y isMURDOCN UNIVERSITYMurdoch, Western Australia 6153

Telephone 66 2211

Students shoud fill in Sections A and C inBLOCK LETTERS and include this sheeteach time an assignment is submitted .

SECTION A

Course . . . .. . . . ..Classroom. ...Studies.. ..E461. .. . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . .

A Heuristic Model . . .Assignment Title . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . .. .. . .. . . . . . ... .. .. . .. .. . . . .,

old E

7 TO 78Student

Mr/Mrs/Miss/Ms . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . ..Pugh. . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . ..D. .. . . .na.. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . .. .

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

.. ... .. . .. . .. .. . . . . .. .. .. . .. ... .. . .. .. .. .SURNAME

y

INITIALS

STUDENT NO.

Tutor. .. . . . . .. . . . .R,.. . .. .. .S.oh-&be.c.i.. . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . ..NAME (BLOCK LETTERS)

Assignment No. . .. .1". . . . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . .

SECTION B

. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. .. . .. ..... . . ... .. . .. .. .. .

.. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . ... .. . .. . .. ... . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . .. ... .. . . . . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . . .. .. . .. .. .. . . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . . ._ .. . .. .. .. .

r~.- - ?. . . . . .. ... .. . .. .. '.'. .̀ .̀ . . . . . . .. . . :'. : .. . ..

.. . . . . .

. . . . . .

..~,.

. . . . .. . ..j. ..

. . . . . . .~.. . .`~ . ..

.. . . . .. . . . . .'~:.....`u^.'. .'

.:. .. . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .

. . . . ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . .. . . . . .. . .. ... . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . ... .. . .. . . . .. . . . . .. .. . .`:

: : .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. .. . .. . .. . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . :. . .. ... . . ... . . . .. . . .. . . .. . .. .. ._ ..VI -. . .. . . . . .. ... ... .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .

. . .. ._ .. . .. . .

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

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

A. .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . :: .,. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .

.

..

. ..

. .

. ..

. .

. ..

. .

.. .

. .

.. .

. .

. . . .

.

..

z-.. . . .. . .. . .. . . .

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

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

.. . .. . .. .. . . . .r.. .. . .. . . . . .. . . . .

. . .. . . . . .,... .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .. ~. . .

.. . .. ... .. . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. .. ... . . . . .. ..... . .. . .. ..nve-c.

.'~

. .

. .

. .. .C . .. . . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ..

. .. ... . . . . .. .�. . .. . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . .. . .. . .. .. . . .. . .. ... . . . . .

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

. . .

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

. . . .. . ..

.. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . .. .:. .. . .. . . . ..

.~.. . .. ..

ASSIGNMENT ATTACHMOIT

TUTOR'S COMMENTS

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

.. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ... . . . . .. ... ... . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . .. ... .. . . , . . .. .. . . . .. . . . .. . .. . .

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

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

4001-475This is self carboned paper - use ball point pen -press hard on firm surface.

41.. ... .. . .. . .. . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . .. .. . .. . .. . .. . .. . ..

Student's

. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . .. . .. . ... .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . .. .. . ..~ .. . .. . . ..U. . .. . .. .. . . . . ... .. . .. . . . . .. . .. .. .. . .. . .. . . .. . . .. . .. . . . . .. . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .

Date

Note to Tutor: When this section is completed, please return to External Studies Unit with assignment.

SECTION C

NAME .. . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . onal d. . . . . .". .. . .Pu&. . .. . .. . . . . .. ... .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . Student's Name

ADDRESS Christ Church .. .. . . . . . .. ... . . .

. . . . .Grammar. ._.Schoo.l. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . .. . .. . andAddressQueenslea Dr ,

.. . .. . .. . . . .. . .. . . . . .. ..Claremont . ..6014-; .. . .. . . . . .. .. . .. . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . .. for Return Mail .

AN HEURISTIC MODEL FOR PROMOTION OF HIGH LEVEL THINKING IN

School of Education,Murdoch University,Perth, West Australia .

ANTHROPOLOGY

Donald E . Pugh

ABSTRACT :

This paper suggests a means to stimulate high levelthinking at the analysis, synthesis and evaluation levelsin anthropology . The anthropological concept of culturaloptimality is suggested as an integrative device wherebystudents may examine cultural change, acculturation andpossible trans-cultural comparisons in a structured,systematic way . Introduction of a structural communicationsmatrix provides guidance . for student selection of anthropologicalcontent, without promoting either simplistic, recall typethinking or unstructured, and unproductive divergent thinking .

TABLE OF CONTENTS :

Introduction p . 1

Difficulties in Asking Higher Level

Structural Communication p . 3

Application in Anthropology . p . 4

An Integrative Anthropological Concept .

An Anthropological'Integrative Matrix .

Analysis of Pupil's Answers . p . 8 .Classroom Applications . p . 10

Conclusion . p . 11 .

Questions .

P . 5

P . 7 .

may otherwise have been missed . The sum of such questions

leads to enquiry learning .

