when I taught critical thinking, the majority of my students could not tell the difference between a point the author was criticizing and a point the author was defending. I once had a student claims that Christian writer CS Lewis was an atheist, and they backed this claim up by quoting Lewis’ paraphrase of certain atheist positions. In …
when I taught critical thinking, the majority of my students could not tell the difference between a point the author was criticizing and a point the author was defending. I once had a student claims that Christian writer CS Lewis was an atheist, and they backed this claim up by quoting Lewis’ paraphrase of certain atheist positions. In the very next paragraph, Lewis rebutted these positions, but the student didn’t seem to pick that up.
when I created multiple-choice tests, I had to have wrong answers that could still be possibly right, or else the student would accurately guess the answer even if they didn’t know the material. I found the best wrong answers were the ones that stated the exact opposite of the correct answer. The students would remember that there was some connection between the right answer and the answer they marked, but they often would not remember that the connection was one of denial.
I think that’s what happened with this commentator. Simply quoting a position seems like defending it if you read carelessly enough.
when I taught critical thinking, the majority of my students could not tell the difference between a point the author was criticizing and a point the author was defending. I once had a student claims that Christian writer CS Lewis was an atheist, and they backed this claim up by quoting Lewis’ paraphrase of certain atheist positions. In the very next paragraph, Lewis rebutted these positions, but the student didn’t seem to pick that up.
when I created multiple-choice tests, I had to have wrong answers that could still be possibly right, or else the student would accurately guess the answer even if they didn’t know the material. I found the best wrong answers were the ones that stated the exact opposite of the correct answer. The students would remember that there was some connection between the right answer and the answer they marked, but they often would not remember that the connection was one of denial.
I think that’s what happened with this commentator. Simply quoting a position seems like defending it if you read carelessly enough.