North American higher education finds itself on the horns of a dilemma. On the one hand, it accepts droves of freshmen who equate learning with rote memorization and who correlate achievement with the ability to pass narrowly focused standardized tests. On the other hand, it is expected to contribute to the country's cultural and economic vibrancy by graduating engaged citizens and creative professionals. After contextualizing its desirability and the support for its efficacy, this paper discusses how one pedagogical technique - the classroom critique - can help higher education to resolve the discrepancy between the improperly prepared student and the excellence a college education is expected to impart. The author suggests that this neo-Socratic method can not only help to correct previous educational deficiencies but can also nurture the civic and creative skills necessary to a democratic society and required by a competitive business community.
CoeymanM. (2003), ‘Twenty years after “A Nation at Risk”’, Christian Science Monitor, www.csmonitor.com, retrieved 30 September 2006.
7.
CooperL. (1995), ‘Cooperative learning and critical thinking’Teaching of Psychology, Vol 22, No 1, pp 7–8.
8.
DewyJ. (1910), How We Think, Dover, Mineola, NY, 1997.
9.
ElfandA. (1990), A History of Art Education, Teachers College Press, New York.
10.
GarlikovR. (undated), ‘The Socratic method: Teaching by asking instead of by telling’, www.garlikov.com, retrieved 13 August 2006.
11.
GiancarloC.FacioneP. (2001), ‘A look across four years at the disposition towards critical thinking among undergraduate students’Journal of General Education, Vol 50, No 1, pp 29–55.
12.
HakeR. (1998), ‘Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of mechanics test data for introductory physics courses’, American Journal of Physics, Vol 66, No 1, pp 64–71.
13.
HeubertJ.P.HauserR.M., eds (1999), High Stakes: Testing for Tracking, Promotion, and Graduation, Committee on Appropriate Test Use, National Research Council, Washington, DC. Material cited from the PDF version available from the National Academies Press at www.nap.edu.
14.
HollanderJ. (2002), ‘Learning to discuss: Strategies for improving the quality of class discussion, Teaching Psychology, Vol 30, pp 317–327.
15.
HuangW. (2005), ‘The Socratic method in medicine: The labor of delivery medical truths’, Family Medicine, Vol 37, No 8, pp 537–539.
16.
KemberD.GowL. (1994), ‘Orientations to teaching and their effect on the quality of student learning’, Journal of Higher Education, Vol 65, No 1, pp 58–74.
17.
KenskiH.KenskiM. (1975), ‘Teaching political development at American colleges and universities: A survey’, Western Political Quarterly, Vol 28, No 3, pp 567–578.
18.
LampertN. (2006), ‘Critical thinking dispositions as an outcome of art education’, Studies in Art Education, Vol 47, No 3, pp 215–228.
19.
McDadeS. (1995), ‘Case study pedagogy to advance critical thinking’, Teaching of Psychology, Vol 22, No 1, pp 9–10.
20.
McNeilL.M. (2000), Contradictions of School Reform, Routledge, New York.
21.
National Commission on Excellence in Education (1983), A Nation at Risk: The Imperative for education reform, www.ed.gov/pubs/NatAtRisk/index.html, retrieved 15 August 2006.
22.
OrfieldG.KornhaberM.L., eds (2001), Raising Standards or Raising Barriers? Inequality and High-Stakes Testing in Public Education, Century Foundation Press, New York.
23.
OverholserJ. (1992), ‘Socrates in the classroom’, College Teaching, Vol 40, No 1, pp 14–19.
24.
ParaskevasA.WickensE. (2003), ‘Andragogy and the Socratic method: The adult learner perspective’, Journal of Hospitality, Leisure, Sport & Tourism Education, Vol 2, No 2, pp 4–14.
25.
ParisS.G. (2000), ‘Trojan horse in the schoolyard: The hidden threats in high-stakes testing’, Issues in Education, Vol 6, Nos 1 and 2, pp 1–16.
26.
PercyC. (2003), ‘Critical absence versus critical engagement: Problematics of the crit in design learning and teaching’, Art, Design & Communication in Higher Education, Vol 2, No 3, pp 143–154.
27.
PiagetJ. (1961), The Psychology of the Child, Basic Books, New York.
28.
PolyaniM. (1962), ‘Tracing knowing: Its bearing on some problems of philosophy’, Review of Modern Physics, Vol 34.
29.
PrinceM.FelderR. (2006), ‘Inductive teaching and learning methods: Definitions, comparisons, and research bases’, Journal of Engineering Education, Vol 95, No 2, pp 123–138.
30.
RauW.HeylB. (1990), ‘Humanizing the college classroom: Collaborate learning and social organization among students’, Teaching Sociology, Vol 18, pp 141–155.
31.
ReichR. (1998), ‘Confusion about the Socratic method: Socratic paradoxes and contemporary invocations of Socrates’, Philosophy of Education, www.ed.uiuc.edu, retrieved 8 August 2006.
32.
RichmondW. (2001), ‘A request: Your reflections on the classroom critique’, www.commarts.com, retrieved 11 August 2006.
33.
RobinsonR. (1971), ‘Elenchus’, in VlastosB, ed, The Philosophy of Socrates, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, IN, pp 90–91
34.
RubinL.HebertC. (1998), ‘Model for active learning: Collaborative peer teaching’, College Teaching, Vol 46, No 1, pp 26–30.
35.
SacksP. (1999), Standardized Minds: The High Price of America's Testing Culture and What We Can Do to Change It, Perseus Books, Cambridge, MA.
SheldonK.M.BiddleB.J. (1998), Research and Evaluation in Education and the Social Sciences, Allyn and Bacon, Needham Heights, MA.
39.
SiegesmundR. (1998), ‘Why do we teach art today? Conceptions of art education and their justification’, Studies in Art Education, Vol 39, No 3, pp 197–214.
40.
VenturelliS. (undated), ‘From the information economy to the creative economy: Moving culture to the center of international public policy’, Cultural Comment Series, Center for Arts and Culture, www.culturalpolicy.org, retrieved 16 August 2006.
41.
WestheimerJ.KahneJ. (2003), ‘Reconnecting education to democracy: Democratic dialogue’, Phi Delta Kappan, Vol 85, No 1, www.pdkintl.org, retrieved 7 November 2006.
42.
WorsfoldV. (1999), ‘Liberal education and moral education’, Perspectives, Vol 29, No 22.