Introduction :

Many advantages are attributed to asking questions

in the classroom . Questions are said to motivate and sustain

interest, develop and modify attitudes, stimulate thinking

ability, elicit reasoning processes and facilitate fresh

approaches to problem resolution . (Lowery, 1974, p . 39)

The most educationally valuable type of questions are those

stimulating higher level cognitive thinking . These questions

foi:ce the student to analyze concepts which they otherwise may

have thoughtlessly accepted, to generalize principles instead

of learning isolated facts and to discover connections that

Although research into the effects of posing questions

's vo

nous

( Johns on

1074)

and conflicting14'.,

as a learning technique

1.

lum i

,

#

there seems to be substantial agreement that the cognitive

complexity of questions is closely related to the cognitive

level of student response in terms of the answers length,

syntax and abstractness . (Cole, 1973, p . 143 .) Most researchers

agree that the asking of higher level questions st .mulates

a more complex, abstract response which requires greater

length and syntactical complexity . (Dunkin,, 1974, p . 270)

Yet, in spite of successful research (Davis, 1960) into

means of reliably categorizing questions according to their

cognitive levels, as either low level, convergent questions,

(of knowledge, comprehension, or application) or higher level

divergent questions, (analysis, synthesis, and evaluation),

the training of teachers to ask questions at different levels

2 .

has been less successful . Recent studies of classroom

question ing still indicates that most questions asked are

of the memory and recall of specific facts type . (Lowery,

1974, p . 40 ; Tinsley, 1970 ; Davis, 1960 .) Few teachers

upgrade their question.ing to demand reflection . The roots

of this thorny problem appears to sink deeper than merely

the recognition and classification of higher level questions .

Difficulties in Asking Higher Level Questions :

It is suggested that teachers fail to ask higher

level questions because these questions are both difficult

to compose and to answer . Many teachers may lack the subject

expertise, or the time and energy needed to refresh old

expertise . Formulation of cognitive questions involves a

thorough knowledge of the underlying concepts and principles

of a subject, and the discipline's unique way of approaching

and explaining issues . Unless these principles are clarified

and are thoroughly understood by the teacher, it is doubtful

that there will be questions generated which demand application

of these principles .

Higher level questions are most useful to students

who possess an awareness of the underlying concepts of the

discipline and the ways in which these concepts may be

applied . Students who have failed to progress to this stage

tend to be merely puzzled by higher level questions, and,

in bewilderment, fail to answer them . Rather than some

positive learning occurring, such as is generated by the

recall of memory type answers, the teacher may achieve no

progress at all .

e

Structural Communications :

Kieran Egan (1975) has suggested an useful technique,

called structural communication, as a partial answer to the

problem of low level questionning . The technique is an useful

compromise between low and high level questions, by permitting

the formulation of higher level questions, but with some

student guidance . Although the technique sacrifices the easy

give and take of common classroom discussion, and involves

substantial teacher preparation, this method does actually

provide the guidance necessary for the promotion of high level

thinking .

Kieran Egan describes the technique as one which provides

the data for the students to think with . Rather than confron-

ting the student with the difficult task of selecting

relevant concepts, and specific information to fit these

concepts, the student is provided, instead, with the answer

information appropriately generalized and randomly presented .

Structural communications thus involves the teacher not

only in the task of posing high level questions, but also

in the contingent task of determining the answers, and

analyzing how students may functionally derive maximum

learning from their responses .

,The heart of the system is the matrix . once the

reflective questions on a theme have been set, subcomponent

answers are generalized and randomly entered into a large

matrix, so that the students may build their responses by

combining choices . As Egan (1975 . p . 230) has cogently noted,

a matrix of twenty items permits more than a million different

be combined in numerous different ways to suggest a variety

of interpretations .

Application in Anthropology :

With the present growth of interdisciplinary studies

in the social studies curriculum, it is becoming virtually

impossible to become a subject specialist in all the disciplines

taught . Lichty (1967, p . 3) has criticized interdisciplinary

courses for lacking depth and rigour in using the disciplinary

concepts for analysis and synthesis . Students often fail to

apply or even to be able to categorize problems according

to their disciplinary nature . Lichty urges that students

must learn the separate structures of the disciplines before~.G

they integrate them . Only in this way, he believes, will

higher learning be encouraged .

Byrne (1969, p . 7) has defined the disciplinary structure

as the basic assumptions or principles from which content is4.,1, r

N

� ,

obtained . He adds that it includes the methods through

which new knowledge is discovered, suggests the directions

for growth, frontiers for exploration, and provides insights

I

into the discipline's logic and integrity .

Bruner (1963, P " 8) goes further to hypothesize the

many advantages of learning disciplinary structure . These

4 .

responses . The student must understand and. apply the

discipline's principles in order to obtain the correct

combination of data .

This system has numerous advantages . The student

must structurally coher the data which ranges over the

entire theme . In doing so, he becomes aware of the inter

connections between subthemes, and discovers that data may

5 .

include making the subject more comprehensible, slowing

forgetting, reconstructing details through patterns,

promoting transfer of learning, enhancing intuitive thinking

and narrowing the gap between advanced and elementary knowledge .

Anthropology is one discipline which frequently suffers

from a lack of subject specialists within the school system .

Yet, ironically, thisidiscipline forms an important part

of most school curriculums within the social studies arena .

