Why QBCT?
What are the Benefits of Structuring Conversations around Questions?
In the spirit of friendly critical thinking, I want first to think aloud about the benefit of conversations in which one person or group dominates the situation by providing answers. They do so by virtue of their cultural aggressivity, superior knowledge, desire to fix or repair those listening, or tradition. Conversations where one person in effect holds the microphone or the bullhorn can at their best teach respect for expertise. Democracies can devolve into an extreme form in which everyone’s opinion about anything is perceived as equally beneficial to humankind.
But each of realizes at some level that certain people have specialized knowledge that we need. For example, as an aspiring tennis player, it would make little sense for me to play the major role in conversations with my coach. I probably do not know that the grip of the racquet is an important factor in developing an effective serve or ground stroke. I do not know to ask about the optimum bevel or side at which to place the crease between my thumb and forefinger. This kind of information is more efficiently shared by a series of declarative sentences delivered by the person with superior knowledge. You and I must rush to the emergency room, not a friendly bar, when a loved one is having a stroke.
This efficiency advantage is probably why the typical classroom has been and seemingly always will be the teacher talking, and the students listening. Despite the abundant critiques of the concept of a lecture as a learning stimulus, I once watched a classroom scenario where a student raised her hand for 45 minutes while the lecture proceeded uninterrupted. Extreme? For sure. But that example illustrates the power dynamic that a lecture exemplifies. Therein, lies an important introduction to the power and beauty of questions.
Conversations have a wide range of objectives. When a conversation has severely limited interactions between dominant voices and quiet voices, the probable purpose of the conversation is knowledge transfer. For example, when we listen to what Google says, we willingly play a minor role in the exchange because we are comfortable relying on Google’s answers. If those answers were to get a little long, we the recipient would be getting more of what we want. For better or worse, we acknowledge the wisdom of allowing Google to “fix” us.
However, the conversations where critical thinking comes into play are different in an important way. Knowledge transfer is not the privilege of any one voice. Instead people with conflicting BCDs speak with one another to either persuade or wonder together about which BCD makes the most sense. For example, when people of different generations discuss the wisdom of the U.S. in 1945 dropping an atomic bomb on Nagasaki, Japan that would kill 75,000 people 2 days after having dropped an atomic bomb on Hiroshima, Japan that killed 225,000 people, the discussion can be fertilized beyond imagination when one or more of the participants has acquired a solid foundation of critical thinking.
Critical thinking questions can perform many functions propelling this conversation far beyond the walls that otherwise prevented participants from finding BCDs that are more reliable, creative, and rational. How do they work that magic?
Questions provoke a broader range of participation. At minimum they result in two people playing an active role in the launching of a conversation. Consequently, each person feels as if their voice is being given respect?
Questions reduce the sharp power differential visible anytime one person lectures or overwhelms all listeners by vacuuming most of the oxygen out of the room. Power inequalities in a conversation inhibit mutual respect and squelch creative contributions from those who are largely reduced to listeners or at their worst to being someone keeping the curtain open as the dominating party performs.
Questions stimulate a flow of ideas from everyone. Hence, they have the potential to replace solo acts with collaborations.
Questions enable us to probe beyond simply absorbing someone else’s perspective.
Questions provide energy, an especially important component of ongoing conversations given the impact of a screen culture on attention spans.
Questions reflect a participatory ethos consistent with the needs of a robust civic community.