may 20, 2016
opinion
Let’s rethink Socratic seminars By Spencer Adams
“...What do the rest of you think?” Three students stutter and raise their hands, desperate to answer the question. A brief pause follows—the anxiety palpable—before one bold student steamrolls the others and begins a scripted analysis that doesn’t even answer the question. Welcome to Socratic seminars, a noble idea that has been perverted into an uncollaborative practice where graded points matter more than intellectual conversation. English teachers and students should change the way these discussions are carried out and graded to create a more constructive environment. Inspired by the ideas of Greek philosopher Socrates, Socratic seminars seem like a great way for students to demonstrate their critical thinking skills. Instead of being forced to write yet another essay, students talk organically about a book/play/story/poem in order to reach new, thoughtful conclusions. As a bonus, the seminars give students who don’t usually participate in class a chance to speak up. But as soon as the teacher assigns points to the discussion, the circle of desks becomes a gladiator ring. When the seminars are graded, students don’t care about having meaningful discussions; they only care about commenting the required three times and asking one “thought-provoking question” to earn the coveted 20/20. This mentality often comes at the expense of actually responding to the questions posed by other students—the entire point of a Socratic seminar. Instead, students interject with preconceived ideas, causing the seminar to collapse into a sporadic mess of unconnected points. Even if students have novel thoughts, they are often too nervous to say so because summative points are in jeopardy. They either don’t speak at all or repeat each other’s points, stalling the conversation and causing Socrates to roll in his grave as the ninth students says, “To go off of Jeff’s point…” So what’s the solution? Teachers should hold more ungraded, practice seminars so that students are more comfortable speaking before the real deal or split classes into smaller groups so that students have more opportunities to speak up. Students should also always be allowed to submit notes or a written supplement afterwards (already a common practice) so that they aren’t as concerned about their grade during the seminar. Fixing Socratic seminars also rests in students’ hands: we need to be more civil and respectful if we want a positive discussion, and we need to wholeheartedly participate in any practice Socratic seminars—even if it’s not for a grade. These changes may mean students would be graded more leniently, but this is a necessary sacrifice if we truly want to honor Socrates’ virtuous idea.
7
Why Trump’s candidacy is (mostly) good for politics BY TREVOR Lystad
I hate Donald Trump. I think he’s racist, sexist and unfit to be president, and I’m genuinely terrified of the thought of Trump in the Oval Office. I also think his candidacy—and success—is beneficial for American politics. The 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC allows corporations to spend unlimited money on political campaigns via super PACs. The decision has benefitted rich donors on both sides of the aisle, but the ruling has generally favored the right. The five conservative justices voted in favor while the four liberals dissented, and campaign finance reform tends to be a Democratic talking point while most prominent conservatives stay mum. As the Koch brothers and other billionaire donors prepared to bankroll their chosen candidates to victory, much of the electorate became fearful of the donors and their super PACs handpicking elected officials who may choose to help their donors instead of their constituents, giving the rich even more influence in politics. Trump’s super PAC-less, relatively low-spending primary campaign has proved these fears to be unfounded. Trump’s success paired with the failings of the high-fundraising candidates has reaffirmed my faith in America’s political system. While Trump has dominated polls, caucuses and primaries, Jeb(!) Bush raised over $150 million between his own fundraising and his super PAC, yet Bush failed to win even one primary. When it became clear that Bush didn’t have a shot, many high-profile donors turned instead to Florida Senator Marco Rubio. Rubio proceeded to drop out within a month of Bush’s exit. The big money donors were at odds with a plurality of the voters, and the voters won. But perhaps more important is how Trump exposed the hypocrisy of some GOP politicians by smashing through their carefully crafted, focus tested rhetoric and ignoring
politically convenient Republican answers about issues like abortion and gun control. After Trump said women should be punished for having abortions, prominent conservatives like Ted Cruz harshly criticized him to the media. And yet, many of these conservatives regularly equate abortion to murder, arguing that life begins at conception. However, conservative politicians often blame doctors for abortions while painting women as victims to avoid alienating female voters. If abortion were really murder like they say it is, Trump’s position would make sense, but these same pro-lifers criticized him when he didn’t use their careful, inoffensive answer. Trump’s honest response reveals these Republicans’ insincerity. On gun control, Trump has exposed more hypocrisy. Trump and most conservative politicians style themselves as strong protectors of the Second Amendment. However, when a petition was signed by 2,000 Republicans—including many Trump supporters—calling for al-
Washingtonian Top Dentist, Dr. Marko, as her patients call her, has combined the art and science of dentistry to deliver extraordinary care in a state of the art facility.
SPECIALIZATION General/Family Dentistry, Cosmetic Dentistry, Botox Therapy, TMJ dysfunction
Dr. Marko performs all aspects of general dentistry including preventive care, fillings, crowns, veneers, whitening, Invisalign and has specialized in more complex dental needs such as cosmetic dentistry, root canals and implants.
DESIGNATIONS, AFFILIATIONS AND AWARDS Washingtonian Top Dentist 2015 Washington’s 2016 The Face of Smile Makeover, American Academy of Facial Esthetics, American Dental Association
Dr. Marko uniquely tailors her treatment to each patient. She is able to conservatively and comprehensively create a beautiful smile while properly addressing dental health and function.
5454 Wisconsin Ave., Suite 835 Chevy Chase, MD 20815 301.652.0656 SmilesOfChevyChase.com
lowing firearms at the Republican National Convention, these same politicians called guns at the convention “unnecessary” and deflected the question by turning it to the Secret Service. If they truly believe open or concealed carry should be allowed in public places, then there is no plausible reason why the convention should be any different. The very Republicans who love to talk about protecting the Second Amendment are too scared of their own base to let them bring these same guns to July’s convention. It pains me to say it, but we have Trump to thank for this exposure. Without the petition—and without Trump—gun-toting politicians could have kept getting away with applause lines about guns while quietly nursing fears of actually confronting an armed Republican electorate. So while I might hate Trump on a personal level, his success has done a major service to the electorate. Now I just have to hope he doesn’t win.
Cartoon by Ramsey Aly
info@smilesofchevychase.com