The Socratic Method and education

i

INTRODUCTION

Rene Saran and Barbara Neisser

In his seminal piece, 'What is Enlightenment?' Kant stated that the motto of that remarkable period in European thought was quite simply 'Have courage to use your own understanding'. Kant provided the framework within which Leonard Nelson later developed his educational philosophy in the 1920s. Nelson made the concept of thinking for oneself, or self-directed learning, central to his philosophy of education. For the learner this in­volved the growth of individual autonomy in the development of the capacity to reason.

Nelson saw the Socratic Method as especially suited for fostering the capacities of enquiry and reason. The method consists of a learning-teaching process in which learners, through co-operative group dialogue, win knowledge about their own inner experience and develop insights into the truth concerning a philosophical question. In this process they are guided by a facilitator who steers the dialogue without impinging on the substance of the self-directed enquiry of the learners (see chapter 13 for Nelson's essay The Socratic Method).

By following the dialogical procedures recorded by Plato in the early dialogues of Socrates, Socratic Dialogue enables ordinary people to philosophise with the aim of enriching and informing civic life. This involves a non-specialist way of philosophising that has been furthered through the neo-Kantian philosophical practices of Nelson, Heckmann and, more recently, a number of other philosophers.

Gustav Heckmann, a student of Nelson, developed these ideas further and introduced the Socratic Method, evolved into a teaching-learning dialogue, into his work as a teacher-trainer in post-war Germany. His chief concern was that teachers of the future should develop into independent personalities and become competent to foster self-directed learning, as well as developing the capacity to elicit reasoned judgements among children, young people and adults.

Stimulated by the work of Gustav Heckmann, a tradition of Socratic Dialogue developed in Germany and the Netherlands, and resulted in many publications. Nowadays, there exists a widely spread practice of Socratic Dialogue in schools and adult education (see appendix 1 for organisations offering Socratic activities and appendix 3 for survey of the literature).

Theory and practice are often separated in the concerns of school and academia. But when theory and practice relate to the know­ledge of non-academic everyday life issues, they become less easy to separate - for instance, the way people reason about life in­variably informs their everyday conduct.

In his teaching Leonard Nelson sought unity between theory and practice. In 1922, he established a boarding school for children (the Walkemuhle) and an academy for adult education (the Philo­sophical-Political Academy - PPA) in order to test his educational concepts in real life situations. Teachers in the school and in the academy used the Socratic Method in their professional work.

After 1933, both school and PPA were banned under the Nazi regime. It is noteworthy that many who had attended Nelson's Academy and joined the political movement founded by him be­came active underground anti-fascists in opposition to Hitler. Susanne Miller, a German historian, has written about the impor­tance of participation in Socratic Dialogues during those dark times. It was this participation that sustained those who took part in the underground resistance, enabling them to retain and deepen their inner convictions in the fight for survival under Nazi tyranny. In 1949 the PPA, but not the school for children, was re­established in Germany.

are:

•     To answer a philosophical question by seeking out the truth about the nature of concepts like tolerance, freedom, justice and responsibility, and to endeavour to reach consensus - ie to reach a result or outcome

•     To engage in the co-operative activity of seeking answers to questions and to understand each other through the explora­tion of concrete experiences, volunteered by participants, one of which is usually chosen by the group for detailed analysis. In this way all are engaged in the process

•     To deepen individual insights and understandings as the dialogic process moves towards enabling participants to grasp the moral perplexities of the everyday world

•     To gain through dialogue greater clarity about what is and what is not in keeping with considered, thoughtful and reason­able conduct, thus enhancing self-confidence in our ability to reason and so shaping our approach to life

Participants may not reach definitive outcomes in the form of agreed answers. This need not lead to disappointment. The posi­tive experience of participation in co-operative thinking is of major importance; it can be very rewarding as a learning process and have profound meaning for one's life. The process of Socratic Dialogue is governed by a set of rules. These are frequently elaborated and applied in many of the chapters of this book. A summary of these rules is provided in appendix 2.

