A Different Way to Do Socratic Discussions

When I came across this idea for Socratic seminars, I knew I wanted to try a version of it in my classroom.  It is called a BRAWL (Battle Royale, All Will Learn).  It is a way to set up text discussions that, while slightly competitive, gives students an opportunity to really think about the text.

I started with a reading schedule:

I wanted to students to come up with their own questions to lead the discussion, but I didn't want questions about just anything.  That is where the book Notice and Note by Kylene Beers and Bob Probst was helpful.  I took their signposts, and made each a category of question.  I also added Author Purpose as a category, as that was one skill where my students needed extra practice.

I put students into groups of about five after they had read the particular section and had each group come up with one question per category.  They wrote these on index cards and placed them on a big whiteboard in my room, under the correct category.  To keep track of which questions went with each group, I color-coordinated markers (Pink group, Purple Group, etc).  At the end of the day, I typed up the questions in a color-coordinated chart, gave a 1-2-3 score for each question, and gave this list back to the students the next day.  The 1-2-3 score coordinates with Jim Burke's Levels of Questioning, which my class had used before.  The chart looks like this:

This is where the competitive factor comes in.  Groups were competing to earn the most points.  Group points came from 1) Each student coming into class with at least 5 questions over the section read.  2) The levels of questions each group had.  3) The students participating in the group discussion later.

Students had a class period to look over the questions and discuss answers with their groups.  They took notes and used sticky notes to find text support for their answers.

The next day, the students had a modified Socratic.  Each group had one representative chosen to be in the inner circle to represent the group (this was done randomly).  The inner circle responses were worth more points.  Each inner circle member had to answer one question and had the opportunity to add to another group's answer (but could only do so two times).  I pulled the questions from the ones the students created in class.  After the inner circle got to respond to a question, the outer circle members could respond.  Each outer circle member got two talking chips to use for the entire conversation (to prevent a few students from overtaking the discussion).  Students got points for participating and for the caliber of their responses.

Because the students didn't know who would be chosen for the discussion, every student had to be prepared.  Because they got more points for referring to specific examples in the book and referring to page numbers, quoting the book, etc. they were more likely to use specific examples and to use the book to guide the discussion.  Because the groups were tracking points, it allowed for students to be a little competitive and to try and outwit other groups.

The depth of analysis and the range of discussion skills my students were able to show definitely made this time-intensive preparation worth it.