Eliciting Substantive Discussions: Socratic and Divergent Questioning

Rebecca J . Sisk, PhD, RN, CNE

Associate Professor
Chamberlain College of Nursing

Introduction

Both faculty and students participating in online courses are required to make at least a minimum amount
of posts to threaded discussions per week by course policy. Simultaneously, the evidence demonstrates
that the frequency of faculty interaction in discussions is related to both better grades and student
satisfaction (Bedi & Lange, 2007). For faculty, the challenge of facilitating discussions is to encourage
participation with stimulating, thought-provoking questions. For students, stimulating discussions make
meeting course requirements easier. Good questions lead to good discussion responses. The purpose of
this presentation is to describe the potential use of two techniques, Socratic and divergent-thinking
questions, to motivate students, to add depth and breadth to courses, and to help students meet course
objectives. Very little research is available related to Socratic and divergent-thinking questions.
Therefore, in this presentation, examples of Socratic and divergent-thinking questions are presented,
followed by a possible research agenda related to the types of questions that best elicit substantive
discussions.

Theories Related to Online Teaching and Learning

Several theories have been applied to online teaching and learning. With respect to threaded discussions,
adult learning theory and social constructivist theory are especially applicable. According to adult
learning theory (Knowles, Elwood, & Richard, 2005, p. 5), adults are self-directed and want to learn what
is applicable to their real world experiences. The instructor assumes the role of facilitator, the guide on
the side, as opposed to the sage on the stage. In online courses, much of the interaction in threaded
discussions focuses on student experiences related to the topic at hand. The intent is to help students build
knowledge through readings and previous learning and experiences.

In social constructivist theory (Vygotsky, 1962), learning occurs when students are brought together in a
collaborative environment to build knowledge together. Social constructivist learning is learner centered
and includes three basic concepts. First, the zone of proximal development is the stage at which students
are ready to learn. In online courses, this is analogous to the students decision to enter a course ready to
learn and armed with appropriate prerequisites. Scaffolding is the state at which the student learns a new
idea or task. In online learning, scaffolding occurs through readings, assignments, and discussions related
to course objectives. Cooperative learning is the ability of students to collaborate with each other and the
teacher to learn something new, within a socio-cultural context. Threaded discussions are not meant to be
a recitation of facts but instead should help students explore all aspects of a question.

The faculty role is to facilitate the interactions for the good of the entire class. Both students and faculty
grow into a community of scholars. For the faculty member, in addition to letting go of the traditional
lecture/testing format, questioning skills and tools are important to help students develop as learners. Both
critical thinking and divergent thinking skills can be nurtured by faculty in discussions (Kim & Bonk,
2006).

Critical Thinking and Socratic Questioning

Online discussions should promote critical thinking, help students make connections between ideas, and
promote a community of scholars who think critically. For the purpose of this presentation, critical
27th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 1
thinking is defined as the art of analyzing and assessing thinking with a view to improving it (Elder &
Paul, 2009, p. 267). Critical thinking involves not only learning facts and principles but also figuring out
how to analyze, apply, and evaluate knowledge for deeper understandingdigging deeper holes.
According to Dr. Robert Ennis (2010), from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, critical
thinkers are open-minded and well-informed individuals. They are able to (a) judge the credibility of
information; (b) judge the quality of an argument, including its reasons, assumptions, and evidence; (c)
ask appropriate clarifying questions; (d) formulate plausible hypotheses; (e) define terms in a way
appropriate for the context; and (f) develop and defend a reasonable position

Modern Socratic questioning is a process of inductive questioning used to lead a person to learning
successfully through small steps (Maxwell, 2009, para. 5). For faculty, this means helping students gain
knowledge and skills together as they apply what they have learned to their personal and professional
lives. Potentially, a question posed to one student is read and considered by all, stimulating further posts.
Socratic questioning stimulates critical thinking by asking students to think deeper and harder (Paul &
Elder, 2007; Yang, Newby, & Bill, 2005).