It is commonplace in most classrooms to examine the cultural

attributes of various primitive tribes . Unfortunately, in

looking at such things as the means of obtaining food,

clothing, housing, political structure and religion, the

examination tends to become ad hoc . There is no overall

structure, purpose, means of analysis, or cross-cultural

comparison undertaken . Too often acculturation is overlooked,

or dealt with briefly . The results of such teaching tends

to be low level question ing by the teacher, student recall

of memorized, isolated facts, and little effort to integrate

all the facts learned in order to support some overall principle .

What is needed in anthropology is an overall concept,

or thesis towards which students can analyze or synthesize

all their information, and critical examine and evaluate

interrelationships through a variety of acculturated changes .

Such a thesis would provide the basis for higher level

question : -:ing on the part of the teacher, and higher level

reflective thinking and responses at the student level .

An Integrative Anthropological Concept z

The following thesis is proposed as a higher level

cognitive question in anthropology, and as an heuristic

6 .

device to permit students to integrate all the cultural

attributes of a people in the post-contact acculturative

period as well as the precontact stage of development .

Cultural optimality is defined as the creation oradoption of technology by a primitive tribe to improvetheir material situation and the chances of survivalin their habitat, without a forced disruption anddecline in their cultural self-identity . Technologymay often be obtained when two groups of differentcultural levels,come into contact with each other andshare

congruent goals .

One culture maytend to share its technology and superior means ofadaptation to the habitat with the other, and toimprove that culture's ability to survive and todevelop itself, without a total disruption of itstraditional way of life . Usually, in this situationboth cultures share similiar perceptions towardsresources, exploit them voluntarily, and exist symbiot-ically with one benefitting the other . (Pugh, 1972, p . 67)

Examine the adaptation of the tribe of yourchoice to the habitat in three different time periodsspre-contact, early contact with a different race, and

This question is enormously complex since it involves

not only the recall of information concerning both the

material and non-material culture of that tribe, during

precontact,but also the determination of changes to this

culture caused by early inter-racial contact and the

present day civilization . Once the student has determined

the data, he is still required to integrate all of the

information and to analyze each cultural change over threeeach stage's

time periods, concerning

relationship to the cultural

optimality thesis . Although there may be positive improve-

ments in the ease of survival of the tribe through time, and

a growth in their population, there may also be a gradual

erosion of their autonomy and self-identity . The student

the present day situation . With reference to theculture of that tribe, justify, according to yourreasoning, the culturally optimal period in the overallhistory of that tribe ..

is faced with the difficulty of weighing and comparing each

advantage with each loss . He is being forced to reach a

conclusion, which he must justify by his overall integrative

cultural analysis . It may, in fact, be possible to justify

different time periods for cultural optimality according

to different weights

. and values being placed on various

changes . The framework of the thesis permits all aspects

of a culture to be slotted into an overall analytical structure,

and consequently remembered with increased ease . The thesis

provides a means to approach any primitive tribe, and to

compare the cultures of different tribes, through time and

acculturated changes . Consequently, transfer of learning

is facilitated and the gap narrowed between an elementary

and simplistic understanding of certain aspects of a culture,

and a detailed, and conceptual grasp of the culture and cultural

.adaptation through,history . (cf : Appendix C .)

An Anthropological. Integrative Matrix s

Structural communications provides an organizing

matrix of information upon which the students may draw for

assistance in answering this high level question . The matrix,

(Appendix A), provides an outline guide as to how to structure

data to organize an answer . It provides a sensible intermediate

stage between giving the students concrete, specific information,

which obscures the forest for the trees, and shadows higher

level thinking, and leaving the question wide

simply leads to confusion .

Degrees of difficulty within the matrix may be

enormously and may be adjusted to classes of different ages

open, which

varied

8 .

and abilities . The teacher, for lower ability classes,

may structure the matrix as suggested, but, in addition,

he may wish to fill in the answers for each category, in

a suitable, generalized way . The students have merely to

interpret the information, reflect, state a hypothesis,

and support it .

To increase the difficulty, the teacher may use the

matrix, but may enter in a random way, all the data needed .

This will force the students to organize the information

into some form of structure before undertaking reflection

and hypothesizing .

The third and perhaps most useful method is to turn

the matrix into a project structure . Students will research

the data for each matrix square and enter this data .

Upon completion of the research, and the completion of

content for each matrix square, students will review the

data and their results . They will then weigh the importance

of various positive or negative matrix squares, arrange the

matrix information to support and defend a hypothesis, and

draw a conclusion . The matrix, in essence, is an useful

device for stimulating and structuring research and in

encouraging constructive, reflective, high level thinking .

Analysis of Pupil's Answers e

Once the students have completed the matrix, and

drawn conclusions as to when and why cultural optimality

was experienced, they may discuss the results . All

students may not agree as to the optimal period . 'his is

acceptable, as there may be no one correct answer when

complex thinking is involved . As long as the position is

9 .

defensible, it is acceptable .

The first step in classroom discussion is to compare the

student's entries in each matrix square . Since this exercise

is a factual, research oriented one, there should be agreement

among all the students concerning their answers .

By field testing, the teacher should know the variety

of responses which th6 students tend to make to support

their hypotheses . Since each matrix square is numbered,

the teacher may draw up a discussion guide . By listing a

variety of conceivable hypotheses, as A, B, C, D, N, etc,

in the guide, the teacher could relate probable matrix numbers

in support of each hypothesis . The teacher would also

list comprehensive reasons to explain the choice of matrix

blocks in support of each hypothesis .

