Honors Comp 3 (2:30-3:30 p.m.): Socratic Circle
For today's first socratic circle we will be breaking into two groups: the first will be our "fishbowl," leading a group discussion about an article from The Atlantic; the second will be our audience, observing how discussion is going and how they feel about points brought up in the conversation.
After twenty minutes, we will switch roles, and group 2 will have their own discussion on an important article from The Atlantic, while group 1 live comments (see instructions below).
Instructions:
Audience members: in the comments section of this post, make thoughtful observations about the conversation taking place in the "fishbowl." Good observations will do the following:
- Identify when you agree/disagree with observations and specifically state why (ASR: Apt Specific Reference).
- Observe what specific group members did that helped to
- "propel" conversation forward,
- respond to their group members,
- and provide thoughtful observations.
Fishbowl members: students who do well in the "fishbowl" will do the following:
- Come to discussion prepared, having read and researched materials beforehand.
- Work with peers to promote a civil, democratic discussion, set clear goals, and establish individual roles.
- Propel conversations forward by posing and asking questions that probe reasoning and ask for evidence.
- Respond thoughtful to diverse perspectives, synthesize (combine) comments, claims, and evidence, resolve contradictions, and investigate meaning.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDrake began by asking Toby what he thought about the article, which helped establish Toby's opinion on the article. Drake also briefly explained the subject.
ReplyDeleteI like how Drake describes the work overall.
ReplyDeleteI think what Ethan said about parents in the article is a good observation
ReplyDeleteI agree with the fact that there is a main point in the article from what I here
ReplyDeleteToby also refuted Daniel by respectfully stating that he disagreed with Daniel's point, then providing a counterexample.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the lack of clarity regarding proficiency-based grading is a bad thing
ReplyDeleteToby effectively analyzes the goal of the article, which is to provide different opinions about standard based education.
ReplyDeleteThey are moving towards a consensus on the stance of the article
ReplyDeleteQuinn mentions the difficulty of applying to colleges that may not understand proficiency based grading.
ReplyDeleteI completely agreed with Quinn when she mentioned the formatting of college applications
ReplyDeleteRachel, Annie, Quinn, and Ethan talk about how standardized learning is meant to make people proficient and ensure that learning is standardized and equal. However, they also state that this approach is having the opposite effect.
ReplyDeletePointing out that this system makes really smart kids seem average which is unfair for them
ReplyDeleteI completely agree
DeleteI also agree. It makes it difficult to stand out.
DeleteI agree with Daniel when he commented that doing the work vs not doing the work will not change your grade that much
ReplyDeleteYes! A widely-implemented system would be a great idea! I feel like their would be more critique as well, so maybe it could get better that way. I don't think the few people using the system are really being heard.
ReplyDelete*there
DeleteThey all seem to be of the opinion that the standards based education system is incomplete and not completing its desired goals and effects.
ReplyDeleteI like how Quinn explains her opinion with example of her old school.
ReplyDeleteMe too. It's a good connection that I think a lot of us can make in our minds.
DeleteQuinn provide an example from her life supporting her point
ReplyDeleteDrake talks about "quality of work" vs "work habits" grade, which was a similar system to the one that I had at my old school, Greely.
ReplyDeleteQuinn and drake are both adding to the conversation by using specific examples from their own schools and connecting the examples to the points of the article
ReplyDeleteRachel points out that the strictness of assignments was slightly lacking at her school. I experienced this too. It's a good connection,
ReplyDeleteDrake is using his own experience about proficiency based grading.
ReplyDeleteRachel points out that late work wasn't as punished under the proficiency based system, which disincentivizes hard work.
ReplyDeleteDrake explains the standards based system well
ReplyDeleteMSSM is not going to go into this system. Alan Whittemore told me that himself.
ReplyDeleteToby points out that this is mainly for sports, not other important jobs like economy
ReplyDeleteToby points out that PBE makes sports more of a differentiation than academics, due to the simple fact of there being only 4 points to assign to hundreds of students.
ReplyDeleteRachel comments that she would not know if she would need to improve her work if she got a 3
ReplyDeleteThe lack of explanation that Rachel is referencing is an excellent point.
