A Dialogic Path to Literary Mastery: Implementing Socratic Seminar in University-Level Literature Classes
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.63236/injeep.1.1.1Keywords:
critical thinking, literary analysis, qualitative research, Socratic Seminar, university educationAbstract
The Socratic seminar has emerged as an effective pedagogical approach for enhancing critical engagement in university-level literature classes. Rooted in dialogic interaction, this method fosters analytical reasoning, interpretative depth, and collaborative inquiry. This study explores the implementation of the Socratic seminar in literature courses, examining its impact on students’ textual comprehension and critical thinking skills. Employing a qualitative research design, data were collected through classroom observations, reflective journals, and semi-structured interviews with students and lecturers. Findings indicate that structured dialogue facilitates deeper engagement with literary texts, enabling students to construct nuanced interpretations and articulate reasoned arguments. Furthermore, the seminar format encourages active participation and a sense of intellectual community, reinforcing literary appreciation and academic discourse. However, challenges such as uneven participation and the need for preparatory guidance highlight areas for refinement in instructional practices. These findings contribute to the discourse on innovative literature pedagogy, advocating for a more interactive and student-centered approach to literary studies. Future research could explore interdisciplinary applications of the Socratic seminar to further enhance its pedagogical value.
Saksono, S. T., Hanifa, S, Inayati, R., Harits, I. W., Suryani, S., Roifah, M., & Puspitasi, D. (2025). A dialogic path to literary mastery: Implementing Socratic seminar in university-level literature classes. International Journal of Education and Emerging Practices, 1(1), 1-16. https://doi.org/10.63236/injeep.1.1.1
References
Acim, R. (2018). The Socratic method of instruction: An experience with a reading comprehension course. Journal of Educational Research and Practice, 8(1).
Alexander, R. J. (2020). A dialogic teaching companion. Routledge.
Ayton, D. (2024). Qualitative research. Monash University.
Bahtiyar, A., & Can, B. (2021). The views of Science and Art Center (SAC) students regarding Socratic inquiry seminars. Eğitimde Nitel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 21(28), 1–21. https://doi.org/10.14689/enad.28.1
Cananau, I., Edling, S., & Haglund, B. (2025). Critical thinking in preparation for student teachers’ professional practice: A case study of critical thinking conceptions in policy documents framing teaching placement at a Swedish university. Teaching and Teacher Education, 153, 104816-. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2024.104816
Chiang-Lopez, C., & Núñez, V. (2024). Rethinking Socratic seminars: Making small changes for larger impact. Sociological Focus (Kent, Ohio), 57(1), 6–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/00380237.2023.2293976
Griswold, J., Shaw, L., & Munn, M. (2017). Socratic seminar with data: A strategy to support student discourse and understanding. The American Biology Teacher, 79(6), 492–495. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2017.79.6.492
He, J., Ren, S., & Zhang, D. (2024). The relationship between personal-collaborative motivation profiles and students’ performance in collaborative problem solving. Large-Scale Assessments in Education, 12(1), 34–19. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40536-024-00219-6
Jakonen, T. (2020). Professional embodiment: Walking, re-engagement of desk interactions, and provision of instruction during classroom rounds. Applied Linguistics, 41(2), 161–184. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy034
Katsara, O., & De Witte, K. (2019). How to use Socratic questioning in order to promote adults’ self-directed learning. Studies in the Education of Adults, 51(1), 109–129. https://doi.org/10.1080/02660830.2018.1526446
Leese, B., & Rosen, A. M. (2024). Increasing inclusion in classroom discussion: The raised block as a classroom response system in international studies. International Studies Perspectives, ekae004. https://doi.org/10.1093/isp/ekae004
Legath, N. E. (2023). The effects of participation in Socratic seminar on critical-thinking skills [ProQuest Dissertations & Theses]. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2833856770?pq-origsite=primo
Magill, K., & Harrelson Magill, L. (2023). Socratic seminar: A transformational approach to vertical and horizontal historical analysis. Social Studies Research & Practice, 18(1), 47–64. https://doi.org/10.1108/SSRP-11-2022-0028
Manalo, E. (2020). Deeper learning, dialogic learning, and critical thinking: Research-based strategies for the classroom, Vol. 1. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429323058
Myren-Svelstad, P. E. (2024). Exploring poetry in dialogue: Learning as sustainable development in the literary classroom. ISLE: Interdisciplinary Studies in Literature and Environment, 31(3), 672–693. https://doi.org/10.1093/isle/isad003
Pavlovskij, A. I., & Pavlovskaya, O. V. (2024). Assessment of students’ critical thinking maturity in the process of teaching philosophy. Obrazovanie i Nauka, 26(5), 40–66. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2024-5-40-66
Pettersson, H. (2023). From critical thinking to criticality and back again. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 57(2), 478–494. https://doi.org/10.1093/jopedu/qhad021
Robinson, L. (2023). To what extent do Socratic seminar activities encourage engagement in Classical Civilisation lessons? Journal of Classics Teaching, 24(47), 65–71. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2058631022000459
Sanders, E., Zuiker, S., Jordan, M., & Henderson, J. B. (2019). Increasing student engagement and student voice through collaborative reflection. Arizona State University. https://keep.lib.asu.edu/items/157654
Xhomara, N. (2022). Critical thinking: Student-centred teaching approach and personalised learning, as well as previous education achievements, contribute to critical thinking skills of students. International Journal of Learning and Change, 14(1), 101-. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJLC.2022.119513
Yang, Z., & Brindley, S. (2023). Engaging students in dialogic interactions through questioning. ELT Journal, 77(2), 217–226. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccac021
Zhang, Z., Bekker, T., Markopoulos, P., & Skovbjerg, H. M. (2024). Supporting and understanding students’ collaborative reflection-in-action during design-based learning. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 34(1), 307–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-023-09814-0
Downloads
Published
Data Availability Statement
The data used in this study are not publicly available due to institutional policies but can be obtained from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