The system is advantageous, since it illustrates

to the students that there may, in fact, be no truly correct

answers . Information may be combined in a wide variety of

ways and still be acceptable . This is simply a need, the

student will realize, to justify the logical structure

in a defensible way .

The matrix system also permits the teacher to introduce

chosen,

Student

Hypotheses :

Discussion Guide

Matrix Reference Numbers Expl anatory Comments

A 3, 6a, 6c., etc III

B 6b, 9a, 10d etc IC II

IIIII

value clarification techniques and the concept of bias .Students are faced to assign positive or negative values to

each matrix according to some criteria . Students must

assess the overall values and make a decision . the teacher

may help the students clarify the criteria by which traits

and changes are to be judged for a culture . The teacher may

also point out the relativdt y of some values and assist in

steering students clear of the reefs of ethnocentricity .

By comparing alternative hypotheses and the values supporting

each, the students will develop a clearer awareness of

their own biases and personal values .

The discussion guide, as Kiergan Egan (1975, p . 233)has pointed out, ensures that all the important points

concerning the tribes cultural attributes are raised, and

that the significance of these points are fitted into an

overall structure and interpretation . Each student's

response may be analyzed in some detail, by the student him-

self, based on the guide, and the student is directed

precisely to those comments which fit his answer . Effective

question ing at a higher level must involve penetrating

evaluation of the results of the questions at the individual

level, and the expansion of the student's thinking based on

the results of this evaluation .

Clas sroomApplications :

One disadvantage of the matrix technique is that it is

oriented towards the written word . Yet, it is difficult to

undertake the type of reflective thinking, characteristic of

a problem of this magnitude in free flowing classroom discussion .

However, once the results are in and hypotheses formuated

and justified, there is potential for effective, high level

and informed discussion . The teacher may project the matrix

with its content onto an overhead scree4 for the entire

class to see . The teacher may then ask the students to

support their hypotheses by combining various responses .

Alternatively, the teacher may combine responses and request

the students to suggest a hypothesis which emerges . In

this way, the teacher may assure himself that the students

have considered in a detailed way the various combinations

available, and the reasons behind each combination .

Conclusions

Using Kieran Egan's structural communications matrix,

a means has been suggested to stimulate high level thinking

using analysis, synthesis and evalution

pology . For teachers and students lacking in specialist

training in the anthropological discipline, a useful

integrative thesis has been suggested, as an heuristic

device by which concepts may be broadly interpretated,

interrelated, and evaluated to support a generalization .

A structural matrix has been suggested to provide sufficient

guidelines for sailing clear of the twin rocks of simplistic,

recall type thinking, and unstructured, unproductive, divergent

thinking .

It is suggested that the combination of an integrative

thesis with the matrix will improve the slotting and retention

of anthropological data, and will increase the students

ability to think in high level abstract terms . Finally,

in anthro-

12

by introducing cultural change, acculturation and possible

trans-cultural comparisons, the thesis increases the

complexity of anthropological studies and ought to strengthen

student satisfaction obtained from his work .

APPI i-tiDIX C .On the subtropical north coast of Australia lives a

tribe of native hunters and fisherman called the Yir Yormont . Thetribe enjoyed great stability .

Up to the turn of the century, the tribe as still livingin the stone age . An important tool, a short-handled stone ax, was usedin building huts, cut firewood, and make other tools for hunting,fishing and gathering wild ho .rrey . The stone heads came from a quarry 400miles to the south, arid were obtained from other tribes ii an annualintertribal fiesta . The handle was fitted with great skill ar~d careand the artifact was more thaii a tool. It represented a symbol, atotem, a sign of the owner's masculinity, avid a ki :~d ofkeystonr-the belief systemof the Yir Yoront .

About 1?00, steel axes began to filter i, alo -g the tribaltrade routes . They were welcomed at first as more efficiei_t ; one couldcut down a tree much faster . By 1915, missionaries were distributiligthe steel axes as gifts and rewards .

If a ma ,, L worked hard he mightan axe .

The idea was excellent, but it overlooked the cultureconcept . The steel ax destroyed a most important symbol ii : the beliefsystem of the tribe . A ma-1i lost his importai -ice acid dignity ; his verymasculinity was threate ied without his sto :te ax . Women a)id children,now possessed axes themselves, became independent and disrespectful .The entire system of age, sex, and kir:ship roles was thrown intoconfusion . The old trade relatio -iis were disrupted and the i_tertribalfiesta was robbed of sig iificaiice alid charm . ,`sealing and wife lending,increased .

(Falla i. and

;ersh, 1972, p . 42 . )Typical questions asked by many teachers would be as follows1 . What kind of climate would you find o , ; the north coast of Australia?

2 . In what 'age' of man did the vir '~'oront live?

3 . Give 3 uses of the stole ax .

4 . Why was the year 1900 important for the tribe?5 . YY1iy were steel axes welcomed?etc .

Problem :

These questions are low level and require

reflective

thinking . 'tudents need to analyze the data into categories

based on pre and post contact . Students need to synthesize the

individual facts to support an overall integrative cultural theory .

