MEd: Frame Research Choices - Rev3

Dianne Allen RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES IN EDUCATION (Assignment 2) FRAME RESEARCH CHOICES AROUND A PARTICULAR TOPIC
p.1
FRAME RESEARCH CHOICES AROUND A PARTICULAR TOPIC (Assignment 2)
How to Introduce the Use of Reflective Techniques to Enhance Learning from Role Plays, Simulations and other Experiential Components of the Dispute Resolution Coursework.
FRAME RESEARCH CHOICES AROUND A PARTICULAR TOPIC ................... 1 Background to Inquiry: ............................................................................................ 2 Context for My Research Thinking Issues in Practice / Relevant Research Literature .................................................................................................................. 2 Review of My Understanding of the Different Research Perspectives.................... 4 Brief Discussion of What Perspective or Perspectives Appear Most Relevant to My Exploration of this Focus................................................................................... 6 Exploring the problematic:....................................................................................... 7 How to Introduce ................................................................................................ 8 Kind of knowledge I wish to generate and what kinds of procedures or research activities might be carried out to generate this knowledge ...................................... 9 My position as a researcher:................................................................................... 10 Key assumptions I am making about the nature of my educational world: ........ 11 Ethical Issues that need to be considered:.............................................................. 12 Concluding remarks ............................................................................................... 13 BIBLIOGRAPHY:..................................................................................................... 15 ENDNOTES: ............................................................................................................. 18
Dianne Allen, 2000
p.2
How to Introduce the Use of Reflective Techniques to Enhance Learning from Role Plays, Simulations and other Experiential Components of the Dispute Resolution Coursework.
Background to Inquiry: In 1998 I was involved in working on a course work research project and paper under the auspices of the Master of Dispute Resolution studies. As a consequence of my experience of the course work, and interactions with other students involved in contemporary studies during the previous two years, I was proposing the development of an elective unit to add to the course work. The proposed elective unit design was to provide an opportunity for students to engage with one another in activities which I was describing as reflective research of practice and which had been developed from ideas promulgated by Kenneth Kressel in his Negotiation Journal article (Kressel, 1997). 1
The stimuli for exploring that as my research proposal came from a number of different factors. Firstly, there were the critiques of my peers, then my own experience and frame brought to the studies, and finally inklings in the literature.
My current focus is on how to introduce reflective practices, and/or various options of reflective techniques, as a more deliberate activity and supportive mechanism to the current form of studies. 2
Context for My Research Thinking Issues in Practice / Relevant Research Literature In summary, my interest is with improving the practice of a third party intervenor to a dispute. As I look at what is involved in that task, I see that it has some generic components that apply to a number of other tasks in which I have an interest in developing effectiveness (ie training). They are teaching and managing. 3 The generic components relate to the nature of the practice. It is the something that is/ has to be a part of the expression of the nature of the practitioner. This involves
p.3
what they know, and can activate, in and of themselves, of their understanding, firstly of the technical content of their practice, and, secondly, of the interactive nature of their interpersonal relationships with the people with whom they are seeking to work. For the interpersonal aspects, in the dispute situation the interpersonal can be both content and process. In teaching and in management the interpersonal is primarily an aspect of process, however, in some teaching and management contexts the interpersonal can become content as well as process. 4
The thrust of a solution (or a process to engage in) to improve effectiveness has come from my reading of Kressels article (1997), and then the development of ideas from that interacting with other readings. 5 As Kressel describes it (1997, p.155)
I have attempted to demonstrate that an articulated paradigm for conducting mediation research can be built upon Schon's notion of the reflective practitioner. The aim of such a paradigm is to give us systematic access to the potentially codifiable knowledge contained in the wisdom of everyday mediation practice. The paradigm I have sketched is built around mediator-researcher self-study, using the case study as the unit of analysis and the research team as the vehicle of reflection.