In today's educational practice, questions are raised about the methods available to help learners to develop skills in self-directed activity and philosophical reflection. Most would agree that it is important that schools should focus on independent learning and intellectual activity. In the information age, in which the electronic media (videos, computers, electronic games) can place children and young people in passive learning situations, intellectual and communicative potential is often inadequately supported and

Socratic Dialogue encourages ordinary human reflection in a dia­logue setting. At times, and in certain settings, such a dialogue can be extremely powerful for people of all backgrounds. What is special about Socratic Dialogue is that it is open to all who wish to engage in a co-operative thinking activity where the basic aims

are:

•     To answer a philosophical question by seeking out the truth about the nature of concepts like tolerance, freedom, justice and responsibility, and to endeavour to reach consensus - ie to reach a result or outcome

•     To engage in the co-operative activity of seeking answers to questions and to understand each other through the explora­tion of concrete experiences, volunteered by participants, one of which is usually chosen by the group for detailed analysis. In this way all are engaged in the process

•     To deepen individual insights and understandings as the dialogic process moves towards enabling participants to grasp the moral perplexities of the everyday world

•     To gain through dialogue greater clarity about what is and what is not in keeping with considered, thoughtful and reason­able conduct, thus enhancing self-confidence in our ability to reason and so shaping our approach to life

Participants may not reach definitive outcomes in the form of agreed answers. This need not lead to disappointment. The posi­tive experience of participation in co-operative thinking is of major importance; it can be very rewarding as a learning process and have profound meaning for one's life. The process of Socratic Dialogue is governed by a set of rules. These are frequently elaborated and applied in many of the chapters of this book. A summary of these rules is provided in appendix 2.

In today's educational practice, questions are raised about the methods available to help learners to develop skills in self-directed activity and philosophical reflection. Most would agree that it is important that schools should focus on independent learning and intellectual activity. In the information age, in which the electronic media (videos, computers, electronic games) can place children and young people in passive learning situations, intellectual and communicative potential is often inadequately supported and developed, especially during the formative years of childhood and adolescence.

Contemporary educational theory embraces a concept of learning which is similar to the self-directed learning of Socratic Dialogue in that it involves enquiry into inner activity and the independent development of cognitive and emotional competences.

Central to Socratic philosophy is the moral agent, the human agent who has to think about how he or she is to live well with others in social harmony. Reflection on such a problem gains ex­pression in speech. Genuine conversation demands a real willing­ness to work towards truth with others who are pursuing the same aim. Arrogance, conceit and hostility threaten both social harmony and good dialogue. They jeopardise the philosophical progress that is sought in Socratic Dialogue as the views of one person are tested against the views of others and as more general views about life emerge from different perspectives. The ultimate test is the way these views throw light on the question at hand and consolidate the details of the original example. The reasoning of Socratic Dialogue is thus always anchored in the to and fro move­ment of the reasoning process, based upon the example given at the start of the dialogue.

Through this kind of thoughtful engagement individuals can learn about life and reflect upon their own experiences. They can develop the capacity to systematically test their own and other people's general judgements, including various views of the world and different political ideologies and theories. The Socratic Method thus offers a process of dialogue through which indivi­duals can gain insight into their spiritual and intellectual outlook and develop their capacity for reasonable argument and their ability to empathise.

The texts in this book illuminate the Socratic Method and intro­duce readers to the practice of Socratic Dialogue. Many of the chapters that follow are extracts from sources which have been translated from German. Some of these are pedagogical and philosophical scientific contributions to the German literature. During translation some texts have been cut and most footnotes have been omitted as these refer almost exclusively to German literature.The original sources of these texts are given in appendix 4.

Part I of this book contains texts on the significance of the Socratic Method for learning and on some of its structural charac­teristics.

Chapter 2 serves as a contemporary introduction to the value of Socratic Dialogue in today's learning environment, in which far more emphasis than hitherto is laid on self-directed independent learning. It is taken from a German text, published in 2002, which collated various theoretical writings published over several decades, thus reflecting the history of modern Socratic Dialogue. It illustrates the link between the Twentieth Century Nelson-Heckmann tradition of Socratic Dialogue and the Socrates of antiquity.