The structuring of data in an orderly way in support of a- ; overall

theory, will increase the retention of individual facts and

involves a much higher level of skill development and reflective

thinki.rig, than the asking of isolated facts .

BIBLIOGRAPHY :

Bruner, Jerome S . The Process of Education . Cambridge,Mass . : Harvard University Press, 1961 .

Byrne, T . C . The Role of the Secondary School in Public Education.Toronto : Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 1969 .

Cole, Richard A . and Williams, David M . "Pupil Responses ToTeacher Questions ." Educational Leadership . Vol . 31, Pov .,1973, PP . 142 to 145 .

Davis, 0 . L . Jr . and Tinsley, D . C . "Cognitive ObjectivesRevealed by Classroom'Questioning Asked by Secondary SchoolStudent Teachers ." in Hyman, R . T . (Ed,) Teachings VantagePoints for Study . Philadelphia : J . B . Liincott, 1960 .EdO11 7 .

Dunkin, M . J . and Biddle, B . T . The Stud of Teaching .New York : Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1974 .

Egan, Kieran .

"How to Ask Questions that Promote High-LevelThinking ." Peabod Journal of Education . Vol . 52, No . 3,April, 1975, pp . 22 to 23 .

Johnson, James R . and Wilen, William W .

Questions andQuestionings Research Studies : A Bibliographical Review .Chicago : National Council for Social Studies, 1974, ED 99279

Lichty, Richard . Approaches to an Interdisciplinary Coursein the Social Sciences for Secondary School Teachers .

-1967 . ED1021

Lowery, Lawrence F . Learning Strategy Training ProgramsQuestions and Answers for Effective Learning, Final Report :Jan . 197 to May, 1975 . Berkeley : University of California,1974 . ED112894 .

Pugh Donald E . Cultural Optimality :

A Stud of the Rise andDecline of the Cree Culture of North Eastern Ontario .M .A . Thesis, Carleton University, Ottawa . May, 1972 .

Tinsley, D . C . et al . Cognitive Objectives Revealed byClassroom Questions in "Process-Oriented" and "Content-Oriented" Secondar Social Studies Programs . Paper presentedat- the Annual Meeting of the American Educational ResearchAssociation, Minneapolis, 1970 . ED040895 .

Pfiallar;, J . f . and Hersh, R . i~,,o G .O .D .'s in the Classroom :Inquir y into 1-,iqu xy .

London : W .

B . .`3aunders Co .,

1972 .

;ection

Practical a~p~li cati o :,_ of ai i~A nthr

ological

l!'atrix in A Sample Cl assr oom Lessor .

TABLE OF CONTL-ITS

Teacher's Instructions

Teacher's Objectives

Teaching Strategy

Hypotheses, A to F

Explanatory Arguments, A to F

Evaluation

Conclusion .

" T NLPR-: .R~ Qtl i

,

this lessor ; plait it is assumed that tree students

already have some background ii, cultural at,al rsis arcd

termi!iologv .

(!;'xogamv, polygam.y, patrilocal etc .)

_ t is

assumed that the teacher has already ir :troduced and explained

the concept of cultural optimality, iyi such a way that the

students understand the meal -"ing of the concept . ~_t is

assumed that the students are well developed ire cognitive

and affective abilities, and have good skills i ~ read rl=,

a.riallrzing aid, 6'quiry style thinkinC; .

Teacher Instruc tio-, :;

The teacher will distribute the information

presented in the matrix (Appendix 1-3) to the students,

either by photocopies, or by the use of projection of

overhead transparencies . The :etude-its will be preser-ited

with the following questions

Cultural optimality refers to the period in time whena primitive culture reaches the maximum adaptatior-,to its environment, without forced disruption anddecline in cultural self-identity . Remember thatone culture may often obtain superior techt~olo :-,vfrom another culture, and use this technology toimprove its adaptation to the environmer t . Cri theother hand, unless cultures in interact io_f ,

sharecommon goals acid preceptions of the environment, conflictand the disintegration of the weaker culture may result .

In the following matrix of informatioi ., there is presenteddata on aspects of three different cultures . Considerthis information carefully, during the next hour .With reference to the data co lcerr -_ing the culturalchange of each tribe from precontact days, through earlycontact to the present situation, determine when you believethe culturally optimal period was achieved irk the overallhistory of each tribe . Justify your answer, accordingto the data and the criteria by which you have determi7 :edupon your choice of tim4period for cultural optimality .

Teacher's Objectives %

Low Level Objectives :

1 .1 Students will be able to recall specific facts

concerning anthropological patterns of the Aborigines, Maori,

and tree, as listed i: : the matrix, categories Il to C, 1 to 1E .

1 .2 . Students will have knowledge of the ways and

means of orga_rizing specific bits of information to establish

cultural trends, based on continuity in development or

disintegration of cultures .

1 .'i . Students will have a kn-,owledge of different

categories by which cultures may be classified .

2 .

1 .4 Students will have a

which cultural growth may

1 .5 Students will have

ications which are used

theory of acculturation

2 .0 Students will comprehend cultural data by interpretating

the meaning of cultural data, and extrapolating the implic-

ations of the information presented in the matrix .

Yigh Level Objectives :

3 .0 Students will apply the

and support a theory for the

cultural optimality for each

`., ,h ;_s involves expressing tree

supportive evidence, comprehending the inter-relationships

among the ideas and checking the consistency of the

hypothesis with the evidence .

