The Socratic Method

Shila Mortazavi Pharm.D.
PGY1 Pharmacy Resident
Howard County General Hospital

As its name suggests, the Socratic method is an approach to teaching that originated from the renowned Athenian philosopher Socrates and is based upon engaged dialogue. According to Delić and Bećirović this method consists of five distinct stages starting with wonder and the postulation of questions by the student.1 In the subsequent stage, the teacher would then look to the student to form a hypothesis to the initial wonder. In response to the student’s primary hypothesis, the next stage would involve the teacher performing a cross-examination of the primary hypothesis by providing counterexamples to prove or refute the hypothesis. The following stage is the acceptance or rejection of the hypothesis in which the student can accept or reject the counterexamples. In the final stage, the student can act upon the discoveries from the dialogue between the teacher and student.1 Traditionally in this method, the teacher serves as a mere guide that incorrectly reasons with the student throughout the discussion to allow them to draw their own conclusions and develop a higher level of critical thinking.

In the writings of Socrates’s students such as Plato, most emphasize the cross examinations performed by Socrates as the critical point where the truth-value of a statement is discovered, which was a point referred to as the elenchus.4 While the origins of these lessons were intended initially to challenge philosophers on topics that related to their morals and ethics, these same methods can also be used to guide active classroom discussion in higher education. One structured application of this method is called the Socratic seminar, and much like the fishbowl approach employs a design where students are arranged in two rows of concentric circles.2 In this method, the students are provided reading materials to review, then asked to participate in one of two ways: the outside row of students observe while the inside row of students engages in a dialogue with the instructor. In this model, the students are not necessarily debating each other on the text that they have read but are instead working together to develop a more critical understanding of the text. The teacher is an expert in the subject matter and guides the discussion by posing questions and mediating the discussion. When the discussion of the inner circle concludes, the outer circle, who has thus far been exclusively observing the conversation, provides relevant feedback to the inner circle on their discussion.2,3 Similar to other models of instructional system design, there is a strong emphasis on students closely analyzing and gathering information before the discussion. This method also encourages students to discuss and develop critical knowledge on the topic through discussion and requires that they reflect and evaluate their discussion with appropriate feedback.

In terms of instructional design, the Socratic seminar could prove valuable in many ways. A study was conducted where middle school students took part in a Socratic seminar after reading a text on their own.3 Surprisingly, 80% of the student sample had shown evidence of performing metacognitive activity or higher-order formal operation. This meant that students focused on forming abstract thoughts to create a hypothesis which they then systematically tested. Polite et al. also found that middle school students who were involved in the Socratic seminars were largely comfortable with utilizing different degrees of conflict resolution skills. About 80% of the students had at least some conflict resolution skills and that about 66% of these students were able to utilize elaborate resolution skills such as the agreeing-to-disagree outcome.3 In the realm of higher education, it is not uncommon for students to have to digest primary literature. The Socratic seminar model could be applied and promote a more abstract discussion rather than stressing specific data points and trends. These discussions could also help students hoping to become future practitioners more critically assess what research and clinical guidelines they chose to implement in their personal practice. For instance, the ACC/AHA guidelines for hypertension management promote the use of thiazides, calcium channel blockers, angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, or angiotensin II receptor blockers as first line agents. A further discussion into different aspects of the evidence behind these recommendations such as the studies’ inclusion or exclusion criteria, their demographic representation, or follow-up time all could challenge upcoming health care practitioners to consider commonly applied therapeutic generalizations more carefully. Ethically speaking, such discussions could help develop providers that are higher level critical thinkers that take the extra steps to ensure that their interventions for patient research they are utilizing to treat their patients would serve a purpose in their patient on a case-by-case basis.

While the Socratic seminar could prove incredibly useful in higher education, there are several limitations one must consider before employing the model. This model is not ideal for every type of lesson, such as lessons that require the instructor to provide facts and. This type of teaching approach should rather be left to courses where material is more sensitive to interpretation and students have a wider breadth of foundational knowledge. This model also heavily relies on student participation and interest, and without these key elements, the model’s effectiveness would be diminished. However, despite its weaknesses, in terms of crafting professionals through higher education, the Socratic seminar utility is clear. This method of teaching would encourage abstract thought, empower critical thinking, and in the case of pharmacy students, help develop pharmacists who are better prepared to face scrutiny or cross-examination when it comes to making clinical decisions.

References:

1. Delić H, Bećirović S. Socratic Method as an Approach to Teaching. European Researcher, vol. 111, no. 10, 2016, doi:10.13187/er.2016.111.511.

2. Griswold J, Shaw L, Munn M. Socratic Seminar with Data: A Strategy to Support Student Discourse and Understanding. Am Biol Teach. 2017 Aug;79(6):492-495. doi: 10.1525/abt.2017.79.6.492. Epub 2017 Aug 8.

3. Chowning JT. Socratic Seminars in Science Class: Providing a structured format to promote dialogue and understanding. Sci Teach. 2009 Oct;76(7):36-41.

4. Richard Robinson, Plato's Earlier Dialectic, 2nd edition (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1953). Reprinted in Gregory Vlastos (ed.), The Philosophy of Socrates (Anchor, 1971). Edited in hypertext by Andrew Chrucky, June 2, 2005.