My first successful Socratic discussion

After three months in the studio, I am proud to tell you that this morning I led my first successful Socratic discussion!

As I have already written here more than once, a Socratic discussion is a very important cornerstone in Acton’s pedagogy. Socratic discussions ask Eagles to make and defend difficult real-world decisions, supporting Acton’s learning philosophy:

Clear thinking leads to good decisions;
Good decisions lead to the right habits;
The right habits forge character; and
Character determines destiny.

The Socratic discussion at Acton is different from the classic Socratic discussion; it is simpler and is suited for young Eagles and short discussions. The well led Socratic discussion might go something like this:

• You paint mutually exclusive choices for a compelling dilemma Heroes face now or almost surely will face in the future.
• You ask someone to open, but before she starts, you force each person to take a stand by calling for a vote. The studio is tied 50/50.
• The opener takes a strong stand and the energy rises as Heroes pose follow up questions that dig deeper, provide context and perspective, diagnose the problem and propose an action plan.
• At the end, you ask for “lessons learned” and another vote. The studio again is tied 50-50, but every person has changed his or her decision.
• In total, you’ve spoken fewer than fifty words – the Heroes did all the work.

It may sound simple when you read it, but in practice it is very complex. For me it was an obstacle that I have not been able to get through. I’ve failed at some points: During the first few times, I was not sufficiently involved in the discussion: the discussion leader should be very present, look at each participant in the eyes, use a body language that shows her personal interest. After I got more involved in the discussion, the questions I picked were not interesting enough or the choices I picked were not clear enough to create a deep dilemma. In short, I had quite a learning curve here.

This morning I chose to lead the launch on the topic of the classic Robin Hood dilemma:

Intro: Imagine you are standing in front of the bank, about to go inside and suddenly you see a robber running out with a large bag full of money. You hide behind the bushes, and you see the robber get into his car. You write down the license plate number and you are about to call the police, when out of nowhere another car arrives and stops by the robber’s car. From the second car you see a  man coming out. You know this guy! He is the orphanage manager in your town! You see that the robber gives him the bag filled with money and says: “Take this money and build with it a new house for your orphans! Buy them new clothes, give them healthy food and make sure they have all they need in order to live a good life. The orphanage manager takes the bag, hugs the robber and leaves. The robber leaves right after him.

Would you:

a: Call the police and report the robber, even though they would likely take the money away from the orphanage, or
b: Do nothing and leave the robber and the orphans alone?

Stage 2: Voting – In our case all six Eagles voted for option 2.

Stage 3: Discussion – the Eagles explained their opinions. The prevailing view was that the orphans were poorer than the bank and therefore the money was better left with them.

Stage 4: The dilemma escalates: I explained to the Eagles that the bank in the story is a small bank that holds most of the city’s inhabitants’ money – regular people like their parents. If the money is not returned, the bank will go bankrupt and the citizens will lose their money. For some, this will be a small financial hit, but for others, this will seriously impact their quality of life.

Stage 5: Discussion – At this point, one of the Eagles changed her mind and said she would call the police. She explained her opinion but the other Eagles were still not convinced.

Stage 6: The dilemma escalates further: I explained to the Eagles that their family’s money was in that bank and they were going to lose all their money. As a result, they will have to move to a smaller house, they will not be able to send their children to kindergartens and schools, which they trust, and may even find it difficult to buy food for their family.

Stage 7: Discussion – At this point, another Eagle changed her mind and two more Eagles were very hesitant. The discussion that ensued was very interesting and every Eagle had to think a while to justify his chosen position.

Stage 8: Final vote and end – In the final vote, four Eagles voted for the second option and two Eagles voted for the first option.

The entire discussion took exactly 15 minutes (strict adherence to time is of great importance during the Socratic discussion) and all the Eagles were involved in the discussion and expressed their opinion.

If it wasn’t clear, I didn’t express any position at any stage and frankly I did not have a clear position in this question. I enjoyed listening to them talking, expressing their opinions. In any case, most of the time I tried to energize the discussion through purposeful listening, but not bias anyone in any direction.

For me it was a very interesting and instructive experience. I understood how important it is to be strict about all the elements of a Socratic discussion: Choose an interesting dilemma, choose distinctly different options, escalate the dilemma further if necessary in order to create a discussion and high stakes and engagement for the Eagles. As usual, I learned a lot from my previous failures and by doing so I allowed myself to engage in learning that led to this successful launch.