the consequent experience we have.
As another simple example, when meeting a person imagine asking: “What does he/she think of me?” vs. “What is his/her life like?” vs. “How can I make this person’s life a little better?” vs “Why am I even talking to this person?”
Depending on which question(s) you are asking (consciously or subconsciously) you will most likely have a different perspective, experience, and outcome.
As I was conducting a review the last 10 years of research on papers presented at the bi-annual CATaC conference (Cultural Attitudes towards Technology and Communication), I was again impressed by the questions we ask in a research context. They are all laden with assumptions (usually unstated) and have an impact on how the research is conducted – including what end up being the findings and recommended future research.
For this paper we looked at:
• Who is asking the questions? (where are they from, what discipline do they represent, who do they work with)
• What questions are they asking?
• How do they go about finding answers to their questions? (what literature do they cite, what methods do they use, what population do they sample, etc.)
• What answers do they find?
• What suggestions do they have for future research?
Additionally, I kept asking myself, what assumptions might they be making in the questions they address?
Even working with great colleagues like Javier and Brooke, it was a ton of work (reading at least some sections of all 199 papers) – but perhaps one of the best things I have done professionally or personally. I now have a better idea for what has already been done in this field, what gaps there are, and what lines of inquiry have been more fruitful than others. On another level, I am more conscious of the assumptions behind the questions I ask and the potential impact they might have. I wonder, out of all the possible options, are these really the most valuable questions?
Your thoughts/reactions?
• In your personal and/or professional life, have you ever had an experience where you noticed that when you changed the questions you were asking it altered the way you saw the situation?
• Do you ever stop to examine the assumptions you are making which led to the questions you are asking?
• Of all the questions you could ask, why did you pick the ones you are asking? Do you think they are the most important or valuable ones you could be asking or is it for some other reason?
As a side line of thought:
• Do you think we ask ourselves enough questions? Why as we age do we seem to lose some of the curiosity of children and ask less questions?
• If not all questions are created equal, how can I lead myself to asking better and better questions?
Interesting. I think what you operationalize as “questions” is actually a construct I’ve always referred to as “priorities” or “values.” I prefer “priorities” because “values” has too much baggage. (Eg. one is often more comfortable compromising on their priorities than on their values.)
Your idea of “questions” is a good surrogate for “priorities,” but I think you should make sure to link these observable events (questions) to the latent traits (priorities). For example, asking how quickly we can get through a meeting implies a set of priorities, while asking, “How can we best serve these people,” implies another.
I have never been part of any dispute that could not be distilled to a difference in priorities. The possibility of a resolution rests of the parties’ willingness to negotiate and/or compromise on their priorities. Many of the endless conflicts in the world are situations where two (or more) sides hold conflicting priorities on which they are unwilling to compromise even minutely.
So, on to your questions…
“In your personal and/or professional life, have you ever had an experience where you noticed that when you changed the questions you were asking it altered the way you saw the situation?”
All the time. Validity theory (my specialty) is going through this right now. Previous to 1985, the question was. “Is this test valid?” Then it became, “How valid is this test?” and in 1999 it became, “How valid are our interpretations and uses of test results?” Of course, most of the world is stuck in the pre-1999 model. It takes me about two minutes to convince people of the superior nature of the new question, but we – being creatures of habit – are slow to change our speech to reflect it.
“Do you ever stop to examine the assumptions you are making which led to the questions you are asking?”
Yes, yes, and yes. I’m becoming more of a realist (though I prefer the term “epistemological relativist”) in that I believe in a positivist reality, but I know that humans will never come to a consensus on how to represent that reality. How we construe any situation has to do with the assumptions we make (which are usually based on past experience).
Assumptions make a world of practical difference. I’m on a committee reviewing evaluation plans for a large government project. I’ve found that an effective method for distinguishing between the proposals has been to discover the assumptions each group makes about the program. Some make no assumptions and are forced to have lengthy (and expensive) discovery phases. Others make too many assumptions and propose measurables before they’ve even talked to the stakeholders. Somewhere between those two extremes lies a happy medium.
