Socratic Method Case Study: The Impact on the Strong and Weak Student

1
Socratic Method Case StudyThe Impact on the
Strong and Weak Student
Tom Goulding M.S. Ph.d with Student
Reflections by Christopher Powers
Daniel Webster College 20 University Drive
Nashua, New Hampshire 03063
2
OVERVIEW

• Why the Socratic Method
• The Student Population
• Student Preparation and Motivation
• Course Grading
• Student Observations
• Results and Conclusions

3
RESEARCH IN ALTERNATIVE TO LECTURE-TEST
TRADITION
Material produced by a learner is remembered
better than material presented to the learner
Marcheggiani, 1999 Jacoby, 1978
An effective course is one fashioned around
essential questions that cause a student to
search for knowledge Wiggins, 1987
Cooperative learning results in greater mastery
of a subject than individual learning
Lindquist, 1995
There is now substantial evidence that students
working together in small cooperative groups can
master material better than can students
working on their own. Slavin,2002
Evaluations of Socratic vs. other teaching
methods are difficult to locate Smith, 1987
4
Course Redesign

• Content assignments given to teams of two
  students
• Two or three groups cover all the material in one
  chapter
• Team responsible for being class experts on all
  problems
• 25 chapters covered in 15 week term
• Teams generally consisted of 2 weak or 2 strong
  students

5

• A Students Opinion

6
Preparation for a Class Without Tests

• Impressions vs. Reality
• Initial impression Less studying necessary
• Actually required more studying
• We needed to know more than was given in book
• Reasoning behind technical standards
• Efficiency of technology, implementation
• How We Responded
• Used more outside resources
• Spent more time
• In study groups
• Collaborating on-line

7
Presentations and Discussion

• Format was different than most classes
• Teams of 2 assigned a chapter of the book to
  specialize in
• Material not reviewed or discussed in class
  before-hand.
• Team presents topic to the class with example
  problems
• Summary of topic is followed by extensive
  questioning
• Professor takes on role of adversary
• Questions usually covered
• Hypothetical situations
• Topics not covered in book, but related to
  subject

8

• THE STUDENT POPULATION

9

The Underachievers -- 7 Students
All Seniors
Traveled as cohort Attended
Instructors Sophomore Computer Architecture
Performed poorly

• The Strong Students 7 Students
• All Juniors
• Traveled as cohort
• Attended Instructors
  Freshman Programming Class
• Performed exceptionally

10
Student Capabilities SAT Scores
Academically Strong
Academically Weak
AA 1340 EE 890 OO 1130 PP1 1230 PP2 1190 PP
3 1230 PP4 1100 AVG 1158
CC1 1130 CC2 1290 DD 1180 GG 1230 CC3 1240 HH
1120 PP5 770 AVG 1137
11
The Academically Weak and Strong - Composite GPA
Academically Strong
Academically Weak
CC1 2.69 CC2 3.32 DD 2.88 GG 2.77 CG2 2.45
HH 2.73 PP5 2.52 AVG 2.76
AA 3.34 EE 2.88 OO 3.37 PP1 3.96 PP2 3.83
PP3 3.82 PP4 3.79
AVG 3.57
12

• Student Preparation and Motivation

13
Student Survey Preparation
Course Preparation
Strong Students
Weak Students
Twice normal prep time
5/7
4/7
Questions to the Audience
Does this suggest increased motivation and desire
to learn?
Can we expect better than average performance by
weak student?
Do some very strong students work hard regardless
of format?
14
Presentation and Discussion Student Opinion

• First presentation was unnerving
• Partner and I were unprepared
• We realized we needed to look beyond the main
  topic
• After several classes
• Became more comfortable w/ format
• More interested, even excited to participate
• Thinking changed
• Began looking at the broader issues and
  implications
• Used more outside resources

