Questioning and Creating: A Model for Curriculum Reform

ABSTRACT Creativity research has unsettled education by newly defining neglected abilities, and by proposing new methods like training in questioning abilities, but conventional methods do not encourage students to learn or think by asking good questions. We need to cultivate the full spectrum of talents by bridging the research—classroom practice gap. A proposed three-dimensional model for analyzing curricula, courses, and classes would show us where we are not doing a good job in teaching students to think while we are simultaneously teaching them subject-matter content. Content is best learned as a by-product of thinking or learning processes. The proposed model capitalizes on transfer effects of both processes and content, and may be of value in working, not only with those highest in a talent, but also with the educationally deprived. Every student should learn to use each of his abilities at some point in the educational process, but different teachers may specialize in various contents, processes, or methods.     

Stimulus aspects of aversive controls: the effects of response contingent shock

A tone ending with electrical shock was periodically presented to pigeons while they pecked a key for food. Pairs of birds were run simultaneously under a yoked program which insured that both birds received the same number and temporal distribution of shocks. For one of the birds, shock was always initiated by a peck; for the other, shock was unavoidable. Both procedures led to reduced rates of pecking in the presence of the tone, and gradients of stimulus generalization were obtained. But the effects of response contingent shock extinguished more rapidly than the effects of unavoidable shock. In general, birds exposed to unavoidable shock tended to respond at intermediate rates throughout tone, whereas those exposed to response contingent shock ceased to peck for part or all of the tone period.