“Of all the questions you could ask, why did you pick the ones you are asking? Do you think they are the most important or valuable ones you could be asking or is it for some other reason?”
I would like to say yes, but my previous answer precludes that response. Very few of us ever really consider why we’re asking the questions we’re asking, or whether they are the most effective questions to be asking. To do so constantly would lead us to run in circles. (Why do I ask this? Why did I just ask that? Why did I…STOP!)
I tend to ask answerable questions. I told the International Education Program Services division of the U.S. Department of Education, “Ask not what would be interesting to know, but what you would do if you knew it,” which I gleaned from Michael Q. Patton’s “Utilization-focused Evaluation” (oh my, did I just cite Patton?). While philosophical questions are as fun as ping-pong, they are less useful than questions we can address through some empirically-based argumentation.
And, yes, when I’m in a meeting, my priority to make it as short and actionable as possible. What’s the issue? What can we do to fix it? Who will do it? By when? Done.
Jeremy, I love reading your comments because they help me clarify what I am thinking and look at things from a different perspective.
For example your point about priorities. I think I was trying to get at a similar thing by saying that the visible representation (the question), comes with an embedded set of assumptions. But after thinking about your comment, I now think that the assumptions lead to priorities which lead to questions/actions.
For example, your priority with meetings is to make it as short and actionable as possible. This is because you have a set of assumptions about the nature of time, work situations, communication, relationships, etc… These pre-existing assumptions influence your priorities. Then expectations come in to play – based upon a combination of things: your assumptions, priorities, and previous experiences in similar situations with the same or similar people.
I know, at this point many people would be asking – OK, so who cares?
Well, it is so interesting to me because in studying cross-cultural communication and global virtual teams – these assumptions, priorities, and expectations are different enough (in subtle and distinct ways) to cause all kinds of miscommunication.
I am currently trying to help mediate a situation between some European and Chinese partners where this is exactly the case – serious enough to the point that they have threatened ending the working relationship with each other.
More than you may realize, your orientation towards meetings (assumptions, priorities, expectations, etc) is distinctively American – and this leads to different questions and actions. You probably assume a reasonable amount of pre-existing trust, a linear view of time, a fairly egalitarian relationship structure, and a generally task-based orientation. In other parts of the world much more emphasis is placed on “guanxie”, establishing context and connections, exchanging favors, establishing particular relationships with special exceptions, monitoring “face”, having a view of time as circular or parallel, heirarchical relationships, etc…
Of course it is not an either/or situation, as you also care about relationships and they would care about getting things done, but the difference in emphasis and approach is substantial enough for people to easily misinterpret the intention and actions of others.
For just this reason, in the situation I referred to earlier, the Chinese partners feel misused and exploited (e.g. how could the Europeans not even bring a simple gift to China when their airfare was paid for? Why can’t they be more flexible and understanding of this specific situation? How come they so easily and happily receive favors but are so slow to give them? etc).
The Europeans also question the motivation and approach of the Chinese partners (e.g. Why don’t the Chinese partners understand that we are simply following the same rules that we follow for everyone else? Do they only do nice things because they want something in exchange? Why can’t they see that we are being more flexible than normal? etc). They each question the motivations of the other, and use a different reasoning structure which complicates the situation.
Knowing each side fairly well, I can see that they significantly misinterpret each others behaviors, but getting to the bottom of it and establishing mutual understanding takes a lot of time, patience, honest reflection, and open communication – and perhaps more than they are willing to give at this point (I guess we’ll see).
I suppose with any relationship it takes time to establish common expectations and a reasonable degree of trust – and not every relationship makes it that far. There are genuine cases when people should not be trusted because they are not trustworthy, but I think it is unfortunate when the real culprit is simple miscommunication.
