The Socratic Method in Seminary?
Posted by rbseminary on May 24, 2007
Overview
The seminary professor can perceive the Socratic Method with two meanings. The narrow meaning involves the strict classical approach to eliminating false philosophical presuppositions by exposing logical errors in thinking (“Socratic Method,” 2005). The broad meaning involves utilizing the simple question and answer method in order to cultivate critical thinking in a broad variety of areas (Tanner, Bottoms, Feagin, & Bearman, 2003).
Historians believe the method originated when the ancient Greek philosopher Socrates feigned ignorance when interrogating his students (interlocutors) in order to unveil the inconsistency of their thoughts (“Socrates,” 2005). “Socrates believed that there is order in the universe and that for the most part reality is composed of intangible transcendent ideas” (Fishman & Fishman, 1994, p. 223). He would progress from student to student until the group developed coherent thinking; this was Socrates’ means of cultivating what he considered wisdom (“Socrates,” 2005). “This is the only classic method of teaching that was designed to create genuinely autonomous thinkers” (“Socratic Method,” 2005, ¶ 3).
The Socratic Method has survived for centuries as an effective teaching tool (Croce, 1998). Harvard Law School was revolutionary when it adopted its infamous case study method—patterned after the Socratic Method—in the nineteenth century (Thomas, 2005). Glaser’s twentieth century educational critical thinking reform movement had its roots in the Socratic Method (Wallace, 2005). In fact, in a report presented at the Mid-South Instructional Technology Conference, Karen Jarret Thoms and Najmi Junaid (1997) contended that the Socratic Method “is at the heart of critical thinking” (p. 1). Roy Bonnet (1992), in a presentation advocating the Socratic Method at a Texas educator’s colloquium, traced the method through all the levels of Bloom’s taxonomy from knowledge to comprehension to application to analysis to synthesis to evaluation, and concluded that “no other event better portends learning than a question arising in the mind” (p. 30). It is important to note that at the time of presentation, Bonnet (1992) served as chair of The Division of Technology at Central Texas University. Note also that Thoms and Junaid (1997) couched their observations of the Socratic Method in a presentation entitled Developing Critical Thinking Skills in a Technology Related Class. The method applies to such advanced disciplines as technology.
Though perceptions of the Socratic Method are sometimes limited to logic and law in higher education, the method’s applications span all disciplines and grade levels (Tanner, Bottoms, Feagin, & Bearman, 2003). For example, a kindergarten teacher teaching reading can use the Socratic Method when asking a child questions beyond the literal levels of who, what, when, and where. A good teacher will ask questions that investigate the child’s understanding of the reading concepts from analytic, interpretative, and critical vantage points. This is not asking too much of a young student. Christos Frangos (1987) challenged some of Piaget’s psychological age limitation predications and concluded that the Socratic Method can significantly improve primary school student comprehension and actually reduce the age of understanding for critical geometric concepts.
The method is not as efficient as lecture (Horton, 1992), but findings have verified that the method is superior in developing higher order thinking, conflict-resolution skills, and conceptual applications (Polite & Adams, 1996). The most difficult part of any teaching is probably the task of getting the student to think. The Socratic Method provides difficulties in creating thought-provoking questions (Tanner, Bottoms, Feagin, & Bearman, 2003). A lecture approach of simply giving facts is a much easier task for the seminary instructor. Findings have exposed that professors who might desire to use the Socratic Method need training in the method (Polite & Adams, 1996).
Opinion
A university professor who strategically used the Socratic Method inspired this author to become a teacher. Therefore, he employed the method throughout eleven years of high school instruction and three years of adult Sunday school instruction. His experience proved the value of Socratic instruction. Yes, Socratic instruction was very demanding on this teacher, but the rewards were well worth the effort. Students regularly commented that no other teacher had ever asked them to think. The method is simply the finest way that he discovered to cultivate Christian discernment. The critic may contend that Socrates was godless and therefore should not be trusted. The cynic may ask, “Did not Socrates actually deny the absolute Truth?” Indeed, if one were to use the Socratic Method to expose Socrates’ invalid presuppositions, one could undo Socrates’ himself. This does not invalidate the method, however; rather, it affirms the method. Only the Christian worldview can consistently withstand the scrutiny of the Socratic Method. Perhaps this is why the Master Teacher Himself so deftly employed the unparalleled dialogue and disputation that we may safely call the Socratic Method: “Who do men say that I am?” (Neely, 1978).
In light of the evidence, why do so many seminary professors rely so heavily on the lecture method? Is not reading a book almost as efficient as listening to a wisdom-filled lecture? Perhaps the professors themselves have never experienced a master teacher who cultivates biblical thinking. Perhaps the professors have experimented and found that their students do not know how to respond. Perhaps they fear that their lectures will turn into sessions of students sharing ignorance. The Socratic Method should not be feared on these counts. Rather, proper application of the Socratic Method actually eliminates these concerns. Again, the Socratic Method takes some training and getting used to (for both professors and students), but the rewards are well worth the investment. Seminary professors need to cultivate biblical thinkers, not just good note-takers, questioners, commentators, and test-takers.
