Meaning:
The inductive method
of teaching means that the teacher presents the rule through situations and
sentences and does guided practice, then the learners do free practice. After
that, the teacher deduces or elicits the rule form from the learners themselves
by themselves.
An inductive approach to teaching language starts with examples and asks
learners to find rules. It can be compared with a deductive approach that
starts by giving learners rules, then examples, then practice.
Example
Learners listen to a conversation that includes examples of the use of the
third conditional. The teacher checks that the students understand the meaning
of its use through checking learners' comprehension of the listening text, and
only after this focuses on the form, using the examples from the text to elicit
rules about the form, its use and its pronunciation.
In the classroom
Inductive approaches to presenting new language are commonly found in course
books, and form part of a general strategy to engage learners in what they
learn. Some learners may need introduction to inductive approaches since they
may be more familiar, and feel more comfortable, with a deductive approach. The
deductive method of teaching means that the teacher presents the rule, gives a
model, then the learners do free practice and answer exercises.
Definitions:
From The Oxford English Dictionary
(OED); to induce (in
relation to science and logic) means “to derive by reasoning, to lead to
something as a conclusion, or inference, to suggest or imply,” and induction
“as the process of inferring a general law or principle from observation of
particular instances.”
Abduction:
Another version is the “adducing (pulling together)
of a number of separate facts, particulars, etc. especially for the purpose of
proving a general statement.”
Deduction:
The OED definition of to deduce is “to show
or hold a thing to be derived from etc…” or “to draw as a conclusion from
something known or assumed, to infer”;
Deduction thus, is “inference by reasoning from
generals to particulars,” or “the process of deducing from something known or
assumed…”
Differences:
Induction and deduction are pervasive elements in critical thinking.
They are also some what misunderstood terms. Arguments based on experience or
observation are best expressed inductively, while arguments based on laws or
rules are best expressed deductively. Most arguments are mainly inductive. In
fact, inductive reasoning usually comes much more naturally to us than
deductive reasoning.
Inductive reasoning moves from specific details and
observations to the lore general underlying principles or processes that
explain them(e.g., newton’s law of Gravity). The premises of an inductive
argument are believed to support the conclusion, but don't ensure it.
Thus, the conclusion of an induction is regarded as a hypothesis. In the
inductive method, also called the scientific method, observation of nature is
the authority.
In contrast, deductive reasoning
typically moves general treuths to specific conclusion. It opens with an
expansive explanation and continues with predication for specific observations
supporting it.Deductive reasoning is narrow in nature and is concerned with
testing or confirming a hypothesis.
Deductive reasoning leads to a
confirmation(or not) of our original theories. It guarantees the correctness of
a conclusion. Logic is the authority in the deductive method.
Comparison:
Deductive reasoning:
Deductive
reasoning works from the "general" to the "specific". This
is also called a "top-down" approach. The deductive reasoning works
as follows: think of a theory about topic and then narrow it down to specific
hypothesis (hypothesis that we test or can test). Narrow down further if we
would like to collect observations for hypothesis (note that we collect
observations to accept or reject hypothesis and the reason we do that is to
confirm or refute our original theory).
In a conclusion,
when we use deduction we reason from general principles to specific cases, as
in applying a mathematical theorem to a particular problem or in citing a law
or physics to predict the outcome of an experiment.
Inductive reasoning:
Inductive reasoning works the other way, it works from observation (or
observations) works toward generalizations and theories. This is also called a
“bottom-up approach. Inductive reason starts from specific observations ,
look for patterns, regularities (or irregularities), formulate hypothesis that
we could work with and finally ended up developing general theories or drawing
conclusion.
In a conclusion, when we use
Induction we observe a number of specific instances and from them infer a
general principle or law. Inductive reasoning is open-ended and exploratory
especially at the beginning. On the other hand, deductive reasoning is narrow
in nature and is concerned with testing or confirming hypothesis.
Properties of Deduction
In a valid deductive argument,
all of the content of the conclusion is present, at least implicitly, in the
premises. Deduction is non ampliative. If the premises are true, the conclusion
must be true. Valid deduction is necessarily truth preserving.
If new premises are added to a
valid deductive argument (and none of its premises are changed or deleted) the
argument remains valid. Deductive validity is an all-or-nothing matter;
validity does not come in degrees. An argument is totally valid, or it is
invalid.
Properties of Induction:
Induction is implicative.
The conclusion of an inductive argument has content that goes beyond the
content of its premises. A correct inductive argument may have true premises
and a false conclusion. Induction is not necessarily truth preserving.
