Socratic circles for student discussion

1.      Introduction / Context:

Many schools are discussing the idea of ‘stimulating learning’, that brings metaphorical electricity into the classroom. Whilst this is a noble goal, too many strategies seek to have the teacher as the sole conduit for this electricity-style energy. The Socratic circle approach (Brown, 2016; Cazden, 1988; Copeland, 2005) serves the three-pronged purpose of having students engage with texts; share ideas with their classmates; and develop their oracy and collaboration skills. If you value producing students who are able to collaborate and contribute to likely flexible working futures and enjoy hearing the thoughts of your students without you as the central conduit. Then this strategy may be for you.    

2.      Main content:

As a teacher of the English language, in many forms, I value literacy in all of its forms. When working with students who struggle with clear writing, the obvious response would seem to be more writing practice and explicit instruction. Yet, for some students, the disconnect taking place isn’t between their writing practice, but rather with their idea generation. The simple concept to capture is: ‘you cannot write what you cannot say’. Having students discuss or speak before moving into a writing activity is of great import.

For those teaching other subject areas, a focus on feedback and hearing students’ ideas is also greatly important. Consider this, as a teacher of science, how likely would you be to be able to know if students in your class held beliefs of anti-vaccination? This type of discussion is useful not only in respect to teaching and learning, but in gathering students’ understandings about the broader world, and making links between classroom content and that world.

How is it done?

If you’ve read along this far, you might be wondering how this type of an activity might work. The preparation requires a teacher to select an article on a meaty, and complex issue, something relevant to students, but also something that stretches them to consider the role of your subject within the world. This text is annotated by your students, in the form of a personal response, encourage students to position themselves critically, responding to the author of the text, as if in conversation. Noting where they agree, where they disagree, and selecting evidence and arguments that they feel are most important.

This preparatory work requires students to read with eyes to speaking, this is a simple and clear opportunity for them to connect with texts in preparation for peer discussion.

Once the reading has been annotated and prepared, students sit in two concentric circles, each with different roles. The outer circles job is to take notes and observe the discussion, taking notes on interesting ideas, but also tracking the success, or otherwise, of the inner circle. For this reason, this discussion approach is often referred to as the ‘fishbowl method’ (Priles, 1993). Generally, these discussions last for 10 minutes (which can at times appear like the longest possible time if students clam up), then this is followed by 10 minutes of reflection from the outer circle upon the inner circle’s discussion. Then the inner and outer circle trade places and the process repeats. Overall, this process should take at least 40 minutes, if not more, often taking the entire lesson.

The focus of skills can be very flexible, for younger years you may focus on simply listening to peers’ ideas, as listening can be considered a ‘dying art’ (Dobson, 2012). Whilst, for older students, you might be expecting students to show genuine collaboration, build upon one another’s’ answers, and respectfully disagree. The focus of the discussion skills being developed can differ depending on your focus as an educator, but the skill itself is of great import. As the movement away from confidence in democracy increases among the younger generation, it’s of even greater importance that students are offered opportunities to engage democratically within their schooling.

 

3.      References

Brown, A. C. (2016). Classroom community and discourse: How argumentation emerges during a Socratic circle. Dialogic Pedagogy: An International Online Journal, 4.

Cazden, C. (1988). Classroom Discourse: The Language of Teaching and Learning. Porthmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Copeland, M. (2005). Socratic circles: Fostering critical and creative thinking in middle and high school. Stenhouse Publishers.

Dobson, A. (2012). Listening: The new democratic deficit. Political Studies, 60(4), 843-859.

Priles, M. A. (1993). The fishbowl discussion: A strategy for large honors classes. English Journal, 82(6), 49.

 

4.      The Reflective practitioner

Q. How regularly do your students have the opportunity to discuss ideas?

Q. Does discussion within your classroom centre around you as the centrifuge?

Q. Thinking of a class you teach, what skills do you think they most need to develop to be ‘work, or world-ready’?

 

5.      Use it now

·       Consider what issues in the news, relevant to your subject area, you would like to discuss.

·       Consider your classroom space, where would a set of circles of chairs be best suited.

·       Plan out a session for your students, with some time at home to read and consider the article

·       Begin your first discussion, and take note of what skills you think your students most need to learn to be able to develop their skills as discussants.

Running word count: 58,611