References
Bonnett, R. (1992). The Socratic teaching method. Proceedings from a Colloquium Concerning Instructional Methodologies, Killeen, TX., 13-33. Retrieved September 30, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs /data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/23/c7/d3.pdf
Cooper, J. M. (2005) Socrates. Encyclopedia Americana. Retrieved September 28, 2005, from Grolier Online http://go.grolier.com/
Croce, D. D. (1998). Helping students ask the right questions. Word’s Worth, Fall, 4. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/ 80/10/7d/0a.pdf
Fishman, S. & Fishman, E. (1994). A conversation on the Socratic Method. Proceedings from the National Conference on Alternative and External Degree Programs for Adults, San Franciso, CA, 221-24. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_ storage_01/0000000b/80/23/1c/1b.pdf
Foster, J. (1994). The Socratic Method and the great books. Proceedings from the National Conference on Alternative and External Degree Programs for Adults, San Franciso, CA, 225-32. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/ 0000000b/80/23/1c/1b.pdf
Frangos, C. (1987). A European teaching model: From Vygotsky to Socrates via Piaget. Viewpoints,120, 2-8. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_ storage_01/0000000b/80/24/69/da.pdf
Horton, R.A. (1992). Christian education: its mandate and mission. Greenville, SC: BJU Press.
Neely, F. R. (1978). An investigation and application of the teaching principles and practices of the master teacher. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Bob Jones University.
Polite, V. C. & Adams, A. H. (1996). Improving critical thinking through Socratic seminars. Spotlight on Student Success, 110, 1-2. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs /data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/24/89/63.pdf
Socrates. (2005). Encyclopedia Britannica. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from Encyclopedia Britannica Online http://search.eb.com/eb/article-233647
Socratic method. (2005). Wikipedia. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.reference.com/ browse/wiki/Socratic_method
Tanner, B, M., Bottoms, G., Feagin, C., & Bearman, A. (2003). Instructional strategies: How teachers teach matters. Atlanta: Southern Regional Education Board. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/content_storage_01/0000000b/80/28/46/94.pdf
Teaching. (2005). Encyclopedia Americana. Retrieved September 30, 2005, from Grolier Online http://go.grolier.com/
Thomas, A. P. (2005). The people v. Harvard law: How America’s oldest law school turned its back on free speech. San Francisco: Encounter Books.
Thoms, K. J. & Junaid, N. (1997). Developing critical thinking skills in a technology-related class. Proceedings from the Mid-South Instructional Technology Conference. Murfreesboro, TN. Retrieved September 29, 2005, from http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/ content_storage_01/0000000b/80/11/7e/de.pdf
Wallace, J. M. (2005) Critical Thinking. Encyclopedia Americana. Retrieved September 28, 2005, from Grolier Online http://go.grolier.com/
5 Responses to “The Socratic Method in Seminary?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
June 13th, 2007 at 11:52 am
It would be interesting to see a list of resources on how to use or to develop the Socratic method for yourself. I use a question and answer format for our Wednesday Night Study, but I am not sure it is Socratic.
What would be the best resources?
June 13th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
The method is not best developed first by “how to” books but by learning how to think logically (biblically) and by observing or interacting with a good Socratic teacher. For starters, I recommend Peter Kreeft’s “Socrates Meets…” books. They are insightful, enjoyable, and instructive. Kreeft is a Romanist, so you will need to read him with the same discernment that you would with any pagan, such as Socrates, but you will not be disappointed with his style. If, after reading one or two of his books, you still want help, let me know.
June 17th, 2007 at 3:44 am
Joseph, interesting stuff, this is the first I have ever heard of this “Socratic Method”. I would be interested in knowing how this method would be applied in relation to comprehensive testing on a Seminary level.
June 19th, 2007 at 2:10 pm
Assessment (testing) that is driven strictly by memorization of material yields graduates who are good at memorizing and know a lot of facts. Though memorization is essential to biblical learning, it is not the end of learning. The student should not be able to succeed when assessed if he does not understand the material. That is why it is imperative that a good seminary assessment program will include such assessment methods as reading analysis, essay-writing, project completion, and oral examination. From my understanding, RBS does have some of these elements and hopes to implement more. I am told that the mentoring program is designed to address some of these assessment concerns, but I am not aware of what training the mentors themselves receive in implementing effective assessment techniques. The Socratic Method prepares students to think biblically when assessed with an array of methods, especially oral examination.
February 19th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
[...] with 4 comments Site has moved. Click here. [...]