Using Socratic questioning helps students focus on reasoning, correlating, and looking at alternatives
rather than mere facts and keep students engaged in the material they are studying (Elder & Paul, 2007).
Several purposes of Socratic questioning have been identified (Changing Minds, 2009; Elder & Paul,
2007). In all, the teacher is playing devils advocate:

Clarifying concepts involves exploring the clarity, precision, and accuracy of information the
student has about the topic and determining how the student defines the concepts. Examples of
clarifying concepts questions include: What do you mean by ...? How about an example of
...? and How are you defining ?
Probing for assumptions involves determining how the student defines concepts and exploring
the students assumptions and point of reference. Examples of probing or assumptions questions
include: What are the authors assumptions here? and What is your belief about ...?
Probing for rationales and evidence involves exploring the students process of coming to a
conclusion. Examples of probing for rationales and evidence questions include What is your
evidence that ...? and Who is your source of information for ...?
Probing for implications involves exploring whether the student is able to see all points of view
and whether the student can infer future events from todays facts. Examples of probing for
implications questions include: What would happen if ...? and How does this build upon what
you learned in other courses?
Questions about the question/issue involve determining the student's agenda. Examples include:
Why is that information important to you? and What are you thinking when you ask that
question?

Divergent Thinking and Divergent Questioning

Twenty-first century complexities mean that students need to be prepared to develop new ideas and work
within a diverse community. Meeting the intellectual and creative challenges of the 21st century
demands using every ounce of creativity available (Siemens, 2008, para. 1). Being able to think
creatively is enhanced through development of divergent thinking skills. Divergent thinking is the ability
to think creatively, including fluency, flexibility, originality, and elaboration (Guilford, 1967). Fluency is
the ability to quickly come up with multiple possible solutions to a problem. Flexibility is the ability to
weigh several options simultaneously. Originality is the ability to think up new ideas. Elaboration is the
ability to carry out new ideas. Divergent thinking involves thinking outside of the box and digging new
holes rather than deeper holes. According to de Bono (2003), critical thinking is reactive, in that it is used
to examine what is, but divergent thinking is proactive, because it is used to derive new ideas. Therefore,
27th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 2
threaded discussion questions that help students examine issues creatively can lead to new learning for
online students.

Divergent thinking requires critical reflection, new ways to look at old issues, and openness to new ideas;
it often occurs within a social context (Freedman, 2010; Hernandez & Varkey, 2008). While critical
thinking is based on logical, left-brained, divergent thinking is based on right-brained thinking. Divergent
thinking is systems thinking, which is complex and requires both reasoning and imagination.
Multiple ideas have been posed to encourage divergent thinking. Examples that can easily be applied to
threaded discussions are brainstorming (searching for all possible solutions to a problem), rearranging
ideas (What if questions), walking in someone elses shoes, and connecting unlike ideas. An example of
the latter is displayed in Table 1, which provides ideas for combining these examples of divergent
questioning with Socratic questioning. In one of the few studies done on lateral thinking in threaded
discussions (Bradley, Thom, Hayes, & Hay, 2008), brainstorming improved both the quantity and quality
of student responses.

How do Socratic and divergent questions apply to threaded discussions? The progression from adult
learning to construction of knowledge in online learning to Socratic and divergent questioning is
displayed in Figure 1.

These suggestions for questioning in threaded discussions are untested. Therefore, research is needed on
the following research agenda, which is merely a beginning:
Comparison of Socratic questioning, divergent questioning, combined Socratic and divergent
questioning, and no special form of questioning on student participation, quality of posts, and
student interaction.
Determining whether a faculty seminar on the use of Socratic and divergent questioning improves
student participation, quality of posts, and student interaction.
Determining whether Socratic questioning improves critical thinking as well as threaded
discussion and overall course grades.
Determine whether divergent questioning produces increased scores on frequency of posts and
cultural competency or other measures of broad-mindedness.