The paradigm makes use of systematic case study protocols to direct the team's attention to certain types of critical case episodes; emphasises the importance of distinguishing among mediators of differing levels of competence; and argues for the necessity of subjecting reflective hypotheses about effective practice schema to experimental probes
For this bigger picture, I need to look at issues like the development of: selfawareness; other-awareness; and group processes in a team of peers which will allow them to get to the point where they are able to critically reflect on any/ all aspects of their practice, and systematically explore those for indications of what and how to improve them. This exploration/ examination will include the techniques and disciplines of case study, of critical incident debriefing. It will also involve engaging with the interaction of theory and practice, the formation of testable hypotheses for the designing of alternative actions, and then testing these by an
p.4
action research regime. The action design for implementation and then action research will be framed by a persons values and the capacity to design actions which are different (to respond to the ineffectiveness) and congruent with the practitioner (to allow the practitioner to act in the face of perhaps old internal habits and/or reservations). At this point we are back at the self-awareness aspect.
It is an aspect of learning from experience. The literature indicates that experience has to be worked with in some way to yield its information, to develop usable knowledge. (Boud, Keogh & Walker, 1985, Boud, Cohen & Walker, 1993, Boud & Miller, 1996). One way of doing this involves the process of reflection and reflective thinking. Within the literature of the use of reflection and reflective thinking to enhance learning, to develop knowledge from experience, there are indications that it is easier to say than do (Powell, 1985; Walker, 1985; Knights, 1985). Within the tertiary sector, the use of reflective techniques has a patchy performance record (Morrison, 1996, Ferry, 1998). From the preliminary work I
did in 1998, I have some ideas of why this is so, related to cognitive style preferences. There is, therefore, scope for furthering our understanding of this by research.
Review of My Understanding of the Different Research Perspectives In considering how to research, a researcher needs to be aware of what options there are, and how the choice of process might well dictate outcomes of the research (McIntyre, 1995, Usher, 1996, p. 32)
At this stage of my understanding of this complex arena, it appears to me that there are three significantly different ways to undertake the sort of systematic/ disciplined inquiry that is research 6 . And the identification of three routes appears to be at least as old as Aristotle (Carr & Kemmis, 1986). 7 They are: exploration of the natural world, the world of material things the empirical-analytic route; the exploration of human systems the interpretive route; and the exploration of the values and assumptions underlying human system formation and the choices available in solving
p.5
problems in the human system and which choices become privileged for whose advantage the critical route (which for me starts broadly as the social critical and includes the feminist and post-structural frames, as special cases with specific emphases). (Carr & Kemmis, 1986, UTS Learning Guide, 1998 & UTS Reading Guide, 1998) As I have noted before 8 :
I will use the empirical-analytic approach and perspective if I want to compare the comparable-but-different, to be able to have, or develop, some indicators of different effectiveness, especially comparing inputs and outcomes and their linkages, in order to inform my choices in decision making, about predictable relationships in systems, or between system components, where they appear to exist.
I will use the interpretive approach and perspective if I want to explore meaning for the participants, to inform choice/ decision making, in interactive endeavours between people 9 , especially for the process of negotiating consensus of meaning, understanding.
I will use the critical approach and perspective if I want to see whats going on in a different way, to be able to see the impact of culture/ socio-economic/ political trends in a situation in order to inform my reconsideration of values exercised in choice/ decision making, especially to look for indications of options for change based on different values. The critical approach has a variety of forms the broadest dealing with the social - culture with or without economic and/or political emphases. Its specific interest forms are the feminist perspective (focus on gender issues, with their power interactions), and the post-structuralist perspective (focus on power issues). I would note that it is my understanding that I will
need to have the information generated from the empirical-analytic and interpretive approaches and perspectives to work on to do the critical. Further, I will be inclined to undertake the critical approach when the outcomes from the empirical-analytic and the interpretive approaches do not appear to be working in the way that I anticipated!
p.6
Brief Discussion of What Perspective or Perspectives Appear Most Relevant to My Exploration of this Focus I am looking to undertake a process that seeks to develop usable knowledge. The knowledge sought is about what is going on and how a person can more effectively respond to what is going on, in a practice situation. Further, part of that practice situation involves the interaction of the practitioners thinking with the practitioners acting. So, as I see it, all three perspectives: empirical-analytic, interpretive and critical, need to be engaged in the process.
The empirical-analytic approach will be required to identify, describe and confirm the essential elements of patterns of interaction. This kind of information is needed for the practitioner to have a sense of by-and-large this-follows-that. This is needed at the very least to be able to identify the surprise instances that call for more close attention to explore their meaning, the reasons informing these departures from routine (Kressel, 1997, p.149-151).
The interpretive approach will be required to work at the task of enunciating the understandings and the reasoning used by the practitioner in the event under examination, and considering meanings given and alternative meanings possible, and available (Usher, 1996, p.18). The interpretive approach would also be required if the investigation needs to move into the area of exploring the understanding of the other participants in the interpersonal interactions associated with the practice. A mismatch of understandings between practitioner and the other party/ies is firstly possible, and secondly, not likely to contribute to effectiveness.
The critical approach will be required to examine the values which inform the decisions made to take one kind of action in preference to another (Argyris, 1970, 1982, Schon, 1983, 1991). One of the questions that arises is: In whose interests is such a decision made? (Smyth, 1996, p.41-57, Boud & Walker, 1992)
And because what is happening is part of the practitioners ongoing work, this process of inquiry also needs to be continuous. There are elements of it which need to be practical timely in its delivery of workable outcomes (Kressel, 1997, p.155,
p.7
McIntyre, 1995). It needs to be cyclic: a successful pattern of interaction (and also an unsuccessful, or less successful pattern) needs to be examined for a growing (more comprehensive, clearer match between whats happening and what is understood to be the reason this is so) understanding of the meaning embedded in it (Usher, 1996, p.17, McIntyre, 1995, Kressel, 1997, p.151, 153-4, Gummesson, 1991).
For me, the models that describe this continuous and cyclic process are the iterative inductive process of theory building, or Kolbs learning cycle (1984, p.12), or action research (Zuber-Skerritt, 1995). It goes by a variety of names, often depending on the school in which its protagonist was established. 10
Exploring the problematic: There are quite a number of issues raised by this experience.
Out of these, the one of interest to me, at this stage, is that of developing a tool/ or tools that might assist students (and practitioners) to effectively reflect on their experience, and their learning from the experience of role plays, etc. This would contribute to their learning from their coursework. Should it prove to be of value at that level, then it might also be seen to be a tool for lifelong learning from the experience in practice.
I headed the exploration in this assignment in the following terms:
How to Introduce the Use of Reflective Techniques to Enhance Learning from Role Plays, Simulations and other Experiential Components of the Dispute Resolution Coursework
In terms of a researchable question, the unpacking of this, in the first instance, has at least two parts: the how to introduce and the use of reflective techniques to enhance learning.
p.8
How to Introduce
The first thing to note here is that reflection, reflective thinking, is going on, anyway, whether or not there is any focus in the coursework on it. It is part of the various mechanisms we use to process information, to build a cognitive schema (Dewey, 1933, de Bono, 1990). It is one of a number of aspects which have particular relevance to effective adult learning (Burns, 1995, Scott, 1998). However, to make more effective use of it, it needs to be brought forward in the attention of the reflector. One way to do that is to make it an explicit part of the learning process. Further, there needs to be assistance given to help focus the reflective activity on those parts of the learning where it is likely to be most productive, for the practice concerns at hand. Kressels experience (1997) is that it is by no means self-evident which part of the complex of practice (which includes so-called clinical noise) is likely to yield the most useful information if focused on for such learning.
The literature indicates that reflective techniques have been introduced to various formal studies in a variety of forms (Powell, 1985, Walker, 1985, Knights, 1985, Bish & Dick, 1992). The exploration of how to introduce may well involve considering the question what to introduce. Further, the relationship of the reflective technique to formal studies can be established at a number of levels ranging from part of the implicit learning contract to a significant factor in formal graded assessment. The introduction of reflective techniques, or focusing on them as a more formal part of the studies, will be competing with the present components of the course for the scarce resource of time. That means the proposal needs to be persuasive to the presenters in the first instance, and in a form they both understand and expect will be an enhancement to their current mode of presentations and engagement of students. This will mean that the knowledge generated by the research needs to be in a form and substantiated at a level sufficient to give the presenter enough reason to make a change. That is, its claims will need to be better than those supporting the selection of the other content and/or process in order to justify the one replacing the other.
p.9
Kind of knowledge I wish to generate and what kinds of procedures or research activities might be carried out to generate this knowledge: The background material and analysis to date shows that the kind of knowledge I am looking to generate is that which will be of practical use. Part of that process will be demonstrating, in a way acceptable to others, that it has worked in action. The
usual route for this kind of exploration is the experimental approach, the action research. A research framed in those terms and reporting those kinds of findings will do this. In the practical context of coursework, being exposed to the experience itself, and finding out for oneself the pay-offs - the efficacy - of the process (or lack thereof for oneself), may well be more compelling.
One of the difficulties with practical knowledge it works is that we can have that kind of knowledge without any theoretical understanding, without any sense of knowing how it does work. As such that kind of knowledge is limited to the instance/s where it is known to work. By comparison, knowing how and why gives much more scope for flexibility in its use. Further applications may be able to be extrapolated on the basis of similar interacting factors, or the process may be able to be deliberately developed along certain lines indicated by the theory into new areas of application. Part of the strength of the model Kressel (1997) is espousing lies in the discussions between the participants which allow them to explore the reasoning, the theories-in-practice, the rules of thumb, the working hypotheses. Exploring these, and their assumptions, using a critical stance, can help in the process of building theoretical constructs which explain how and why.
Looking at my problematic, with its how to introduce and its use of reflective techniques to enhance learning , it is clear that testing is needed to determine the efficacy of the tools, the options of reflective techniques, the relative effectiveness of one option over another, and understanding why it might be so. The understandings of and the meanings for the participants need to be captured to provide this kind of knowledge. Interpretive and critical techniques are required for this kind of investigation. Further, considerations need to be made of How/ when/ where the reflective techniques are introduced into the course; and How/ if at all, they are incorporated/ encouraged within the coursework activities. The
p.10
consideration of these last two areas would seek to draw on the knowledge embedded in the experience of the course presenters. For the introduction of the reflective techniques to the coursework: the thinking experiment and/or action research plus negotiation with the presenter is needed. This involves convincing the presenter if need be. That can be done by assisting the presenter to examine their own practice, recognise what level of reflection and action research is already operating in their own practice, and how they might get more from both these processes by being more intentional, more deliberate, more systematic, more disciplined. Here the process would be the interview and joint exploration of meaning and understanding, followed by the design of actions to test hypotheses developed the interpretive (and critical) with the action research approach again.
At this stage, I still have at least a two-pronged approach: working with students, working with course presenters.
My position as a researcher: The material to date indicates both my empirical bent, and my alertness to the fact that in this arena something other than the operational needs to be explored. More effective information, for the participants, would be obtained by engaging with them in a natural, personal way (using interviews). Part of the process may involve exploring personal preferences of learning style, (using standardised selfadministered diagnostic tools). Part of exploration can include them as joint researchers, making trials of the different techniques a mini action research exercise. I have indicated elsewhere 11 that I understand myself to be a self-referent utilitarian. I am also cognisant of my preferred cognitive processes the convergent induction processing style.
p.11
In this research problem I will be interested in both the manifest meaning the participants give to their own practice of a reflective technique and the negotiation of a shared understanding of what is understood to be going on. I will want to reflect back to them, as the source of such manifest meaning, my expression of the understanding for their confirmation, rejection or clarification. This is part of the practice of a mediator reflecting (especially for feelings) and/or reframing (especially generalising to a broader category in order to explore common ground; or rephrasing to ameliorate inflammatory language).
I will also be actively engaged in reviewing my own reflective practice, and trying changes to test their relative effectiveness for me. So I will be operating on the observer-participant continuum: sometimes observer, sometimes participant, sometimes a bit of both.
Key assumptions I am making about the nature of my educational world: In proposing the above, I am making various assumptions.
The first batch of related assumptions are (1) there is cause and effect; (2) people can act intentionally; (3) peoples choice of action can be broadened by (a) knowing what to do and how to do it (b) having a reason which can be seen, be shown, to be congruent with their values (c) practicing an action until they are comfortable with a different way of doing; (4) when people act intentionally they can also observe effect, and compare the relative effectiveness of different intentional actions.
Another assumption, with some of its related parts is that there is development in capacities to act this drives mechanisms like continuous improvement of process or the hermeneutic spiral of meaning. Underlying the concept of an hermeneutic spiral are the current understandings we have of human cognition and the formation within an individual of a cognitive frame which is able to be changed, which has a dynamic with information derived from experience, from being intentional about learning. Also, my experience is of use to others; others experience is of use to
p.12
me there is such a thing as vicarious learning. But also, another will not get the full benefit of the capacity of an action (like the use of reflective techniques) until and unless they develop autonomous competence with it: by doing it, by practicing it, by experimenting until they find the routines that suit their style best. Also, modeling of doing it by one party may well be a significant aspect of it being taken up by another. This is the essence of congruence. I am trying to do what I say.. 12
There are also the assumptions related to the existence of individual difference. There is more than one reflective technique possible and likely to be effective. Different techniques will appeal/ are likely to be more useful to different people each person needs to experiment to find the one that suits them best.
Seeking to find mechanisms of reflection that allow for the sharing of reflections in a group context, for mutual learning, is one way of dealing with the assumption that in self-referent reflective work there is the capacity to mislead oneself; to get caught in one-track mind patterned thinking which becomes unproductive. This leads to the consideration that there needs to be the stimulus/ challenge of others to help unlock that one-track.
The work with conflict, especially when touching on differences of values, has found that disputes, where self-identity is threatened, are likely to be intractable (Northrop, 1989). This leads to the assumption that there needs to be an appropriate environment developed in order to share, and to challenge, and be challenged, especially on the discussion of values driving practice (which is a part of selfconcept, eg of competency). Without such an environment the challenging implicit in critical theory explorations is not likely to reach its most productive capacity.
Ethical Issues that need to be considered: At this individual level of exploring how practitioners might reflect to learn and learn to reflect, I am exploring the experience and the understanding of folk. For that to be ethical, they need to be able to make a free choice and an informed decision to be
p.13
involved. To make a free choice they need to be able to volunteer. To make an informed decision they will need to know enough to do so. That will include knowing what is the basis of this hypothesis (ie reflective work does enhance learning); what is the nature of the question being investigated (for example: does effectiveness of reflective technique relate to personality type?); how will the study be conducted (eg pilot study using interviews and engaging in a mini-action research in a collaborative mode); what are the anticipated time commitments (and any other incidental costs) and time lines for the project, especially in relation to their other course work commitments. As collaborative participants this knowledge is needed. As joint researchers with an interest in the outcomes being workable and realistic, the potential for this knowledge to bias the exploration and prejudice findings can be addressed.
Concluding remarks This exploration has made it clear to me that I still have some way to go, to develop a researchable question, which also has a reasonable chance of delivering outcomes to meet the constraints and demands of practice. I think I have a research process, involving the use of reflection in a team to develop testable hypotheses to trial in the practice situation. Obviously, for the team, the practice itself will raise the researchable question/s that they need to focus on. 13
If there is a researchable question for me it is exploring the how to introduce .. aspect.
A route that I am favouring, at this stage, is the pilot study introducing the trialing of some reflective techniques amongst volunteers in the first instance. It would be ancillary to the present studies, and when the findings from that are in, there would be more or less justification for proceeding with the process of implementing change to the present course. While that trial was being undertaken work can be underway to develop an understanding of the reflective techniques and action research aspects of the presenters current course work practice, by interview and critical discussions arising out of reporting in on the findings associated with the literature review
p.14
proposed. Since it will be easier for them to espouse and introduce change that is congruent with their understanding of their own practice, and indeed consistent with my assumptions noted earlier, this route is more likely to be travelled than any other that I can conceive at this stage.
p.15
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
The Action Research Reader [Melb]:Deakin Univ Pr, 3rd ed c1988 Argyris, C. (1970). Intervention theory and method: a Behavioural Science View. Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1970 Argyris, C. (1982). Reasoning, Learning and Action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982 Argyris, C Schon, D. (1974). Theory in practice. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1974 Barfield, A. (2000) remark made in an email interaction as part of the AREOL (Action research and Evaluation On Line) course with Southern Cross Univeristy. Bish, A., and Dick, B. (1992). Reflection for everyone. A paper delivered at the Reflective practices in higher education conference, Brisbane, 1992. Bormann, Ernest G. (1990). Small group communication: theory and practice. New York: Harper & Row, 1990, 3rd ed. Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985). Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Boud, D. Keogh, R. Walker, D. (1985). Promoting Reflection in Learning: a Model in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Boud, D, Cohen, R, Walker, D. (1993). Using Experience for Learning. London: SRHE and Open University, 1993 Boud, D. Cohen, R. Walker, D. (1993). Introduction: Understanding Learning from Experience in Boud, D, Cohen, R, Walker, D Using Experience for Learning. London: SRHE and Open University, 1993 Boud, D. & Walker, D. (1993). Barriers to Reflection on Experience in Boud, D, Cohen, R, Walker, D Using Experience for Learning. London: SRHE and Open University, 1993 Boud, David & Nod Miller, eds (1996). Working with experience: animating learning. London: Routledge, 1996 Burns, R. (1995). The adult learner at work: a comprehensive guide to the context, psychology and methods of learning in the workplace. Sydney: Business & Professional Publishing, 1995 Candy, Philip, Sheila Harri-Augstein, Laurie Thomas (1985). Reflection and the Self-organized Learner: a Model of Learning Conversations p.100-116 in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Carr, W Kemmis S (1986). Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research [Melb]: Deakin Univ Pr, rev ed c1986 DeBono, E (1990). I am Right - You are Wrong: From This to the New Renaissance: From Rock Logic to Water Logic. London: Penguin, 1990 Dewey J (1933). How We Think: a Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process. Boston: DC Heath, c.1933 (original 1910) De Laine, M. (1997). Ethnography: Theory and applications in health research. Sydney: Maclennan & Petty. Dick, B. (1998). Reflective mechanisms [On line]. Available at http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/arp/reflmech.html , based on Bish, A., and Dick, B. Reflection for everyone. A paper delivered at the Reflective practices in higher education conference, Brisbane, 1992. Dick, B. (2000). The change process and action research. Session 2 of Areol- action research and evaluation on line. URL http://www.scu.edu.au/schools/gcm/ar/areol/areol-session02.html Eisner, E.W. (1990). The meaning of alternative paradigms for practice, Chap 5 in E.G. Guba (ed) The Paradigm Dialog. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage. Enterprising Nation: Renewing Australia's Managers to Meet the Challenges of the Asia-Pacific Century [Executive Summary] (Karpin Report) [1995] Ericsson KA and J Smith. (1991). Toward a general theory of expertise. New York: Cambridge UP, 1991 Ferry, Natalie M Ross-Gordon, Jovita M (1998). An Inquiry into Schons Epistemology of Practice: Exploring Links between Experience and Reflective Practice. Adult Education Quarterly. Vol 48, No.2, 1998, p.98-112 Fook, J (1996). The reflective researcher: social workers' experience with theories of practice research. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 1996
Dianne Allen RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES IN EDUCATION (Assignment 2) FRAME RESEARCH CHOICES AROUND A PARTICULAR TOPIC Frey, Lawrence R (ed) (1994). Group Communication in Context: studies of natural groups. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1994 Frey, Lawrence R (ed) (1995). Innovations in group facilitation techniques: applications in natural settings. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Pr., 1995 Grimmett, PP Erickson, GL (1988). Reflection in Teacher Education. New York: Teachers College Pr., 1988 Gummesson, E (1991). Qualitative Methods in Management Research. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, c.1991 Heron, John (1985). The Role of Reflection in a Cooperative Inquiry p.128-138 in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Hoshmand, LT (1994). Orientation to inquiry in a reflective professional psychology Albany: SUNY Pr, 1994 Kasl, E. Dechant, K. Marsick, V. (1993). Living the Learning: Internalizing Our Model of Group Learning in Boud, D, Cohen, R, Walker, D Using Experience for Learning. London: SRHE and Open University, 1993 Kemmis, Stephen (1985). Action Research and the Politics of Reflection p.139-163 in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Kemmis, S McTaggart R (1988). .he Action Research Planner [Melb]: Deakin Univ Pr, 3rd ed c1988 King, PM Kitchener, KS (1994). Developing Reflective Judgment: understanding and promoting intellectual growth and critical thinking in adolescents and adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, c.1994 Kerlinger, F.N. (1986). The scientific approach, Chap 4 in Foundations of Behavioural Research. New York: Holt Rinehart Winston. 4th edition. Knights, Susan (1985). Reflection and Learning: the Importance of a Listener p.85-90 in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Kolb, D.A. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the source of learning and deveelopment. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall, 1984 Kramer, R M, Messick D M (eds) (1995). Negotiation as a social process: New trends in theory and research. Thousand Oaks, Calif., 1995. Kriesberg, L Northrup, TA Thorson, SJ (1989). Intractable Conflicts and Their Transformation. [?]: Syracuse Univ Pr, [?1989] Kressel, K Pruitt, DG (1989). Mediation research: the process and effectiveness of third-party intervention. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1989 Kressel, K (1997). "Practice-Relevant Research in Mediation: Toward a Reflective Research Paradigm" Negotiation Journal, 1997, 13 (2) p.143-160 Main, Alex (1985). Reflection and the Development of Learning Skills p.91-99 in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Mason, J. (1993). Learning from Experience in Mathematics in Boud, D, Cohen, R, Walker, D Using Experience for Learning. London: SRHE and Open University, 1993 McGaw, B Boud, D Poole, M. Warry, R. and McKenzie, P. (1992). Educational Research in Australia. Report of the Strategic review of research in education. Canberra: AGPS McIntyre, J. (1995). Research in adult education and training, Chap 8, in Foley, G (ed.) Understanding Adult Education and Training. Sydney: Allen & Unwin Miller, N. (1993). How the T-Group Changed My Life: A Sociological perspective on Experiential Group Work in Boud, D, Cohen, R, Walker, D Using Experience for Learning. London: SRHE and Open University, 1993 Morrison, Keith (1996). Developing Reflective Practice in Higher Degree Students through a Learning Journal Studies in Higher Education. Vol.21,No.3,1996, p.317-332 Mulligan, J. (1993). Activating Internal Processes in Experiential Learning in Boud, D, Cohen, R, Walker, D Using Experience for Learning. London: SRHE and Open University, 1993 Northrup, TA (1989). "The Dynamic of Identity in Personal and Social Conflict" in Kriesberg, L Northrup, TA Thorson, SJ Intractable Conflicts and Their Transformation. [?]: Syracuse Univ Pr, [?1989] Pearson, Margot and David Smith (1985). Debriefing in Experience-based Learning p.69-84 in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Powell, J P (1985). Autobiographical learning p.41-51 in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985
p.16
Dianne Allen RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES IN EDUCATION (Assignment 2) FRAME RESEARCH CHOICES AROUND A PARTICULAR TOPIC Scardamalia, M Bereiter, C (1991). "Literate Expertise" in Ericsson KA and J Smith. Toward a general theory of expertise. New York: Cambridge UP, 1991 Schon, DA (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books, 1983 Schon, DA (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning in the Professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987 Schon, DA (ed) (1991). The Reflective Turn: Case Studies in and on educational practice. New York: Teachers College Press, 1991 Schutz, A. (1953). Commonsense and scientific interpretation of human action. In Philosophy and Phenomenological Research Quarterly. 14 (1): September. Reprinted in R. Zaner and R. Idhe (1973) (eds). Phenomenology and Existentialism. New York: Capricorn Books Scott, G. (1998). Draft quality assurance framework for developments in learning design and delivery in higher and further education. Working paper shared, January 1998. Toulmin, S, Rieke, R, Janik, A. (1984). An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan, 2nd ed. 1984 (1st ed 1978) Usher, R. (1996). A critique of the neglected epistemological assumptions of education research. Chap.2 in D. Scott and R. Usher (eds). Understanding Educational Research. London: Routledge UTS Faculty of Education 1998, Learning Guide Research Perspectives in Education. UTS Faculty of Education, Sydney, revised 1999. UTS Faculty of Education 1998, Reading Guide Research Perspectives in Education. UTS Faculty of Education, Sydney, 1998 Walker, David (1985). Writing and Reflection p.52-68 in Boud, D Keogh, R Walker, D (1985) Reflection: Turning Experience into Learning. London: Kogan Page, 1985 Whetten, DA & Cameron KS (1995) Developing Management Skills. NY: HarperCollins, 1995, 3rd ed. Wildman, P (1995) "Research by Looking Backwards: Reflective Praxis as an Action Research Methodology" p.171-192 in Moving on: creative applications of action learning and action research. Upper Mt Gravatt, Qld.: ALARPM, 1995 Zuber-Skerritt, O. (1995) Models for Action Research in Moving on: creative applications of action learning and action research. Upper Mt Gravat, Qld.: ALARPM, 1995
p.17
p.18
ENDNOTES:
Kressel, K "Practice-Relevant Research in Mediation: Toward a Reflective Research Paradigm" Negotiation Journal, 1997, 13 (2) p.143-160
2