ReplyDeleteAnnie points out that the system is not very precise, which I completely agree with
ReplyDeleteI agree as well. It's a bit annoying
DeleteEach person is participating well, and someone jumps in whenever another person leaves off. They all help to propel the conversation forwards. They seem to generally be in consensus about PBE.
ReplyDeleteRachel explains how standards are causing problem to grading.
ReplyDeleteThe group is talking about how a more precise grade. This could be resolved by using half step grades. 0.0, 0.5, 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, 2.5, 3.0, 3.5, and 4.
ReplyDeleteEven so, what would be the judge of the amount of work needed to reach those grades? That's a problem regardless of decimal places.
DeleteThat would be for the teachers/admins of the school to determine.
DeleteEthan gives an anecdote about how imprecise 3 vs 4 is compared to 85 vs 95 or 65 vs 100.
ReplyDeleteI like how Daniel asks the group a question so he can make connections with the rest of the group.
ReplyDeleteDrake refocuses the conversation back to the article after a long tangent by others.
ReplyDeleteI like how Drake makes people to return to their topic.
ReplyDeleteDrake is bringing the topic back to the article as they have been only talking about personal experiences
ReplyDeleteDrake talks about proficiency based learning causing failing students to fall further and further behind. However, Ethan points out that the 0-100 system also suffers from this failure. Perhaps this is a greater problem in the American education system.
ReplyDeleteDaniel gives a vague answer, Drake asks him to elaborate, Daniel elaborates.
ReplyDeleteDrake points out that sometimes students fail but its not their fault and the proficiency scale which is supposed to help in situations like those does not help at all.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI like how Rachel talks about pathos and how it comes into play in the article.
ReplyDeleteI like how Rachel brought up pathos to the conversation. Good connection with what we've learned in class.
ReplyDeleteI really like how Jay started off the conversation with a few in-depth sentences about the article.
ReplyDeleteJonathan used a question to introduce a new topic and spur on the conversation
ReplyDeleteJohnathan introduces a question which is answered by members of his group and propels the conversation forward.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jay when he was talking about reading books because he talks about how reading reinforces the learning we did in class.
ReplyDeleteI like how the group keeps on tying their points and thoughts back to the main topic of the article, and questions that were asked by other group members
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jay's point about content and skills. he gives a good example of reading a book as an assignment.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jay's point about fear of failure, and how it motivates you in school.
ReplyDeleteI like how the group will introduce a quote or a point from the article and then elaborate on that and express their own opinions.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jonathan when he spoke about how our generation with the proficiency-based learning will have a big lapse between school and not having to work, and the real world and actually having to do work.
ReplyDeleteThey not only share some experiences from their previous schools but connect them to the argument.
ReplyDeleteRachel questions Jonathan and the others join to answer it too.
ReplyDeleteThey share stories about their sending schools, and also connect their conversation to what the previous group was discussing.
ReplyDeleteI like how Rachel is questioning Jonathan about what he says instead of agreeing with him right away.
ReplyDeleteJohnathan uses an example from experiences at his sending school to prove his point that standardized grading isn't the same for different subjects(math and English in particular).
ReplyDeleteJay brings up a point from the conversation that the previous group had in order to provide more information to support his argument.
ReplyDeleteWhen the conversation seems like it's beginning to drift away from the article, Jay goes back to the article and brings it back into the conversation.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Jay's point of view on what grading system should be implemented instead of just one or the other with the hybrid habits of work, and an actual 0-100 grading system that has been implemented in some schools.
ReplyDeleteJay goes back to the article and talking about the author to get his group back on track.
ReplyDeleteIt's pretty interesting how the students wonder about what the author's profession is and use information from the article looking for clues to answer this question.
ReplyDeleteNoah brings up his level three question when the conversation starts to die down.
ReplyDeleteI like how after Noah listened for a little bit he used his questions to join the discussion.
ReplyDeleteNoah asks his level three question when the conversation starts to die down.
ReplyDeleteI found Noah's point about why this new system might be being implemented interesting.
ReplyDelete