Giving the right gift

Which gifts to give?
SAC or Socratic Seminar
Do you remember birthday parties from your childhood? In the "old days" before gift cards, each of us would have to shop around and purchase a gift for our friends on their birthday. We would have to consider what they liked, what they wanted, and what we could afford to buy. We also would have to look around and see what was available and eventually choose a gift that would match what we wanted to give our friend. A wise choice would show that we knew the person well and that we valued him/her as an important part of our lives. A further personal touch in a gift allowed for anticipation of future growth in the friendship. (What message, then, does a gift card give?) As educators, we often have to make the same types of decisions when we plan lessons for our classes.
Choices, choices, choices...how do we make the right ones for our students? In choosing to have students work cooperatively on a controversial task, instructors have two popular choices: Structured Academic Controversy or Socratic Seminar. But which strategy is the most appropriate for a particular learning task?
In Socratic Seminar, the entire group begins with the same text and then explores interpretations and divergent areas that may lead to insight about its meaning and application. The free exchange of ideas between group members is meant to elicit higher levels of thinking in Bloom's taxonomy. Through this exchange, each member may gain the perspective of how his or her view of the text may be either more singular or pluralistic in reference to a peer group.
In SAC, on the other hand, both groups may research their own resources, but must be willing to exchange these to offer their peers an opportunity to explore the reverse position. By requiring each half of a group to argue for and against both sides of a potential controversy, they gain the experience of synthesis of an argument twice, as well as a forced perspective and point of view that may be antithetical to their own. However, it is the final step that distinguishes SAC from Socratic Seminar in that the group, albeit a small one, must come to some type of consensus at the conclusion of SAC. This is not a requirement of Socratic Seminar.
Now, with this brief background, an instructor must first decide if he or she wants or expects the learners or participants to come to a consensus about a topic or idea. If not, then Socratic Seminar may be more appropriate. However, the consensus required in SAC may be considered arbitrary or temporary until the group has additional time to research a topic in more detail, so it could also be used as a springboard for further research. Socratic Seminar, on the other hand, could be used to explore a wider diversity of perspectives that may be present in a larger group or to highlight particular aspects of a choice or decision that offer more than two choices. In these complex situations, the Socratic Seminar may not offer a consensus, but can be quite successful at providing the raw material for the various constituents of a complex concept.
The need for diverse perspectives could also determine which of these two cooperative learning strategies is most effective in a particular situation. If one of the learning goals is to explore the widest possible variety of options, then Socratic Seminar may provide this wide view. If, however, one wishes to delve much deeper into two particular perspectives, then SAC will be the better choice. In either case, the quantity of perspectives or amount of depth will depend at least in part on the learners and the scaffolding provided by the instructor, so the amount of perspective and intended depth should be carefully considered prior to implementation of either strategy.
Similar consideration should be given to the amount of interactive social skills necessary to achieve the maximum level of Bloom's taxonomic thinking. Both strategies can get learners to higher levels, but SAC will require the teams to utilize sophisticated argumentative skills based on particular types of data, while the Socratic seminar may allow for more personal testimonies during group interaction. SAC typically stresses the researched amount of support for various positions and complexities of each side of a topic, while Socratic seminar may allow for more singular interpretation of particular portions of a common text. In terms of the Six-hats strategy, the SAC leans more towards the black and white hats, while the Socratic seminar allows more red, green, and yellow. Both would offer opportunities for blue hat thinking, although SAC requires Green hat synthesis in its consensus as well as particular analysis of both positions from a third higher perspective. Socratic seminar allows blue hat thinkers to collect and interpret a wider variety of positions or ideas, but may not necessarily encourage as much green hat thinking beyond what is presented in the text.
Furthermore, a SAC typically lends itself well to a topic with two strong opposing positions, while Socratic Seminars are usually utilized as a method to explore a variety of interpretations of one particular text or idea. As an instructor, one should consider carefully the goals and objectives of a particular topic prior to placing one's students into either strategic path. In terms of today's modern world, we could consider SAC as more digital in nature with two particular polarizing positions, while Socratic Seminar is more analog with a flowing stream of fluctuating ideas. Both have a place in cooperative learning, but one must choose wisely to insure that there is a good fit for the one who is "gifted"... One must give the best gift that keeps on giving, and if it fits, then the celebration of learning will continue and grow. Now...who wants cake and ice cream?