4 .0 Students must be able to evaluate, revise or reject

their hypothesis based on a review of internal evidence,

by examining the logical accuracy and consistency of their

hypothesis .

Affective objective :

knowledge of the criteria by

be assessed .

a knowledge of the broad classif-

to structure culture, and the

and cultural optimality .

data in the matrix to derive

location of time period of

of three primitive tribes .

data in an orgarized hierarchy

1 .0 In order to categorize cultures according to an

optimal time period, students must establish a personal

value system or criteria for judging cultural growth .

Students must organize their values into a coherent system,

determine the inter-relationships among values, arid discover

the most pervasive ones . Students must conceptualizeom?

and develop a commitment tos

value:

values,

of

Teaching Str_a e :level th ii-king , analysis and svy-thesis of data, and

application and evaluation ; of hypotheses requires time .Students must be giver sufficient time to permit reflectivethinking and to undertake the juxtaposition of data in a varietyof combinations to permit testing, rejection or revision of avariety of hypotheses . Consequently, the students ought tobe permitted at least one hour, and much lon,_;er if needed, toconsider their responses, without any form of :interruption .During the second hour, students would be encouraged to present

their 'hypotheses ail4 rationales . These student responses wouldbe compared and discussed in class in order to clarify underlyingvalues and to reach are understanding of the logic behind different

theses . The teacher's role in enquiry style discussions is that

of a cha ;smart, rather than as an authoritarian figure . Theteacher must join the students as ari ii ;quirer, permit thestudents to discuss, and to stimulate and ensure that learningoccurs . The teacher guides student coiiversat ion along logicallimes by aski zE

peiletrating questio=ns which bu ~Llds on studentresponses arid probes for further new iris i hts .

The teacher

must guide students

In locating faulty logic, and

i--I assist ing

students in developing logical, coherent chains of reaso~_i , ;

which are needed to argue and support different hypotheses .

Learning Process :

The process being undertaken is what may be termed

guided e;--iquiry based on the students : 1, defir , ir .g a problem,

2, developi i~ a tentative a. :t saver, 3, test :uig the hypothesis

against relevant data., 4, drawnio a conclusion about the

accuracy of the hypot:riesis,

ar :d

5,

apply i i- the

con:clusio,

a ,d

_;e-Aeralizi-g f'rom this conclusion . (Beyer, 1971, p . ~7 . )

fore specifically the action of def in.ii-g the problem

involves becoming aware of the problem, mak I_ng it mea_ ire ful

and making it manageable . Students may easily be overwhelmed,

confused and disheartened by the provision of too much data

in an unorgarsized form . The cultural optimality hypothesis poses the

3a

the problem for the student, while the matrix of researched

information provides distil-Ictive limits ,-n the problem, and

puts the problem within the capabilities of the student . To

develop a tentative solution the students must examine theand

matrix data, arrive at a clear mental understanding of the

characteristics of each culture . . The students must then

classify the data during the three time periods, as concepts

which assisted in cultural development and concepts which are

harmful to cultural development .

Based on the students'

relatio-~lships of various facts, and the

inferences

drawn from these facts according to the students' uiiderlyine

value s,;rstems, it i s possible to draw logical i nfererces

concerning the growth or decline of each culture through history .

From these inferences the stude,_t0ay state

hypotheses

concerning the'optimally desirable cultural peak of each

primitive tribe .

once the students hypotheses has been stated, it is

necessary forthem to test them . Testing involves reviewing the

assembled evidence to ensure that 1, all the heeded evidence

from the matrix has been examined and categorized, and 2, that

inferences arid evaluations placed upon. the evidence are correct .

The student must recheck his arrangement of the evidence based

or, reviewing his interpretations and classifications . Finally,

the evidence :needs to be reanalyzed to determine relationships,

sequences and trends through time, and to re-evaluate these

trends as growth or decline . if the student's hypothesis

is again. supportted, he may regard it as a valid generalization

but otherwise the student may have to reject, or revise his

hypothesis to fit his new evidence .

3b .

Although it is commonly believed that enquiry begit-s

with concrete facts rather than theory, it must be realized

that anthropology usually involves the application of

theories itt organizing; experie: :ce, as well as the g

en

of theories from the data . (P`'allan, 1972, p . 251) By applying

a broad cot -iceptualization of cultural optimality, which guides

the students -geed for avid method of handling empirical data,r

the students are learning both deductive arid inductive processes

of thinking, in a manner congruent with actual scientific

thinking .

The following hypotheses are offered as a ~ uideli :ie to

the teacher in leading dis cussion arid in evaluating, the

sort of answers which are expected to be produced by the

studeras .

Guidelines to Discussion and Evaluation.

+ypothes is

A:

The aborigines~Yiad obtained~their culturally optimal

period during the precontact era .

S ample Yatrix Referei,,ce '-umbers for :supportive T`ata :

la, lb, lc, 3b, 3c, 4b, 4c, 5c, Fc, 9c, 1Oc, llc, 12, c

13c, 15b, 15c, 16c .

Explanatory Argument :

During the precontact period, the aborigines had

developed a distinctive culture based on environmental

adaptation .