Wow – maybe that was a bit of a tangent from the topic of “questions” – but I suppose it is all interrelated. Any other thoughts?
P.S. The stuff you are doing with the U.S. Department of Education sounds really interesting. I really like that quote too – “Ask not what would be interesting to know, but what you would do if you knew it.”
In working with web analytics, this is exactly the point. There is so much data and so much information that you could discover all kinds of interesting things about user behavior. But due to the limited time and resources, it is necessary to always focus on the “so what?” – how would knowing specific information (e.g. the average screen resolution of visitors from Alabama) change what you do?
The assumptions made about the relative importance of different elements of web-pages and user experience set certain priority areas for further questioning and exploration.
Now you got me thinking… never good when I’m trying to run a 1-parameter logistic model.
I’m not sure of the linearity between priorities, assumptions, and questions, but they are surely inter-related. Your examples show why assumptions may precede priorities. Perhaps they’re the same construct, but we have yet to unify them. Or perhaps I’m dead wrong and you’re right.
Regardless, they both exist before the individual realizes they do. This is why they’re so dangerous. It is also why this work is so important to conflict resolution and epistemology.
Yeah – I think people struggle with similar issues, but on slightly different levels… you are challenged by trying to simultaneously grapple with running a 1-parameter logistic model AND the assumptions underlying perception and epistemology
– and others find it difficult to chew gum AND walk at the same time. 🙂
On a much different note—though in my relatively average mind, related (and in my native tongue of ENGLISH =o) )—you can spend 5 minutes with a child and realize that having questions is instinctive. You’re right about adults not having near as many. At least not verbalizing them. Somewhere throughout their formative years we squelch the curiosity, or don’t provide a learning environment conducive of asking them. Or don’t provide an atmosphere where they feel comfortable asking them. Or, most likely, don’t place enough value (“priority”) on critical thinking and higher-level questions to show them our “approval”, and as children are approval-seeking (…as well as, let’s be honest, most adults…) they quickly learn that adults aren’t interested in all their questions. They are not rewarded socially for asking them.
Watch anytime you’re in public. A child asks a question and almost as immediately an adult tries to shut it down, or at best, give the short-answer so they’ll quiet down as soon as possible, and doing so with thinly-veiled exasperation. The other day I was standing in line at a store and the child in front of me had an unyielding stream of questions, and the adult with him was actually answering, and seeming to enjoy it. I was completely shocked (and amused, and pleasantly surprised). So much so that I deduced she must have been an aunt or babysitter rather than his parent. (Awful assumption, I know.)
We get tired. Thinking about other people’s questions stretches our brain capacity and brings us out of easy-response mode, and takes time to think through. We get impatient. We think of our to-do list and don’t want to waste our time. As an educator, this translates to me thinking of all the curriculum I’m responsible to cover and all the evaluations and testing both my students and myself are subject to, and I recognize the tendency to feel like I need to cruise at power-speed through my lesson plans. Get it? Got it? Okay, let’s move on. No more questions. Put your hand down. There are 27 of you and 1 of me and there’s no possible way I can handle 8 questions from each of you. Do the math. 216 questions. An hour. 1296 questions a day. Tiring just thinking about it, no?
Classrooms that don’t reward children who ask questions teach students the underlying message that higher-level thinking is not valued in our society, nor do they develop the child’s analysis, synthesis, and evaluation skills (Bloom). We (educators) too frequently suffice with assessments of regurgitated facts that aren’t true indicators of long-term learning and deeper understanding of principles—in the interest of time…and at immense sacrifice.
