This paper examines the relationship among behaviorism, constructivism and Socratic pedagogy. Specifically, it asks if a Socratic educator can be a constructivist or a behaviorist. In the first part of the paper, each learning theory, as it relates to the Socratic project, is explained. In the last section, the question of whether or not a Socratic teacher can subscribe to a constructivist or a behaviorist learning theory is addressed. The paper concludes by stating that while Socratic pedagogy shares some similarities with each learning theory, ultimately it is fundamentally incompatible with both.The great triumph of Western intellectual history from the Enlightenment until the beginning of the 20th century rested on its ability to organize the knowledge of the world in a rational way independent of the learner, determined by some structure of the subject. Disciplines were developed, taxonomic schemes established, and all these categories were viewed as components of a vast mechanical machine in which the parts could be explained in terms of their relationship to each other, and each part contributed to making the whole function smoothly. Nowhere in this description does the learner appear. The task of the teacher was to make clear to the learner the working of this machine and any accommodation to the learner was only to account for different appropriate entry points for different learners. (Hein, 1991) in particular) sought to collapse the dualism between subject and object, and they identified acknowledgment of mental states with a dualistic metaphysics. They believed that these sorts of dualisms were unnecessary and artifical distinctions. 7. This was Piaget's criticism of behaviorism. It was a reoccurring theme for Piaget, and can be found in many of his works. 8. The phrasing here becomes problematic because of the obvious relativistic criticisms.

This article addresses and rebuts the claim that the purpose of the Socratic method is to humiliate, shame, and perplex participants. It clarifies pedagogical and exegetical confusions surrounding the Socratic method, what the Socratic method is, what its epistemological ambitions are, and how the historical Socrates likely viewed it. First, this article explains the Socratic method; second, it clarifies a misunderstanding regarding Socrates' role in intentionally perplexing his interlocutors; third, it discusses two different types of perplexity and relates these to philosophical inquiry and dialectical pedagogy; finally, it refutes the claim that those who use the Socratic method intentionally attempt to shame and humiliate students.

Cultivation of a critical social awareness "We understand critical thinking to be purposeful, selfregulatory judgment which results in interpretation, analysis, evaluation, and inference, as well as explanation of the evidential, conceptual, methodological, criteriological, or contextual considerations upon which that judgment is based" (APA, 1990, p. 3). The art or practice of arriving at the truth by the exchange of logical arguments Refutation and cross-examination Serving to refute Given to argument or debate Any reasoning about a moral issue CHAPTER I Socratic Pedagogy, Race, and Power: From People to Propositions20 Leaving aside the blatant (to my eyes at least) problems o f power and dominance o f an elderly Greek citizen teaching a slave boy, this example [the Meno] o f teaching has always left me cold.

No abstract

Constructivist pedagogies cannot achieve their critical thinking ambitions. Constructivism, and constructivist epistemological presuppositions, actively thwarts the critical thinking process. Using Wittgenstein's private language argument, this paper argues that corrective mechanisms—the ability to correct a student's propositions and cognitions against the background of a shared, knowable world—are indispensible to critical thinking. This paper provides concrete examples of actual constructivist practice and shows how a particular constructivist classroom exercise can be modified to incorporate critical thinking elements as detailed by the American Philosophical Association. Finally, the paper states the significance of these arguments, particularly as they extend from the educational arena into the public and governmental domains.