Lisa Chrysochoou employs maieutics to foster active learning

The Socratic method: fostering the development of critical thinking and reasoning skills in an interactive, active learning context

 

Trying to meet the challenge of engaging students in constructing knowledge, illuminating ideas, thinking critically, and developing arguments, I remembered a lecturer of mine, stressing the importance of an ancient pedagogical tactic: the Socratic method or Maieutics. A dialectical, yet scientific method: a form of inquiry that takes place within a structured, intellectually responsible discussion. 

Here is a description of the method and a few suggestions to guide its application:

Identifying the appropriate context to apply the method: Target a controversial, yet not vague, theme, of appropriate complexity; it might be a widespread belief or common knowledge, which can be proven false, however, based on theoretical suggestions and research evidence. I have recently targeted the reliability of eyewitness testimony, in a unit discussing memory functions and capacity. A commonly held opinion is that, children’s testimonies are less reliable, due to their immature memory processes and vivid imagination. Evidence suggests, however, that adults interpret events in creating relevant memories, whereas children store verbatim traces of what actually happened. Lacking the knowledge and the emotional and social experience one would require to derive meaning from a situation, children seem less susceptible to false memories. Students would be guided to reach this conclusion themselves…

Progressing smoothly through the method’s phases via an appropriate line of questioning: Students are provided with a line of questions, acting as an equivalent to the critical inner speech that supports disciplined thinking in demanding activities. Try to identify key questions in advance; due to the method’s experiential nature, however, you will necessarily also develop questions on-line, based on your goal in each phase.

• Phase A: Eliciting the target dominant theme. Rely mainly on open-ended, exploratory questions or the presentation of a relevant case to trigger discussion and elicit the targeted widespread belief. Encourage students to refer to relevant experiences they have had, attempting to cognitively and emotionally engage them with the discussion. Here are some of my questions: If you were a member of the jury, how much would you rely on the testimony of an eyewitness? Who would you consider more reliable as an eyewitness (a child or an adult)? Any relevant cases- experiences to report? To no surprise, most students favoured adult’ testimonies.... 
• Phase B: Guide the students through questions (tests of logic) to contradict themselves and experience puzzlement (aporia). Relying on probing questions, get students to elaborate their initial responses (Why do you say that? Could you explain this further?). Moreover, use open-ended, exploratory questions to help them search for alternatives, that will contrast their initial view, and lead them to experience puzzlement (Is there reason to doubt this? Could anyone see this from a different point of view? Is this always the case? If yes, what would be the consequences on ….?). For example, I asked them: What is it that affects memory accuracy, leading to false memories? Reference was made to one’s existing knowledge, experiences, attitudes, prejudices, etc. But how fast does all this increase with age? Silence there, as students began to realize the inconsistency (with age, we enrich our knowledge and experience bases, allowing for greater event interpretation).
• Phase C: eliminating the initially held view, over one that is better justified. Closing questions will help here, along with information possibly provided by the lecturer. In my case: Have a look at this graph, describing the development of children’s ability to infer meaning. Who would therefore be more competent in creating meaning-based memories? Allow students to elaborate responses, before reaching consensus (adults are more susceptible to false memories; thank God the legal system has lately taken this into account!). Why did I initially state this question? Why was it important?: as an attempt to increase awareness and appreciation of the method.

The Socratic method can promote the development of critical thinking and reasoning skills in an interactive, active learning context. The students seem to enjoy the ride! Would you, where appropriate, give the Philosopher’s way a try?