You walk into your English class, a tinge of anxiety in the air, and you notice the desks arranged in a circle, which can only mean one thing: a Socratic Seminar.
Your heart sinks, knowing that it’s the amount of things you say and not the depth of your point that matters.
A Socratic Seminar is a type of class discussion with no teacher interference, where students sit in a circle facing each other and discuss a topic, usually a few chapters of a book, or how a novel wraps itself up. The catch? Every student has to talk. On the surface, this doesn’t seem like that big of a problem, but it becomes one when two or three students talk to each other the entire time, not inviting anyone else from the circle in to talk with them.
The worst part? They tend to be graded on participation.
And you may be asking, why not just speak up? But, it’s not that simple. If a handful of students are dominating the conversation, it’s hard to get even a word in. People will talk and talk about the topic, occasionally paying attention to someone who chimes in, but the majority of the time, they get ignored.
The purpose of a Socratic seminar is to work and talk together. How can that happen if most of the group is swept under the rug by the people essentially controlling the conversation?
However, these conversation controllers aren’t the only kind of people who can affect the balance. Someone could be nervous, and to cope with that, they may just spit out whatever words they’re thinking, whether it contributes to the discussion or not. Someone could also use this tactic to get a satisfactory participation grade. But should that count if nothing they say is adding to the conversation?
Not only is that a problem, but there’s so much pressure that goes into your preparation for the discussion. This can include a passage you want to highlight, a question, connection or a bit of symbolism you thought was interesting. Everyone is expected to prepare an equal amount, and even if they do, most of their ideas won’t be shared, unless they’re a conversation controller. With this setup, asking a question or sharing a quote is virtually impossible.
Now, like anything else, this isn’t always the case. Occasionally, the discussion is somewhat evenly distributed and there’s a really powerful discussion taking place and everything seems perfect. But the truth is, there’s a large group of people, usually anywhere from nine people to a whole class, and everyone has to speak the same amount in a 10-15 minute conversation. This makes it hard for one person to share a detailed thought, or even for everyone to contribute.
How can one expect everyone in the discussion to participate roughly the same amount, have complex ideas and thoughts, and be expected to share them all? It just doesn’t make sense.
I understand that Socratic Seminars are a great way to overcome a fear of public speaking or to prepare for a similar discussion in college. I’ll even agree that sometimes you get some really good, powerful conversations going and that even sometimes you’ll leave with a new viewpoint. But there’s other ways to get that outcome.
One great way is to split up students into smaller groups and have them discuss their opinions with each other. Or even a classic teacher-led discussion with the whole class involved. Often in a seminar, the group will lightly touch upon or completely miss a piece of information that the teacher thinks is an important development in the text. In a teacher-led discussion, this doesn’t happen, as the teacher can guide the conversation and hit all the points they deem necessary.
In an English class, it’s so important to discuss whatever text you’re reading, it’s important to clarify and share your thoughts on anything, from Steinbeck to Shakespeare. But a Socratic seminar isn’t the only way to have these meaningful conversations. There needs to be more variety in class discussions to keep students engaged, enriched and comfortable.
