In an oral examination, faculty members are probing the breadth and depth of a student’s knowledge. The usefulness of the format, however, depends on the quality of the questions. A most Ineffective one begins with an elaborate preamble, then goes on at length to raise multiple issues. 

Suppose, for example, a student working on the problem of free will and determinism defends the view that the two concepts are compatible. 

A loquacious faculty member might begin the questioning as follows:

The other day I was rereading the views on free will developed by W. T. Stace. Have you heard of him? He was an Englishman who taught at Princeton and was the author of many books, including The Concept of Morals, which I especially like. In any case, he argued that free actions are those caused by psychological states of the agent while unfree acts are caused by states of affairs external to the agent. Stace concluded that once this distinction is understood, clearly people sometimes act of their own free will. He recognized that there are puzzling cases, but I won’t take the time now to develop them. So let me ask you: Do you accept the distinction as Stace drew it? Di you think this approach offers the most effective way to draw the distinction? Do you recognize any cases in which the distinction is problematic? Also, is Stace’s view in accord with Hume’s approach to the issue?

This question is a failure. It takes too long to get started, goes on at too great a length, and involves too many parts.  

Yet how can you determine the extent of a student’s knowledge of such a complex subject with a simple question that can be posed in only a few seconds? Here’s one guaranteed to do the job: “You are defending compatibilism. What do you consider the best arguments against your position?” 

The first response is likely to be: “I don’t know any,” to which an obvious reply is: “Some philosophers of the first rank have argued against compatibilism. What reasons have they offered?” 

Once the student tries to develop the opposing position, a follow-up asks for a answer to those arguments. The student is apt to respond with zest until the next question: “How would your opponent’s reply to your counterarguments?” A student who is then at a loss lacks firm control of the issues. After all, as Mill wrote, “He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that” (On Liberty, 2: 23). 

Many years ago, a colleague of mine who delighted in asking lengthy, convoluted questions approached me after an exam where he had talked incessantly. He asked what I thought of the student’s performance. I replied that I couldn’t say because the one asking the questions talked more than the one who was supposed to be answering them. My colleague laughed self-consciously and replied that I had a point.  

In sum, when asking a question at an oral exam, omit any preamble, keep your remarks short, and avoid multiple queries. The others present will be most grateful. 

One additional note. These guidelines also apply to asking questions at a colloquium. There, members of the audience who choose to participate should avoid giving a speech or raising a host of issues. Instead, the challenge is to ask a single, concise query that focuses on a crucial aspect of the presentation. Not too many faculty members, regardless of their scholarly prowess, have the ability to ask such a question. For that reason, those who do so consistently deserve our appreciation. 

The post Asking Effective Questions, Steven M. Cahn first appeared on Blog of the APA.

Read the full article which is published on APA Online (external link)