QUESTION 2.

QUESTION 2

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? A question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it, it can swallow you up. When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

General patterns = Knowledge Particular patterns = Understanding How?
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? General patterns = Knowledge Particular patterns = Understanding How? (specific examples of) general patterns --- in particular, spatial/visual patterns that can be easily presented (and grasped) as a diagram. The periodic table and the el Nino oscillation are both suitable examples, and the recent explosion of infographics is a rich source to mine in that regard.

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? it says : "To what extent do YOU agree?" Well ask your self that question. Do you agree with this quote? I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding. DEFINE EVERYTHING!

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Define only When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

What does it mean to say that this “can give us”?
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? What does it mean to say that this “can give us”? When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Define seeing. When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Define knowledge. When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Define understanding. When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

Where and how do these terms overlap?
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Where and how do these terms overlap?

Define general pattern.
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Define general pattern. When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

Define particular examples.
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Define particular examples. When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

What are they asking you to do?
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? What are they asking you to do? When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

Explain how knowledge and understanding are similar and different.
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Explain how knowledge and understanding are similar and different. When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Look at your assertions. Two key words: knowledge and understanding. Focus on those. Define them. Then move on to answer your question. Look at the assertions again and think back to personal experiences or relate it to someone important and see if it has ever happened to you where you've seen something generally and were able to gain knowledge and understand or just gain. Do the same for the next assertion. Compare and conclude to what extent you agree with it. Couldn't patterns be specific examples? Couldn't one ask the following question? "Can you give me specific examples of patterns relevant to this set of meteorological conditions?" The question differentiates between knowledge and understanding. Who can count as a legitimate differentiator here? The Oxford Dictionary? Some other dictionary? You? Me (difficult to be me as I view understanding as a component of knowing...that is, when I do not use the terms interchangeably).

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data) and individual details or facts (examples). When I was attending my first IB training to teach English A1, many years ago, we discussed Paper 2 -- the more or less open-ended essay prompt. The trainer introduced our group to the phrase, "baggy monster" question" in this way -- to paraphrase: "Beware the baggy monster question. It's a question that looks interesting at first glance, but once you get into it it can swallow you up. I'll need to reflect more on this title, but it smells a bit baggy monster-ish to me. Surely one challenge will be thoughtfully unpacking the definitions of knowledge and understanding. I can see some of my students getting a little lost in fine distinctions that are as much about language as anything else. I like the notion of inviting students to reflect on the difference between general patterns (inductively derived assertions about data, let's say) and individual details or facts (examples), but I'm not sure I would have them do so by saying something further about the difference between knowledge and understanding.

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? What are the Areas of Knowledge you would associate with this question? How? look at the ways in which disagreement DOES NOT aid in the pursuit of knowledge as a counter-claim? Or how agreement can? Since the title asks about how disagreement might aidin the pursuit, it seems that that should remain the focus; but it makes perfect sense to add some counter-examples, acknowledging ways in which disagreement might impede the pursuit of knowledge. I would just warn against letting this angle become the focus. What are the Ways of Knowing that you would associate with this question? How?

What are patterns that you could find in each of the different AoK?
2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? What are patterns that you could find in each of the different AoK?

What are patterns that you could find in each of the different AoK?
Natural Sciences Human Sciences Mathematics Arts & Aesthetics History Ethics

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? In order to provide "positive" evidence - not biased, I mean - don't we need to understand before we can “know”? Can we know something we cannot understand? isn't Understanding part of Knowledge? In order to provide "positive" evidence - not biased, I mean - don't we need to understand before? Can we know something we cannot understand? What about beliefs without evidence? What about Faith vs. Knowledge? In order to have faith, understanding is not necessary, either, is it?

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? What about beliefs without evidence? What about Faith vs. Knowledge? In order to have faith, understanding is not necessary, either, is it? Who can count as a legitimate differentiator here? The Oxford Dictionary? Some other dictionary? You? Me

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Could a dichotomy like general vs. particular examples lead to knowledge and/or understanding? Synonyms: contradiction, incongruity, paradox Division into two usually contradictory parts or opinions: "the dichotomy of the one and the many" (Louis Auchincloss). Up/Down In/Out Democrat/Republican (and people wonder why a third party system doesn't work...its not in our nature) Liberal/Conservative Life/Death Good/Evil Yin/Yang Capitalism/Communism Theist/Atheist Male/Female Positive/Negative God/Devil Pepsi/Coke Ford/Chevy Mac/Microsoft Proton/Electron Cathode/Anode beauty/ugly healthy/sick old/young a division into two especially mutually exclusive or contradictory groups or entities <the dichotomy between theory and practice>; also : the process or practice of making such a division <dichotomy of the population into two opposed classes> : something with seemingly contradictory qualities <it's a dichotomy, this opulent Ritz-style luxury in a place that fronts on a boat harbor — Jean T. Barrett>

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? What are some specific examples of general patterns? What are particular, spatial/visual patterns that can be easily presented (and grasped) as a diagram. (specific examples of) general patterns --- in particular, spatial/visual patterns that can be easily presented (and grasped) as a diagram. The periodic table and the el Nino oscillation are both suitable examples, and the recent explosion of infographics is a rich source to mine in that regard.

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? How important is the need to differentiate the knowledge-understanding / pattern-example pairs? The terms "specific examples" and "general patterns" can be applied to different abstractions

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? How can the terms "specific examples" and "general patterns" can be applied to different abstractions?

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Can general patterns mean belonging to a specific time? Does it mean we may find common features in some works belonging to the same artist/period? I immediately thought of Math/scientific approach when I read about General Patterns...But I was wondering whether we can talk about GP in the Arts, too...What do you think? Can GP mean belonging to a specific current? Does it mean we may find common features in some works belonging to the same artist/period?

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Who can count as a legitimate differentiator here? The Oxford Dictionary? Some other dictionary? You? Me? Couldn't patterns be specific examples? Couldn't one ask the following question? "Can you give me specific examples of patterns relevant to this set of meteorological conditions?" The question differentiates between knowledge and understanding. Who can count as a legitimate differentiator here? The Oxford Dictionary? Some other dictionary? You? Me (difficult to be me as I view understanding as a component of knowing...that is, when I do not use the terms interchangeably).

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? Couldn't patterns be specific examples? Couldn't one ask the following question? "Can you give me specific examples of patterns relevant to this set of meteorological conditions?" The question differentiates between knowledge and understanding. Who can count as a legitimate differentiator here? The Oxford Dictionary? Some other dictionary? You? Me (difficult to be me as I view understanding as a component of knowing...that is, when I do not use the terms interchangeably).

2. “Only seeing general patterns can give us knowledge. Only seeing particular examples can give us understanding.” To what extent do you agree with these assertions? An interesting thought might be how we interpret responsibility. Does responsibility always mean a logical reasoned response/reaction to whatever it is we now know about that raises an ethical issue? Or can you be ethically responsible for something in an emotional way only? Couldn't patterns be specific examples? Couldn't one ask the following question? "Can you give me specific examples of patterns relevant to this set of meteorological conditions?" The question differentiates between knowledge and understanding. Who can count as a legitimate differentiator here? The Oxford Dictionary? Some other dictionary? You? Me (difficult to be me as I view understanding as a component of knowing...that is, when I do not use the terms interchangeably).

QUESTION 2.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "QUESTION 2."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

QUESTION 2.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "QUESTION 2."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback