Dear John, Peter and all
The friendly and supportive character of this list is one of its great strengths.
Sensitivity to each other's views and feelings, and general politeness are very important online in order for us to maintain an atmosphere in which people feel free to express their views and further our understandings of LD.
I think it's also important, however, that a certain level of robustness is maintained. Whilst treating each other with respect, it should be perfectly fine for us to disagree and express varying points of view.
In my opinion this is what was happening in John Cowan's recent post responding to Peter.
John expressed a view deriving from his personal experiences relevant to reflection that was different to, but did not necessarily contradict or undermine the approach for promoting reflection by students (Driscoll's 3 questions) expressed by Peter.
In my view both Peter and John's posts are valuable and there is certainly no need for John to withdraw his!
Best wishes to all
John
John Hilsdon
Listowner LDHEN
On 6 May 2013, at 08:08, "Cowan, John" <[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>> wrote:
Please withdraw this posting which Peter found hurtful.
Yours aye
John
________________________________
From: learning development in higher education network [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] on behalf of Cowan, John [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: 02 May 2013 16:08
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Driscoll's three questions
Mm. Not sure about this, Peter. It's a neat and succinct summary. But some of my most creative reflections have begun just from a question rather than analysis of an experience.
I recall an Ed Tech workshop at Bath in 1971. I was asked about my plans by a man Strum from Monterey. I launched into an account of well-formulated plans. He interrupted me: "John, what's the least effective part of your course for your engineering students?" Without hesitation I replied that it was what we called tutorials: "Worked Example classes." "Why don't you begin there?" he asked, and there was a long silence, then I went off to bed, pondering in deep reflection, and next morning knew I should begin there, and how I should begin.
Yours aye
John
________________________________
From: learning development in higher education network [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>] on behalf of Peter Samuels [[log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>]
Sent: 02 May 2013 14:30
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Changing topic: This may seem inappropriate, but I'd welcome advice from some on this busy list
Dear John,
I like Driscoll’s “what, so what, now what” model of reflective practice:
· What? A description of the experience
· So What? An analysis of the experience
· Now What? Proposed action
See Driscoll, J. (1994) Reflective practice for practise. Senior Nurse 13(7), 47-50.
Dr. Peter Samuels, MA, PG Cert MS DD HE/FE
Academic Skills Tutor
Centre for Academic Success
Library and Learning Resources
Birmingham City University
City North Campus
Perry Barr
Birmingham
B42 2SU
Tel. 0121 331 5687
http://library.bcu.ac.uk/learner/
From: learning development in higher education network [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Cowan, John
Sent: 02 May 2013 14:11
To: [log in to unmask]<mailto:[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Changing topic: This may seem inappropriate, but I'd welcome advice from some on this busy list
“What’s the difference between analytic review and reflection?”
A participant posed this question during a conference call in a postgraduate course on higher education. It was apparently prompted by the demand for participants to provide an analytic review of their learning from the course, and to be reflective in so doing. Assembling an adequate answer to her question has troubled me for more than a year. My thinking has centred on two examples from my own subsequent experience which sum up for me the distinction between the two processes.
I felt I was being analytic when I undertook a literature survey on a topic which concerned me at that time, seeking to identify outstanding issues in this field. I thought I was being reflective when as a reviewer of drafts submitted to an educational journal, I chanced on an interesting innovation and thought: “Could we do that, to advantage, in our course?”
I made a succinct comparison of the features of each process:
In analytic review, we:
* First set out to identify all available data (in this case, in publications);
* Follow a familiar and well established approach to summarising, identifying patterns and noting mismatches and disagreements;
* Try to be objective in all our decisions;
* Seek and identify sound and well-evidenced outcomes of general significance.
When reflecting, we:
* Focus on something which seems likely to be of use to us (and our students);
* Oscillate between questioning of potential, and speculating about implications and possible outcomes;
* Often make choices of our priorities and options subjectively;
* Seek a worthwhile plan for innovative action and enhancement on our part.
That makes them very different, although perhaps on a PGCert, analytic review precedes reflection.
Questions for those on the list:
1. Do you have puzzled students who raise the analyse/reflect quesiton with you, especially in establishing a border line?
2. If so, what do you add to this simple comparison........
3. .......and what would you advise me to amend/change?
John Cowan
Edinburgh Napier University is one of Scotland's top universities for graduate employability. 93.6% of graduates are in work or further study within six months of leaving. The Telegraph newspaper named us as one of the "top ten UK universities for getting a job" in 2012. This university is also proud winner of the Queen's Anniversary Prize for Higher and Further Education 2009, awarded for innovative housing construction for environmental benefit and quality of life.
This message is intended for the addressee(s) only and should not be read, copied or disclosed to anyone else outwith the University without the permission of the sender.
It is your responsibility to ensure that this message and any attachments are scanned for viruses or other defects. Edinburgh Napier University does not accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from this email or any attachment, or for errors or omissions arising after it was sent. Email is not a secure medium. Email entering the University's system is subject to routine monitoring and filtering by the University.
Edinburgh Napier University is a registered Scottish charity. Registration number SC018373
Edinburgh Napier University is one of Scotland's top universities for graduate employability. 93.6% of graduates are in work or further study within six months of leaving. The Telegraph newspaper named us as one of the "top ten UK universities for getting a job" in 2012. This university is also proud winner of the Queen's Anniversary Prize for Higher and Further Education 2009, awarded for innovative housing construction for environmental benefit and quality of life.
This message is intended for the addressee(s) only and should not be read, copied or disclosed to anyone else outwith the University without the permission of the sender.
It is your responsibility to ensure that this message and any attachments are scanned for viruses or other defects. Edinburgh Napier University does not accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from this email or any attachment, or for errors or omissions arising after it was sent. Email is not a secure medium. Email entering the University's system is subject to routine monitoring and filtering by the University.
Edinburgh Napier University is a registered Scottish charity. Registration number SC018373
Edinburgh Napier University is one of Scotland's top universities for graduate employability. 93.6% of graduates are in work or further study within six months of leaving. The Telegraph newspaper named us as one of the "top ten UK universities for getting a job" in 2012. This university is also proud winner of the Queen's Anniversary Prize for Higher and Further Education 2009, awarded for innovative housing construction for environmental benefit and quality of life.
This message is intended for the addressee(s) only and should not be read, copied or disclosed to anyone else outwith the University without the permission of the sender.
It is your responsibility to ensure that this message and any attachments are scanned for viruses or other defects. Edinburgh Napier University does not accept liability for any loss or damage which may result from this email or any attachment, or for errors or omissions arising after it was sent. Email is not a secure medium. Email entering the University's system is subject to routine monitoring and filtering by the University.
Edinburgh Napier University is a registered Scottish charity. Registration number SC018373
|
