Proposal Title

The Reflective Design Cycle: Plan, Execute, Reflect

Session Type

Interactive Presentation

Session Location

University Hall, ADP Center 1120

Start Date

30-5-2019 2:15 PM

End Date

30-5-2019 3:00 PM

Brief Abstract

This session will overview the concept of reflective practice relating to design, including “reflection-in-action”, “reflection-on-action”, and “frame analysis”, and provide examples of each. We will then consider how these practices can be applied to learning design and specifically to the common issues dealing with student group formation and process.

Proposal

In 1983 Donald Schon introduced his concept of reflective practice of professional service-based careers in his book The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Schon places reflection at the core of an informed professional practice (1983). He posits that professional practitioners (doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc.) are unique in three ways:

  • there are generally multiple approaches to a solution of their problem

  • identifying the problem is often as much a part of the process as solving it

  • they “can recognize phenomena…for which he cannot give a reasonably accurate or complete description” (1983, p. 49).

The first part of this session will briefly overview Schon’s concepts of “reflection-in-action”, “reflection-on-action”, and “frame analysis”, and provide examples of each from contemporary education research.

The second part of this session will provide for open discussion on how Schon’s practices can be applied to learning design and examples will be provided of each. The final portion of this session will look at the issue of student group formation and process and applying the practices of Schon’s work on reflection. (Kelton, 2018)

Professional practitioners identify solutions by reflecting on them in order to make sense of problems (1983, p. 50). In this reflective process Schon differentiates between the immediate reflection one performs while actions take place (reflection-in-action) compared to reflecting in retrospect (reflection-on-action).

The temporal immediacy of reflection-in-action can be exemplified by structural changes a teacher might make during a class when the planned activities do not yield the desired result. The timing of reflection-in-action allows for an impact in situ. For example, for one class most of the students did not read the required assignment. Instead of the planned class discussion on a central theme in the reading, the instructor decides to use group work to reinforce the theme.

Reflection-on-action takes place after an event, thus giving the practitioner a gap, or pause, after the event for the reflective process (Schon, 1983, Vagle, 2006) . Building on the above example, in response to a shrinking percentage of students not completing readings assigned outside of class, the instructor decides, post-course, to replace the class discussion of readings with an in-class group assignment that takes the same amount of time as the discussion, but fosters engagement with the students.

Schon refers to reflection-on-action research, formal or otherwise, as including a process called “frame analysis” (1983, p. 309) He defines frame analysis as “the study of the ways in which practitioners frame problems and roles”, believing that the embarking on the activity alone opens practitioners up to the possibility of, and practice of, change through reflecting on the ways in which s/he (the practitioner) frames things (1983, p. 309).

Schon’s work on reflective practice has been cited with ongoing and growing consistency since its publication and is increasingly being used as a theoretical lens for pedagogy (Vagle, 2006). From studies on phenomenology of practice in middle schools (Vagle, 2006) to sports coaching (Collins & Collins, 2015), Schon’s call-to-action on reflection both in- and on-action continues to resonate.

Although no formal theoretical name has been applied, any search for “reflective theory” returns to Schon’s work and reflective practice. Research has been done on the use of reflection for school improvement in Singapore (Tan, 2008) and to improve individual student learning for English as a Second Language teachers in Iraq (Noormohammadi, 2014). A group of grade school teachers used reflective practice as a means of personal professional development (Glazer, Abbot, & Harris,2000) and a librarian used reflective practice to examine the role of the librarian in today’s academic economy (Macdonald, 2009)

Teachers are reflective in their practices already, fitting into Schon’s definition of Reflective Practice (1982). Reflective theory, as seen in this dissertation, as well as the examples above, uses Schon’s Reflective Practice as a lens through which to examine an issue, or problem. The results of these research projects shed light on individual small areas of a growing research agenda focused on the effectiveness, and importance, of reflection in the assessment and evaluation cycle, irrespective of the discipline. (Kelton, 2018)

Collins, L. & Collins, D. (2015). Integration of professional judgement and decision-making in high-level adventure sports coaching practice, Journal of Sports Sciences, 33:6,622-633, DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2014.953980

Glazer, C., Abbott, L., & Harris, J. (2004). A teacher‐developed process for collaborative professional reflection, Reflective Practice, 5:1, 33-46, DOI: 10.1080/1462394032000169947

Kelton, A.J. (2018). Formation and Composition of Student Groups as a Teaching Methodology (Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and These database (UMI No. XXXXXXX)

Macdonald, K. (2009). Out of the boot camp and into the chrysalis: a reflective practice case study, The Australian Library Journal, 58:1, 17-27, DOI: 10.1080/00049670.2009.10735832

Noormohammadi, S. (2014). Teacher reflection and its relation to teacher efficacy and autonomy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1380-1389.

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tan, C. (2008) Improving schools through reflection for teachers: lessons from Singapore, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19:2, 225-238, DOI: 10.1080/09243450802047931

Vagle, M. D. (2006). Dignity and Democracy: An Exploration of Middle School Teachers’ Pedagogy, RMLE Online, 29:8, 1-17, DOI: 10.1080/19404476.2006.11462031

Vagle, M. D. (2010). Re‐framing Schön's call for a phenomenology of practice: a post‐intentional approach. Reflective Practice, 11(3), 393-407.

