Here are some beliefs that, in various societies and at various times, have held sway:

• The Earth is flat.
• Celestial bodies revolve around the Earth, which is stationary.
• The human body is filled with four basic substances (yellow bile, black bile, blood and phlegm). When these are out of balance, people’s health and temperament deteriorates.
• All swans are white.
• Phlogiston is a fire-like element which is released during combustion.

All these beliefs have been subsequently disproved.

Yet, at one time – and in some cases for extremely long periods – they were held by large numbers of people.

In turn, those people’s thinking and behaviour was influenced, directed and informed by what we now recognise to be erroneous beliefs.

In some cases, information which refuted the beliefs was met with derision, disdain or worse. Justifications and proofs were presented which claimed to explain why the beliefs were true. Counter-proposals received short shrift.

And yet, here we are, in a position to know that each of these theories is false.

Our study of astronomy and physics has shown us that the Earth is a sphere, that it moves through space orbiting the sun and that the moon is the only celestial body that revolves around it.

Developments in medicine have demonstrated that the body is not filled with four basic substances. Many different causes have been identified which explain the presence or development of diseases, illnesses and afflictions.

It has been shown through observation that some swans are black.

Phlogiston does not exist. Combustion involves the burning of oxygen; plenty of tests have been developed to prove this.

These can be replicated by different people in different parts of the world.

We can draw two points from this.

First, human understanding changes over time. In addition, using various tools – including writing, observation, scientific method and numeracy – it can be said that human understanding of the world has developed.

Second, it is through the exercising of critical faculties that individuals have come to develop alternative theories and explanations to those which are taken for granted.

As teachers, we want to develop critical thinking in the classroom.

One way to do this is to present knowledge as being provisional rather than fixed.

This can be achieved through questioning.

The use of the word ‘might’ is a simple way of achieving this.

If we alter a question so that it presents an idea or process as open to a variety of possible explanations, then we are promoting the use of reason, analysis and critical thinking in the classroom.

Instead of asking students to guess the right answer which the teacher knows and wants to impart, we are helping pupils to arrive at a reasoned answer that is built on careful thinking and discussion:

• What is democracy?
• What might democracy be?

The latter question encourages students to reason, analyse, assess and examine.

The former makes this less likely.

Given information, evidence and examples by the teacher, pupils will be able to arrive individually and as a group at an answer (or a collection of answers) which are predicated on critical thinking.

Two further benefits accrue from making knowledge provisional.

First, the teacher can elicit detailed information from students concerning what they think and why they think it.

This is of greater use than information likely to be elicited by a non-provisional question. It means the teacher can get an insight into students’ thinking.

They can then use this to adjust their teaching including, for example, by asking further questions, offering counter-examples or by seeking justifications for that which has been said.

The second benefit is that theories, answers and ideas are tested. Logic, evidence, examples and reasoning must be used for something to stand.

Making knowledge provisional means placing it in reference to the set of criteria which has developed since the Enlightenment, and which underpins what we are prepared to accept as true (or as near to true as we can know at present).

Questioning in this way trains students to think critically – both through making specific response-demands and by subjecting their responses to further analysis and evaluation.

Here are two brief exchanges to illustrate:

Example 1

• Teacher: What is democracy?

• Student: Is it a type of political system?

• Teacher: Yes. Well done.

Example 2

• Teacher: What might democracy be?

• Student: Democracy is good.

• Teacher: What makes you think that?

• Student: Well, it is something which you hear a lot about in newspapers and on television and people tend to talk about it as a good thing.

• Teacher: What might make people see it as a good thing?

• Student: Well, I know that democracy involves people voting on things. So, perhaps, people think voting on things is good.

• Teacher: Why do you think it might be good to vote on things?

The second example would conclude, eventually, with a request for a formal definition of democracy. That definition would be informed by the preceding exchange, one in which the teacher has had an opportunity to probe the knowledge and understanding of their students.

In conclusion, there is a great deal to be gained from making knowledge provisional.

It can be achieved through reshaping traditional questions.

Other key words to use include ‘may’, ‘could’ and ‘would’.

You might also like to use questions stems such as: ‘can you think of some different possibilities (regarding X)?’ or ‘What different answers might be possible (regarding X)?’