Fall 2024 Talking/Teaching Schedule Updated
The Fall 2024 Talking/Teaching schedule is nearly complete. For those already registered for this fall’s installment of our free online discussion series, an updated Zoom link has been sent out. If you haven’t registered but are interested in one or more sessions, register once to receive a Zoom link for the entire series.
10/04/24 (12:00 Eastern): Paul Green: How Does This Fit?: Navigating the norms of philosophy in an interdisciplinary context
What disciplinary norms in philosophy are likely to be disorienting to interdisciplinary students? How can a philosophy instructor help students make sense of philosophical methods and norms relatively quickly? I will start by giving two examples from teaching philosophical writing. The following discussion will aim to 1) identify various disciplinary norms that might trip up students, and 2) brainstorm about how to help students navigate these norms within a broader disciplinary perspective. If there is time, I’d also like to discuss how to help students understand the value of philosophical work more broadly, especially as a complement (not competitor) to other disciplines.
10/11/24 (3:00 Eastern): Claude Gratton: A Method to Evaluate Arguments and Explanations
The great majority of textbooks in critical thinking or argumentation teach a variety of reasoning skills without teaching a procedure that organizes the application of those skills. Consequently, most students have difficulty orchestrating the application of those skills to their own thinking, academic disciplines, and controversial topics. Thus, they have difficulty transferring those many reasoning skills that we too often teach disconnected from one another. I will start our discussion by briefly illustrating the application of a method that I have developed over many years of trials and errors and describe the logical and practical justifications of the method.
10/18/24 (12:00 Eastern): TBD
10/25/24 (3:00 Eastern): TBD
11/01/24 (12:00 Eastern): Kristen Oganowski: Demonstrating Joy in Discomfort
Many students appear to have an aversion to discomfort: one that is detrimental to their learning. As such, I argue that educators should find creative and strategic ways to show our students how to find joy or take delight in discomfort.
To be clear: I argue not only that we should value discomfort. I also argue that we should develop an emotional disposition that demonstrates this value to our students and to each other. This will require theorizing not only about our students but also about ourselves: our assumptions, our practices, and our comportment in the classroom.
The guiding questions for my discussion will be as follows:
–What is the pedagogical value of discomfort?
–How should we distinguish what I call “productive discomfort” from “harmful discomfort”?
–Do we have a moral duty to demonstrate “delight in discomfort” for our students?
11/8/24 (3:00 Eastern): Stephen Block-Schulman: [A Student Question Experience]
11/15/24 (12:00 Eastern): Alida Liberman: Alternate Standards of Philosophical Excellence
To start this discussion, I’ll first briefly explain what argument maps are and some of the research on their pedagogical efficacy. Then I’ll introduce a new kind of argument map: one with inference boxes between the conclusion and premises. As I’ll show, the inference box allows for more effective teaching about what inference is and inference rules. Finally, I’ll demonstrate how the inference box allows us to teach about analogical arguments, and the criteria for assessing them, more effectively.
11/22/24 (3:00 Eastern): Jonathan Surovell: Teaching About Inferences to Improve Critical Thinking Outcomes
To start this discussion, I’ll first briefly explain what argument maps are and some of the research on their pedagogical efficacy. Then I’ll introduce a new kind of argument map: one with inference boxes between the conclusion and premises. As I’ll show, the inference box allows for more effective teaching about what inference is and inference rules. Finally, I’ll demonstrate how the inference box allows us to teach about analogical arguments, and the criteria for assessing them, more effectively.
12/06/24: TBD
