Mary Styslinger and Timothy Pollock - "The Chicken and the Egg: Inviting Response and Talk through Socratic Circles"
Mary Styslinger and Jessica Overstreet - "Strengthening Argumentative Writing with Speaking and Listening (Socratic) Circles"
Out of Copeland's piece, I was more impressed with what the students had to say. This is especially true of the things they have concluded about learning and Education in general. These kids admitted that learning was a passive activity. No one has ever told them that, explicitly, they just used their deduction skills. What did they deduct from, you may be wondering. Well, they were able to conclude that learning is passive because their teachers teach passively.
Socratic seminars are methods that can be used in the classroom to encourage active learning and teaching. The examples that are given throughout Copeland's piece displays students being actively engaged and involved in their own learning. The students are the ones directing the discussion, topics and questions. Of course, the teacher is still present, but their main role is as a facilitator. They are not to lead the discussion in anyway, rather they are to be an observer looking from the outside in. Teachers can ask a question to re-direct conversations that may go down unnecessary rabbit holes, but for the most part they should not be a major component to the discussion.
It is so important that students break-down their readings in this way so that they can create meaning for themselves. In Styslinger and Pollock's piece they quote Rosenblatt, "a work of literature has no meaning to a reader until he or she has experienced a personal response." Their personal response with this piece can certainly be a socratic seminar!
Since I'm talking about reader response, let's briefly touch on the perpetuation of the New Criticism approach within the classroom. Styslinger and Pollock also criticize how this approach has been used in the past. Students will have a hard time functioning in a socratic seminar. It is because of the New Criticism approach and how teachers have abused it in the past. The New Criticism approach gives all knowledge and power to the teacher and not to the mind's of readers and first-time experiencers. New Criticism enables teachers to be "all-knowing" literature gods who know the ins and outs of symbolism and meaning to any given text. This crushes autonomy. This destroys creativity. And it limits meaning.
The purpose of a socratic circle is a way to have a dialectic between people in order to seek a deeper meaning of complex ideas through thoughtful conversation. According to Styslinger and Overstreet this is very different from writing argument. Socratic seminars are not meant to be debate or persuasive conversations. They function as a means to dig deeper to the root of meaning. Socrates was convinced that having socratic circles was the best way to attain reliable knowledge. As we interact in these socratic circles, we are literally getting to the heart of the issue. We are searching the souls of other people and finding our own soul.
Do:
Controversial Topics Handout
Disagree with Grace Statements
Remember: Using “but” negates. Using “and” hears.
“You’re right and this is how I feel/think...”
“That’s okay and...”
“That’s true for you and what’s true for me is something else...” “That’s a really good point and I feel/think differently...”
“I was curious what you thought when you said...”
“I was wondering what you thought/felt when you said...”
“Can you tell me more about what you meant when you said...”
Disagree with Grace Statements
Remember: Using “but” negates. Using “and” hears.
“You’re right and this is how I feel/think...”
“That’s okay and...”
“That’s true for you and what’s true for me is something else...” “That’s a really good point and I feel/think differently...”
“I was curious what you thought when you said...”
“I was wondering what you thought/felt when you said...”
“Can you tell me more about what you meant when you said...”
Controversial Topic: “You’re so gay!”
I think saying it is fine because...
We don’t mean anything by it.
It just means “stupid” or “dumb.”
Being gay is wrong.
Gay men are effeminate. Being gay is a sin.
I think saying it is fine because...
We don’t mean anything by it.
It just means “stupid” or “dumb.”
Being gay is wrong.
Gay men are effeminate. Being gay is a sin.
I think saying it is wrong because...
It is bullying.
There is nothing wrong with being gay in the same way that there’s nothing wrong with being heterosexual.
It’s hurtful to people.
Sometimes if people aren’t really masculine or feminine they get called gay and they aren’t.
A ‘faggot’ literally means a stick for kindling and it’s used to denigrate gays and lesbian because in medieval times they used to use gay men as kindling to burn women accused of witchcraft.
“Gay men are effeminate” is a stereotype. Plenty of gay men are not and plenty of heterosexual men are. There is no such thing as a typical gay or lesbian person.
Thinking that effeminate is negative is sexist.
Gay people believe they are born gay, that it isn’t a choice. Therefore, it’s not a sin.
It is bullying.
There is nothing wrong with being gay in the same way that there’s nothing wrong with being heterosexual.
It’s hurtful to people.
Sometimes if people aren’t really masculine or feminine they get called gay and they aren’t.
A ‘faggot’ literally means a stick for kindling and it’s used to denigrate gays and lesbian because in medieval times they used to use gay men as kindling to burn women accused of witchcraft.
“Gay men are effeminate” is a stereotype. Plenty of gay men are not and plenty of heterosexual men are. There is no such thing as a typical gay or lesbian person.
Thinking that effeminate is negative is sexist.
Gay people believe they are born gay, that it isn’t a choice. Therefore, it’s not a sin.
Discussion
Questions
0=I
would rather not talk about race/racism.
1=I
am very uncomfortable talking about race/racism.
2=I
am usually uncomfortable talking about race/racism.
3=I
am sometimes uncomfortable talking about race/racism.
4=I
am usually comfortable talking about race/racism.
5=I
am very comfortable talking about race/racism.
- On a scale of 0-5, how comfortable are you talking about race? Explain.
- On a scale of 0-5, how comfortable are you talking about racism? Explain.
- What does bias mean?
- Explain colorblindness.
- What is a stereotype?
- What stereotypes can you come up with about these people groups:
- African American/Black
- Asian
- European American/White
- Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
- Hispanic/Latino/Chicano
- Jewish
- Middle Eastern/Arab
- Native American
- What country did they reside in? What was their nationality? Were they male or female? Young or old?
- What kind of discrimination did the person of the article endure? Did they deserve what happened to them, why or why not?
- What would you have done if you were in their shoes? How would you have felt?
- Before reading this article, did you know about this particular story? Did you know that discrimination and racism existed in this area of the world?
- How did this testimony change your perspective and idea about racism?
Alyssa,
ReplyDeleteI'm sorry that you didn't experience this in high school, but now you can use this information for your students and create great experiences for them! I appreciated that you noted the affects that New Criticism had on students perceptions when it comes to analyzing literature. It is such a crucial part of our job to make them understand that finding pleasure and knowledge in literature is not solely based on the author or the "all knowing literature gods." I also think it is an important step to incorporate reader response as a scaffolding tool to get them talking about the books. For your DO, I love the disagree with grace statements and would totally use that to teach students how to use polite phrases when disagreeing. The topic of your questions are great and could create powerful and meaningful conversation with your class; however, I was a little confused as to what kind of context your discussion questions fit into. Was this suppose to be part of a socratic circle or an anticipation guide? Are you using the controversial topic questions to have them practice disagree with grace statements? I just kind of needed a little more clarification or explanation as to what you are actually doing with these discussion questions in the context of a lesson.
How was your experience different in high school? Did you only have an inner circle? Did the teacher direct the conversation towards a known destination? I am hoping you can utilize Copeland's version in your own classroom some day. As for the DO, I have to admit that I don't understand it fully. I need you to explain your DOs as part of your SAY--at the end, making the connection between the reading and the Doing please so I can see where you are heading with it.
ReplyDeleteAlyssa--
ReplyDeleteI really like your insights on the articles we read. I don't remember doing Socratic circles when I was in high school either, so you're not alone in that. Your thoughts on passive teaching and passive learning I completely agree with. Students can't learn how to properly debate with their peers when they're being spoon-fed everything. I also liked your activities, especially the one where you explain how to politely disagree with someone.