27th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 3
Table 1. Relationships Between Socratic Questions and Divergent Thinking Questions
Type of divergent thinking question
Type of
Socratic
question
Brainstorming/
discovering
attributes of a
situation
Rearranging
ideas
Walking in
someone else's
shoes
Connecting
unlike ideas
Clarifying
concepts
What are all the
possible meanings
of ...?
What if you
define X as ...?
How would (fish
in the ocean,
people from
another culture,
etc.) define this
concept?
How is X similar
to Y (a widely
different idea or
perspective)?
Probing for
assumptions
What are all the
possible
assumptions behind
this idea?
What if you were
going by ...'s
assumptions?
What kind of
assumptions
would a ... have
about this
phenomenon?
What are you
assuming about X
in comparison to
Y?
Probing for
rationale
and
evidence
What are all the
possible reasons for
...?
What if the
evidence pointed
another way?
What evidence do
you think ... has
for their
perspective?
How would
(professional
group) justify this
stance as opposed
to (another
professional
group)?
Questioning
viewpoints
Who are all the
players who may be
affecting this issue?
What if (social
group) started to
believe ...?
What if we
substitute XX
with Y?
What do you
think would be
the (professional
organization)'s
stance on this
issue?
What would (an
animal, a person
from a different
age group, etc.)
think about this
idea as opposed to
people in your
profession?
Probing
implications
What are all of the
possible
implications of ...?
What would ...'s
opinion be about
this issue?
How would this
phenomenon
affect (other
professions or
groups)?
If this were to
happen to ... what
would be the
effect?
Questions
concerning
the question
What are the
possible reasons
why someone
would ask this
question?
Can you ask that
question in
another way?
How would ... ask
that question?
What if you asked
this question from
the perspective of
a (lobster,
kangaroo,
Christmas
cactus)?

27th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 4
References

Bedi, K., & Lange, H. (2007, December). The impact of faculty interaction on the learning experiences
and outcomes of online learners. Procedings ascilite 2007, Singapore.
Bradley, M. E., Thom, L. R., Hayes, J ., & Hay, C. (2008). Ask and you will receive: How question type
influences quantity and quality of online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology,
39(5), 888-900.
Changing Minds (2009). Socratic questions. Retrieved from
http://changingminds.org/techniques/questioning/socratic_questions.htm
deBono, E. (2003). Critical thinking is not enough. Educational Leadership, 42(1), 10-17.
Elder, L. & Paul, R. (2007). Critical thinking: The art of Socratic questioning, Part II. Journal of
Developmental Education, 31(2), 3-5
Elder, L. & Paul, R. (2009). Close reading, substantive writing and critical thinking: Foundational skills
essential to the educated mind. Gifted Education International, 25, 286-295.
Ennis, R. L. (2010). A streamlined conception of critical thinking. Retrieved from
http://criticalthinking.net/definition.html
Freedman, K. (2010). Rethinking creativity. Art Education, 63(3), 8-15.
Guilford, J . P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Hernandez, J . S., & Varkey, P. (2008). Vertical versus lateral thinking. The Physician Executive, 34(3),
26-28.
Kim, K. & Bonk, C. (2006). The future of online teaching and learning in higher education: The survey
says Educause Quarterly, 29(4), 22-30.
Knowles, M. S., Elwood, F. H., & Richard, A. S. (2005). The adult learner: The definitive classic in
adult education and human resource development (6
th
ed.). San Diego, CA: Elsevier.
Maxwell, M. (2009). Introduction to the Socratic method and its effect on critical thinking. Retrieved
from http://www.socraticmethod.net/
Paul, R. & Elder, L. (2007). Critical thinking: The art of Socratic questioning, part III. Journal of
Developmental Education, 31(3), 34-35.
Siemens, G. (2008). Boundary-less living, working, and learning. Retrieved from
http://www.elearnspace.org/blog/2008/01/08/boundary-less-living-working-and-learning/
Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Yang, Y. C., Newby, T. J ., & Bill, R. L. (2005). Using Socratic questioning to promote critical thinking
skills through asynchronous discussion forms in distance learning environments. The American
Journal of Distance Education, 19(3), 163-181.

About the Presenter

Rebecca J. Sisk, Ph.D., RN, CNE, is an Associate Professor at Chamberlain College of Nursing, Devry
University. She has taught as an adjunct faculty member for several online schools and has many years of
experience in nursing education. She has designed and implemented both undergraduate and graduate
courses, has a certificate in online teaching from Indiana University, and is a National League for Nursing
Certified Nurse Educator.

Address: 7214 West Legion Hall Road
Dunlap, IL 61525
Phone: 309-472-2824
Email: rsisk@chamberlain.edu
27th Annual Conference on Distance Teaching & Learning For more resources: http://www.uwex.edu/disted/conference
Copyright 2011 The Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System 5