If more detail background about the student critique and my experience is required, it can be found in the material attached. (ATTACHMENT- DETAILS OF DISPUTE RESOLUTION STUDIES EXPERIENCE AND INTERESTS) (http://www.scribd.com/doc/63601244)
In my view there are a range of activities where these kinds of concerns arise activities that call on creativity in problem solving of one-offs design; and activities which involve interacting with other people autonomous, independent actors with a capacity of choice in action, and where negotiating shared understanding will be part of any effective co-operative venture. It also includes the practice of research. A dispute has three components: the emotional, the procedural and the substantive. Helping resolve disputes means needing to pay attention to these three dimensions. The interpersonal obviously comes into play in the emotional dimension. It is also a part of the procedural the understanding of fair process this is socially constructed and a persons perception of its bias or neutrality may well rest on personal experience of previous interpersonal encounters within such a frame. The substantive tends to range from the personal to the impersonal family disputes to environmental policy disputes. But the resolving of them involves the mobilisation of interpersonal aspects: respect, communication, sense of agency, etc. In teaching, the interpersonal has been shown to have an impact on learning effectiveness at a variety of levels. The environment the teacher establishes in a class, the social context of learning, and learning from one another, etc. The interpersonal can become content in some course work: directly in Personal Development, less directly in studies of drama, etc in English literature. In management, the recent Karpin report (Enterprising nation [1995]) noted the level of interpersonal effectiveness of present Australian managers (in general it is poor compared with other better performing countries). Again, in management the interpersonal may be the content as well as the process. It is the content in the human resources management field, it is the content of the development of team effectiveness, and at the end it is the content of the formation of organisational culture, and so part and parcel of any endeavour to change culture for greater organisational effectiveness.
5 4
These other readings include Whetten & Cameron, 1995; Argyris, 1970, 1982; Schon, 1983, 1987, 1991 amongst others. To the extent that effectiveness has been a concern of mine over my professional life, spanning 30+ years, I cannot at this stage identify all the possible inputs, to cite them here. One of the frames that contributes to the focus on improving effectiveness comes from my Christian concepts of redemption and sanctification. Usher, 1996 p.10 notes the systematic tag usually used. Cronbach is the reference for disciplined inquiry Cronbach, l. & Suppes, O. (1969). Research for tomorrows schools: Disciplined inquiry in education. New York: Macmillan. Or at least, this is what other writers claim for the history of ideas in the occidental culture. There may be other routes to inquiry, favoured in oriental cultures which have much, or more, to teach us. However, at this stage, we do not have readily at hand, mechanisms to help us make this transition, let alone have it accepted as part of the dominant/ privileged academic frame. See Bormann, 1990 and deBono, 1990, for ideas about creative thinking and alternative thinking processes. Assignment 1 Research Perspective in Education. (http://www.scribd.com/doc/63436502)
And even within a person. This is so, because of the reflexive nature of human beings. There is an intrapersonal dialogue as well as interpersonal dialogues.
p.19
This is an example of Kuhns concept of the sociological formation of a researcher McIntyre, 1995; Usher, 1996, p.15; and is being recognised more in recent explorations of research process and method: Gummesson, 1991, Hoshmand, 1994, Fook, 1996, deLaine, 1997.
11
10
See Assignment 1 Research Perspectives in Education
12
This is in comparison with the usual research frame of objectivity, of not being engaged in judging, in exploring values. And it contrasts with the usual dissonant practice of: do as I say, not as I do what Argyris & Schon, (1974) call their Model I behavior.
Again, Kressels (1997) Essex Project experience was of findings for a number of different areas: relative effectiveness of different mediation processes (at least two of these); and models informing the substantive issues involved in the dispute (the interpersonally dysfunctional parent).
13

MEd: Frame Research Choices - Rev3

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

MEd: Frame Research Choices - Rev3

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Dianne Allen RESEARCH PERSPECTIVES IN EDUCATION (Assignment 2) FRAME RESEARCH CHOICES AROUND A PARTICULAR TOPIC

FRAME RESEARCH CHOICES AROUND A PARTICULAR TOPIC (Assignment 2)

Dianne Allen, 2000

I headed the exploration in this assignment in the following terms:

If there is a researchable question for me it is exploring the how to introduce .. aspect.

See Assignment 1 Research Perspectives in Education

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen