Dialogue as a form of teaching

Abstract

This study starts off with a brief outline of the way education with special emphasis on PSD, is related to dialogue. The focus is on the methodology PSD adopts, especially since the emphasis behind this subject is on dialogue, or as often referred to in PSD manuals, 'processing'. The study moves on to evaluate dialogue and compares two aspects of dialogue to PSD. One view is 'divergent', as proposed by Bohm and Gadamer and the other view associated with the Socratic dialogue, is 'convergent'. Both these opposing views on dialogue are analyzed within the PSD framework. The study moves on to question whether the Socratic Method is the best method to be adopted in PSD, especially due to its directive nature. The question here is whether students in PSD are really being educated or whether they are being in Freire's words, 'domesticated', or even worse manipulated. In line with the divergent form of dialogue, the dialogic classroom with the classroom as a space that enables free dialogue, is evaluated. However it is concluded that this classroom also has its shortcomings especially since it can leave the student in a status quo; the student is always in dialogue but never changing and learning. Learning should be about change and it is this that makes this study conclude that the Socratic Method, despite its weaknesses, can be more suitable in a value laden subject such as PSD. Within a PSD framework, the teacher, while not totally directive, guides the student towards a learning point and turns the classroom into a community of inquiry.