This is evidence in statements 1 to 16, column

A . Although life was rigorous and challenging, there was

clear self-identity and cultural expression . v1ith earlyP

contact with the whit+an, an immediate clash developed between

the nomadic hunting aboriginal lifestyle and settled pastoral-

ism of the colonists . Consequently, the European aim was to

eliminate or to segregate the aborigines . Statements lb, 3b,

14b, 15b indicate that the post-contact period was not a

pleasant one for the aborigines . '?'he aborigines gained very

little of a positive nature from contact with Europeans, since

their life style was not one requiring European technology .

Consequently cultural disintegration commenced from the

immediate point of contact and continues to this day .

Alternative Hypothesis : B :

The aborigines had

period during the early

Sample I_atrix Reference

2b, 4b, 5b, 6b, 7b, 8b,

Explanatory Argument :

It may be possible

inhospitability of the Australian desert to the European,

as well as

Europeans,

passed through the culturally optimal

post-contact period .

Numbers :

9b, 10b, llb, 12b, l6b .

to argue that the vastness and

the separation of many aborigines from contact with

enabled many aborigines to continue their traditional

for a period of time, without forced disruption .life style

however, through trade, the aborigines did ga~. .uiore efficient

5 .

implements such as steel knives,

containers, which simplified and

to the environment .

}iypothesis C

it may be

history is the immediate present .

Sample Hatrix Reference numbers

argued that the optimal period

carrying and cooking

improved their adaptation

within Vaori

lb, lc, 3c, 4c, 6c, 8c, 9c, 10c, llc, 12c, 13c, 14c, 15c, 16,c,

Explanatory Argument :

it may be argued that the settled, farming nature of

the Maori combined with their aggressiveness led to a direct

conflict of interest during the early post-contact period over

ownership of land . Consequently, the post-contact period was

one of bloodshed and rapid decrease in P"aori population due

to European diseases and fighting . Today, however, the

fkaori receives little discrimination at the direct personal

level, and their culture is reacting to the assimilative

European model, by adapting and incorporating European ideas

into earlier Maori patterns, and by developing new and

distinctive Maori cultural patterns out of the old . The

Maori modify the European methods and place a Maori accent

on all that is accepted by their culture . Unlike the pre-

contact period, the Maori no longer suffer from warfare, and

hunger, have increased medicial benefits, and while

retaining their culture, have adapted to the environment today

in a more efficient manner than ever before .

hypothesis D :

Students may wish to argue that the Maori reached the

6 .

optimal period during precontact .

Sample P'latrix Reference iumber.s : la, 2a, 3a,4a, 5a, 5c, 7a,

7c, 8a, 8c, 10a, 10c, 13a, 13c, 15a, 15c .

Explanatory Arguments :

Although this hypothesis is more difficult to maintain,

it may be adequately done so by stressing the variations

between the Maori culture of the past and present . While the

C hypothesis stressed the continuity of culture between pre-

contact and the present, this hypothesis must build up

evidence to show a gradual disintegration of the traditional

culture, and the construction of a new Maori culture which

lacks many of the pre-contact ingredients . The weighting and

interpretation placed on various facts are the determining

factors in support of either hypothesis,

Hypothesis E :

It may be argued that the Cree Indian reached their optimal

period during the post-contact period from 1650 to 1900, a

time period noted for the European collection of animal pelts .

Sample PRatrix Reference T-umbers

2c, 3b, 4b, 5b, 5c, 6b, 6c, 7b, 7c, 8b, 8c, 9b,

llb, llc, 12b, 12c, 13b, 13c, 14b, 14c, 16b, 16c .

Explanatory Statement :

This hypothesis rests on stressing the continuity

Cree and post-contact Cree culture

rapid cultural disintegration

The argument is based on the

goals between the European fur traders

betwee.i the precontact

and by emphasizing the

has recently occurred .

that the congruence of

9cr 10b, 10c,

which

premise

7 .

and skilled Cree trappers, led to the Europeans valuing and

emphasizing the maintenance of the traditional Cree skills and

culture, during the fur trading period . The Cree culture

reached an optimal peak during this period because of the inc-

reased adaptation to the environment permitted by the

introduction of steel implements such as knives, and guns .

However, %ith the change of the European perception of the

environment from furs to modern industrial exploitiation of

lumber and minerals, the Cree culture has become reduntant .

Rapid cultural disintegration has followed the advent of

modern civilization .

Hypothesis F

It may perhaps be argued that the optimal period

Cree occurred before the advent of the whiteman .

Sample P"Iatrix Reference ! , umbers

2b, 2c, 3c, 4c, 5b, 5c, 6c, 7c, 8c, 9b, 10c, llb,

14b, 14c, 15b, 15c, 16c .

Explanatory Statement

Marshalling the facts in support of this

involve emphasis on the lack of coiiitinuity between the

precontact and post-contact periods . It is

heavy stress on artifacts and customs iri:troduced by

pean culture (diseases, alcohol, trading goods,

which drastically altered the Free culture and to

that the culture was actually in decline . Although

bulk of evidence presented in this matrix refutes, this

it could perhaps be maintained by further research and

interpretation and marshalling of additional evidence .

for the

11c, 12c, 13c,

hypothesis would

necessary to place

the .Huro-

miscegenation)

demonstrate

the

thesis,

a clever

According to the bulk of evidence presented in the matrix,

the three cultures selected for examination should illustrate a

progression of optimal periods from precontact as illustrated

by the aborigines, through post-contact as illustrated by

the Cree, to the present situation as illustrated by the Maori .