Heckmann's book on Socratic Dialogue, originally published in 1981, sets out the basic principles that underpinned his practice as a Socratic facilitator. The editors have selected two chapters from Heckmann's book which focus on key features of facilitation (chapter 12). In the translated text he refers to selected examples to illustrate six pedagogical measures that were central in his practice. All the other contributions in this volume are anchored in these six measures, along with Heckmann's guidance for Socratic facilitators on how to steer the dialogue. These measures are the base for the practice of all facilitators in Germany, Britain and the Netherlands.

In chapter 3 Dieter Krohn, a student of Heckmann, gives an in­valuable overview of the history and philosophical foundations of Socratic Dialogue in the Twentieth Century. In addition, he provides an informative summary of the indispensable characteristics of contemporary Socratic practice.

Part II describes Socratic Dialogue experiences in different types of schools in England and Germany.

In chapter 4 Tamsyn Imison provides the bridge between the more theoretical contributions to this volume and the more practical and applied chapters. A great believer in 'the ethical school', she suggests that use of the Socratic Method in schools can have direct relevance to the development of ethical awareness among both students and staff. During her sixteen years as headteacher of a large and successful comprehensive secondary school in London, she was able to introduce Socratic Dialogue to her students. Rene Saran, who facilitated these dialogues, reports on them in part II.

Chapter 6 moves to the primary sector. Ingrid Delgehausen, also one of Heckmann's students, has experimented with the use of Socratic Dialogue in a German village primary school with chil­dren aged seven to nine. She demonstrates the capacity of young children to deal systematically and intensively with philosophical questions. Delgehausen's chapter illustrates the use of Raupach-Strey's Model 2, set out in chapter 11.

Chapters 7 and 8 contain Rene Saran's reports on her early en­deavours to introduce Socratic Dialogue in some secondary com­prehensive schools in England. Chapter 6 has appeared previously in both Britain and Germany. Chapter 7 gives an account of ex­periences at a number of schools, often with mixed age groups, when it proved important to address questions that were directly relevant to school life. This engaged the active interest of the students and promoted their creative thinking about possible solu­tions to down-to-earth daily concerns, vividly portrayed in their examples. The young people's own evaluation of their Socratic Dialogue experience is included in these reports.

In chapter 9 Mechthild Goldstein describes the use of the Socratic Method in the teaching of mathematics. She shows how fourteen to fifteen year old students in a German secondary modern school worked on and solved, by their own efforts, a geometrical problem. They were proud of their achievement, saying that 'we had to think for ourselves'. Both Nelson and Heckmann had emphasised the importance of Socratic Dialogue for mathematical logical thinking and for the teaching of mathematics. Goldstein studied with Heckmann's student Hartmut Spiegel, who, with Rainer Loska, extended the use of Socratic Dialogue in the teaching of mathematics by developing models for primary and secondary schools.

Barbara Neisser describes, in chapter 10, one of her experiences with Socratic Dialogue in sixth form philosophy lessons in Ger­many. She shows how a complete Socratic Dialogue can be organised and conducted within the framework of the school, and describes the process of the dialogue and its results. This contri­bution concludes with an evaluation on the teaching-learning pro­cess and illustrates Raupach-Strey's Model 1 in practice (chapter 11).

Thus Part II offers practical examples of how critical thinking and communication skills are fostered in Socratic Dialogue sessions in schools. Thoughtful young people are often searching for ways to shape their lives in the community. Personal and social relations loom large. Alongside their keen interest in the wider issues of the world, they feel the need to resolve, in a considerate and reason­able manner, the many practical and everyday challenges which face them. Such young people have much to gain from being introduced to the Socratic Method.

Part III includes some basic and historical texts about the Socratic Method. In chapter 11, Gisela Raupach-Strey presents four models that form part of a more extensive work in German about Socratic pedagogy. The four models point to ways in which Socratic Dialogue and elements of Socratic Dialogue can be integrated into the process of learning and teaching in school. Raupach-Strey's strategic and organisational suggestions might well be transferable to other educational settings.

Reference has been made above to Heckmann's work Socratic Dialogue, on which the editors have drawn for chapter 12. In chapter 13, the 1922 essay by Leonard Nelson on the Socratic Method is reproduced, with an introduction by Fernando Leal. This is an essential foundation text in the history of the Socratic Method. In this essay, Nelson presented his concept of Socratic Dialogue that laid the basis for all further Twentieth Century development.