15
Student Survey Learning Outcome
Strong Students
Weak Students
5/7
1/7
Learned much more than in traditional course
Questions to the Audience
Weak students claim more effort but no learning
benefit --- can that be true?
What measure are students using when considering
learned much more?
Are weak students simply motivated to puff
themselves when possible and
depreciate course (or instructor) when possible?
16
Student Survey Motivation to Work
Strong Students
Weak Students
Liked learning more and Retaining more
5/7
1/7
Questions to Consider
How can instructors exploit the hunger to learn
found in good students?
Does the classical lecture-test format aid in
retention?
Is there any hope for students who do not want to
learn ?
17
Student Survey Motivation to Work
Strong Students
Weak Students
0/7
6/7
Need this to graduate
Questions to Consider?
If the competence is not the goal, shouldnt we
have failed them years ago?
Are the weak and strong always radically
different in their goals?
If the instructor were different would the ratios
change dramatically?
18
Student Survey Pressure to Perform
Strong Students
Weak Students
Motivation to Perform- More from Student Questions
4/7
Motivation to Perform- More from Instructor
Questions
5/7
OBSERVATIONS
Is peer approval the primary motivator for the
good student?
Why did the weak care about instructor approval?
19
Motivation to Work Student Opinion

• Combination of presentation direct questioning
• Makes it impossible to avoid participation
• Puts the focus and pressure on you when
  presenting/responding
• More preparation
• More outside resources
• Tally or tick system of grading added
  competitive factor
• Desire to maintain respect among peers

20

• COURSE GRADING The Tick System

21
COURSE GRADING IN CLASS TICKS

• THE TICK SYSTEM

6 ticks possible each week Ticks for presentation
Ticks for Question-Answer in class participation
The Grade Algorithm 72 ticks A 60
71 ticks B 48 - 59 ticks C
Students chosen for presentation by volunteering
or instructor selection
22
Student Survey Tick System and Work
Strong Students
Weak Students
Did the Tick System of Grading allow you to slack
off daily study? --
6/7 NO
4/6 NO???
OBSERVATIONS
The I worked hard message from Weak group?
23
Student Survey Tick Assessment
Strong Students
Weak Students
6/7 -- NO
Did the tick system accurately capture your
performance?
3/7 -- NO
Questions for Audience Consideration
Was ticking fair?
How do you prevent bias teachers pets?
Was the tick system auditable by an outside agent?
24
Student Survey Tick Assessment
Strong Students
Weak Students
Did Ticks Tick you Off?
0/7
3/7
OBSERVATIONS
A surprise!
Half the weak group wanted to earns ticks and
felt motivated by them!!
25
Student Survey Rate this Approach
Strong Students
Weak Students
Liked Much Better
6/7
1/7 --??
Dont Like This Method
0/7
3/7
OBSERVATIONS
The good work harder and learned more
The weak probably didnt like the visibility
26

• A Students Opinion

27
Pros Cons

• Pros
• Learned more
• Content
• Reason
• Topics were made more interesting
• Integrating book questions w/ our presentations
  and discussion made working out answers less
  tedious
• Good practice for real world engineering debates

28
Pros Cons

• Cons
• Not good for introverts
• System for receiving ticks was not concrete
• Those good at debate or quicker to respond to
  instructors questions could dominate
  conversation
• Required much more work than test-based class

29

• THE RESULTS

30
Conclusion

• The Highly Motivated can still reach for even
  greater heights.
• Retention is a key objective of the top students.
• Top students are looking beyond graduation to
  employee competence.
• Dont choose a classroom strategy to accommodate
  the underachiever.
• Underachievement is often a choice not a destiny.

31
Questions Requiring Further Investigation
What causes capable students to choose low
performance as their trademark?
Are Classroom innovations worth the effort? The
strong do well anyway!
Does peer bonding influence performance and poor
outcome?
32
Potential Weaknesses of this type of Socratic
Method

• Criteria to accumulate points was not always
  clear
• Near the end of the course, strong students had
  final grade of A/A- in hand.
• Weak students participate more at very end,
  using last gasp attempts to pass.
• Instructor bias can be a greater danger