It takes time to let my children learn by asking and doing, instead of telling them. It takes time to ask a child to expound on a thought (though it provides incredible insight and sometimes brings interesting meaning to seemingly irrelevant comments—which are frequent, I might add =o) ). It takes time to stay calm and pause my students in the middle of a heated situation and help them evaluate the real source of the problem and guide them to solving it—resisting the urge to tell them exactly why they’re in trouble and who needs to apologize to who and for what (How much problem solving are they really developing when children stand wide-eyed looking up at a frustrated adult?). It takes time to teach them to reflect on an experiment or on the day, developing their metacognitive abilities. It takes time to be a good listener. It takes time to develop a rapport with a child where the relationship is conducive to their feeling like they can ask you anything. But I don’t think there is a more important aspect to develop in a parent-child relationship than that of open communication and a safe environment where there is trust and where they feel they can come to you with anything. Classrooms—particularly with high enrollment—cannot be as conducive to questions as a one-on-one relationship with your own child. There is no better place to develop communication skills, build trust, encourage curiosity and learning, shape priorities, and formulate values than with the family and in the home. Listening. And talking. Good naturedly, without impatience. Children thrive in that atmosphere. They learn that society values their questions, we value their thoughts (and underlying all that: that they are loved and accepted for who they are. Which is the most basal human desire.). Schools can try, but children have always learned more from their own parents than from their teachers.
My sister answers all her children’s questions. And she doesn’t give them the dumbed-down version. I have seen my nieces and nephew develop critical-thinking abilities beyond their presumed developmental level. Maybe I’m biased and bragging. But I hope to be a parent like her.
(Forgive the relatively extreme simplicity…I am of the walking/chewing gum-challenged crowd. =oP )
Just found this. I liked it.
At school:
“Indicators of critical thinking can be identified through the types of activities in which the teacher engages the students. For example:
* Are in-depth group discussions provided during class time?
* Are students coached to question their thinking processes and those of their classmates?
* Are students afforded opportunities to evaluate their progress regularly?
* Are students encouraged to pose questions regularly in class?
* Are students provided with guides to help them reflect on their thinking (such as Bloom’s Taxonomy)?
* Do class projects engage students in analysis, synthesis, and evaluation?
* Are students given opportunities to consider various opinions and to justify their own beliefs?”
And nurturing critical thinking at home:
“Using Bloom’s guide, note if the child is comparing or evaluating the functions of toys (toddlers and young children), computer programs (young children to teens), or social events (through phone calls or discussions with siblings or friends). Listening to your child and gauging how he or she makes sense of the world will enable you to understand what critical-thinking skills your child uses and whether your intervention is needed at home to extend his or her level of thinking.
Parents can demonstrate critical thinking by pondering aloud the most efficient way to do household chores, considering the most economical purchase to make at the grocery store, monitoring your progress toward your personal goals, or approaching social issues in your community. Describing how you think and solve problems is the best way for you to instill similar thinking patterns in your children.”
So thought provoking- I actually wrote a blog about it… but to try to answer some of your questions:
• Do you think we ask ourselves enough questions? Why as we age do we seem to lose some of the curiosity of children and ask less questions?
I’m one of those people that thinks and analyzes and often has a hard time turning my thoughts off (just to get a wink of sleep). And I’ve noticed a pattern that sometimes comes along. I tend to start asking selfish questions… but as I think about the situation longer, I always try to play devils advocate and see the other side (which usually tends to change my thinking all together). then I start thinking about how I could help or serve that person I might be at odds with… or just knowing me, I think of ways in which to change the world and promote truth. I’ve found in my life if I don’t give myself the appropriate time to think through situations I often respond with selfishness… which only begets one of two things 1) regret, 2) cuffuffled outcome- which leaves me wondering if there really was an intended outcome in the first place or if I was sadly sucked into knee-jerk reaction which 99.9% of the time I end up regretting.
• If not all questions are created equal, how can I lead myself to asking better and better questions?
Good question… when you find the real answer let me know… but honestly I have to act as a lawyer/detective type and try to think through all angles. (But even then, it is hard to ask that one question that unlocks the mystery to another person)… in teaching this is always my goal. There are questions that I’ve noticed tends to open people’s hearts… I searched for these questions as a missionary too. But honestly, it comes down to practice and having the Lord guide you. 🙂