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
May 30th, 2:15 PM May 30th, 3:00 PM

The Reflective Design Cycle: Plan, Execute, Reflect

University Hall, ADP Center 1120

In 1983 Donald Schon introduced his concept of reflective practice of professional service-based careers in his book The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Schon places reflection at the core of an informed professional practice (1983). He posits that professional practitioners (doctors, lawyers, teachers, etc.) are unique in three ways:

  • there are generally multiple approaches to a solution of their problem

  • identifying the problem is often as much a part of the process as solving it

  • they “can recognize phenomena…for which he cannot give a reasonably accurate or complete description” (1983, p. 49).

The first part of this session will briefly overview Schon’s concepts of “reflection-in-action”, “reflection-on-action”, and “frame analysis”, and provide examples of each from contemporary education research.

The second part of this session will provide for open discussion on how Schon’s practices can be applied to learning design and examples will be provided of each. The final portion of this session will look at the issue of student group formation and process and applying the practices of Schon’s work on reflection. (Kelton, 2018)

Professional practitioners identify solutions by reflecting on them in order to make sense of problems (1983, p. 50). In this reflective process Schon differentiates between the immediate reflection one performs while actions take place (reflection-in-action) compared to reflecting in retrospect (reflection-on-action).

The temporal immediacy of reflection-in-action can be exemplified by structural changes a teacher might make during a class when the planned activities do not yield the desired result. The timing of reflection-in-action allows for an impact in situ. For example, for one class most of the students did not read the required assignment. Instead of the planned class discussion on a central theme in the reading, the instructor decides to use group work to reinforce the theme.

Reflection-on-action takes place after an event, thus giving the practitioner a gap, or pause, after the event for the reflective process (Schon, 1983, Vagle, 2006) . Building on the above example, in response to a shrinking percentage of students not completing readings assigned outside of class, the instructor decides, post-course, to replace the class discussion of readings with an in-class group assignment that takes the same amount of time as the discussion, but fosters engagement with the students.

Schon refers to reflection-on-action research, formal or otherwise, as including a process called “frame analysis” (1983, p. 309) He defines frame analysis as “the study of the ways in which practitioners frame problems and roles”, believing that the embarking on the activity alone opens practitioners up to the possibility of, and practice of, change through reflecting on the ways in which s/he (the practitioner) frames things (1983, p. 309).

Schon’s work on reflective practice has been cited with ongoing and growing consistency since its publication and is increasingly being used as a theoretical lens for pedagogy (Vagle, 2006). From studies on phenomenology of practice in middle schools (Vagle, 2006) to sports coaching (Collins & Collins, 2015), Schon’s call-to-action on reflection both in- and on-action continues to resonate.

Although no formal theoretical name has been applied, any search for “reflective theory” returns to Schon’s work and reflective practice. Research has been done on the use of reflection for school improvement in Singapore (Tan, 2008) and to improve individual student learning for English as a Second Language teachers in Iraq (Noormohammadi, 2014). A group of grade school teachers used reflective practice as a means of personal professional development (Glazer, Abbot, & Harris,2000) and a librarian used reflective practice to examine the role of the librarian in today’s academic economy (Macdonald, 2009)

Teachers are reflective in their practices already, fitting into Schon’s definition of Reflective Practice (1982). Reflective theory, as seen in this dissertation, as well as the examples above, uses Schon’s Reflective Practice as a lens through which to examine an issue, or problem. The results of these research projects shed light on individual small areas of a growing research agenda focused on the effectiveness, and importance, of reflection in the assessment and evaluation cycle, irrespective of the discipline. (Kelton, 2018)

Collins, L. & Collins, D. (2015). Integration of professional judgement and decision-making in high-level adventure sports coaching practice, Journal of Sports Sciences, 33:6,622-633, DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2014.953980

Glazer, C., Abbott, L., & Harris, J. (2004). A teacher‐developed process for collaborative professional reflection, Reflective Practice, 5:1, 33-46, DOI: 10.1080/1462394032000169947

Kelton, A.J. (2018). Formation and Composition of Student Groups as a Teaching Methodology (Dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and These database (UMI No. XXXXXXX)

Macdonald, K. (2009). Out of the boot camp and into the chrysalis: a reflective practice case study, The Australian Library Journal, 58:1, 17-27, DOI: 10.1080/00049670.2009.10735832

Noormohammadi, S. (2014). Teacher reflection and its relation to teacher efficacy and autonomy. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1380-1389.

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.

Schon, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Tan, C. (2008) Improving schools through reflection for teachers: lessons from Singapore, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 19:2, 225-238, DOI: 10.1080/09243450802047931

Vagle, M. D. (2006). Dignity and Democracy: An Exploration of Middle School Teachers’ Pedagogy, RMLE Online, 29:8, 1-17, DOI: 10.1080/19404476.2006.11462031

Vagle, M. D. (2010). Re‐framing Schön's call for a phenomenology of practice: a post‐intentional approach. Reflective Practice, 11(3), 393-407.