These three tribes have been specifically selected to

illustrate this interesting contrast and progression .

Consequently the lesson may be used as a laumhin" board for

further detailed studies of tribes, and more detailed

theoretical analysis in anthropology .

in conducting the class discussion, the teacher must

show how weighting of different evidence changes hypotheses .

It is necessary to show how student values determine the

degree to which the student chooses and weigh s data .

Finally, the students may be introduced to the concept of

primary research . Use of the matrix has simplified the

development of hypothesizing and has imposed artifical

limits to the students' creativity . Presentation of

primary documents which contain accounts which conflict

with the evidence already presented in the matrix will

stimulate independent student research . ii'or instance,

it is possible to give primary readings concerning the Cree,

which emphasize the harmful effects of the fur trade,

the effects of European alcohol and disease upon the Indians,

all of which may result in the students revising the data for

the Cree under column B, numbers 1 to 1E . This revision of

data will in turn greatly alter their viewof the culturally

optimal period . Similar experiments in the interpretation

9 .

and weighting of data might be undertaken by the

introduction of primary documents for other tribes . By a

series of exercises which alters the different input data

into the matrix, the students will be given practice in

developing skills in interpretation and critical thinking .

A valuable follow up lesson, in this regard, would be the

distribution of forty eight blank five inch by seven inch

cards, for each category, a to C, 1 to 16, along with a

series of books and readings for each Indian tribe . By

researching and completing their own matrix, students could

be encouraged to undertake independent primary research,

resolve conflicting evidence, and to select and weight their

data for each matrix according to their values . The results

would be selection and structuring of relevant data to support

an independent, and perhaps quite novel, thesis .

EVALUATION s

There are two types of evalution required for the

lesson, formative and summative . Formative evaluation refers

to the actual evaluation of the efficiency of the lesson

itself . Perhaps the students need a shorter or longer

period of time to construct their hypotheses and this must

be considered . "leans to facilitate class discussion should

be considered after the initial trial run .

Summative evaluation is an overall evaluation of the

degree to which the lesson objectives have been achieved . This

will probably be determined by an evaluation of the students .

The degree to which students are able to analyze and synthesize

1 0 .

data in support of a hypothesis and to organize a consistent

value framework, will be apparer-it in the degree of logic

apparent in the student's response . 11n example of the type of

logic expected for each tribe has been presented as a marking

guide under the hypotheses categories .

t'nowledge of cultural trai is will be apparent -!n the

degree to which students can mar-,,hall the evidence without

constant reference to the rrttrix . i,'valuation of student or arriz-

ation of values will be apparent in the weight placed upon cert-

airs cultural trai ts as being important in the determination of

the timing of cultural optimality . for nstance, materialistic

values are apparent in theories which stress materialistic

abundance as the optimal period, the result of effective

environmental adaptation, such as is evidenced by the maori

today . Whatever orEjanization of values is presented, there

must be consistency in the application of the values to the

weighting of evidence throughout the entire assigrnent .

A sample evaluation test which would determine the

extent to which students had developed higher level

cognitive a,--d affective abilities would be to provide a

document describirgyp; a new tribe, such as the Zulus of ,South

tlfrica . Stude,ts would be required to analyze the document,

categorize the data provided or, the tribe, to interrelate the

data to establish trends, and to apply the cultural optimality

thesis . The teacher would mark the essay based on the range of

cultural categories utilized by the student, the accuracy of

slotting the data in the categories, the student's ability to

ir~terpret the facts, to weigh the facts, to determine arid

substantiate cultural tends, arid to apply the cultural optimality

thesis to these trends to discover the cultural peak of the tribe

in a logical , consistent way .

COT-Iclusio_' : :

A high level anthropological question which requires

reflective thought has been posed. as a practical question for

a classroom assignmeiLt .

To provide student ,_ uidance ir ,'. high

level thinking, without being overly restrictive, or overly

open, data has been researched and entered into ar) anthropol-

ogical matrix for the students . At a later date, students would

be expected to research and derive such informatio ;t themselves .

Use of this matrix will challenge the students' ability to

understand data, to interpret, to syjith_esize and to ger-,eralize

in_ a manner co.-gruent with the eriquirv mode of thinki? g .

Objectives for the lessor. nave bear listed which are generally

of a higher level both in the cognitive and affective dormir,s

and require manipulatio-t of data rather than the memorization

of facts . A . teacher's evaluative guide has beel: : suggested as

a means of assessing the degree to which students have lear, -.ed

to ma-iipulate data and to utilize higher levels of thinking .

Although a_t a~;e level has not been suggested for this

lessors, it is believed that the theoretical compo-,eats of this

lesson are such, that the use of the cultural optimality concept

and data orga .ization matrix, could be adjusted to use by teachers

for students at . any stake

the high school pro¬;ram . Thou h

use of these comporvents, it is bel=ieved that a hi,~~her level

of stude_"- .t cognitive thought will be stimulated .