Module 1 - Task 2c: Reflective Theory

My relationship with reflective practice has grown immensely since beginning the course, though I wouldn’t say it’s one I have shared exclusively. I have, particularly during my time at college, needed to take note of constructive criticism for myself. This type of reflection is different to the sort I am experiencing at the moment. It is interesting that I use the word ‘experience’ in affiliation with reflection as that is exactly what it’s all about – experience. In reader two of module one the idea of reflection within professions, ones that specifically deal with and evoke an undergoing of change. Whether it be a psychiatrist helping a patient, a teacher educating a student or the artist creating, all use reflection as a means to assess and advance their subjects. The reader states, however that there is a clear difference between writing practice with one’s own experience and conceptualising it. The latter involves the ability to take a step back from one’s own experience and put it into the grander scheme of reflection. They are able to show an understanding for what kind of reflection they are utilising specifically, the themes being invoked and the knowledge to recognise how other professional practitioner’s analysis can complement or argue said methods.

I mentioned briefly in my last blog post (task 2b: journal writing experience) that I have folders of recorded critical reflection from my time at college. A lot of these notes I still use from time to time when preparing for an audition or I am unsure how to achieve something within my practice and need a reminder e.g. a technique to help with a vocal quality whilst singing, an exercise that will help my understanding of a character’s intentions when acting. These notes are only compiled by previous experience through education, something that educationist and philosopher John Dewey was interested in exploring. He believed that education and experience were closely interlinked and referred to this process as ‘experiential action’, the act of actively seeking out, surrounding and absorbing one’s self with the events of life. He makes the point that arts such as dance, music and architecture were enhancements of social culture e.g. religion rather than developments within the spaces of theatre or museums. He also argued the concept of drawing results from reflection.

 

“We say of experience of thinking that we reach or draw a conclusion.                                   Theoretical formulations of the process is often made in such terms to                                         conceal effectuality the similarity of ‘conclusion’ to the consummating                                            phase of every developing integral experience.” (Dewey, 1934)

Dewey stresses that the generalised term of ‘conclusion’ simply cannot equate to a finality reached within reflection. That is because there is, in essence, no end to reflection. In writing, Dewey describes three stages that the structure of the text will take, ‘premise, proposition and conclusion’. The first two stages of this structure will be pre-determined, moulded and manipulated to pave way for the third and final segment. He argues that this is impossible when writing reflectively as a conclusion has already been reached in the practitioner’s mind beforehand. Unlike the study of someone else’s work, the writer will work through an assignment giving back and forth reference to premise and proposition. They will continue in this vain as their research develops and expands within the text being studied all before attempting to marry these separate entities in the conclusion. Dewey suggests that reflective practice works in the opposite direction, that the first stage can only be initiated by its conclusion. It is because of the conclusion that the reflective process begins and so Dewey makes the case “a ‘conclusion’ is no separate and independent thing; it is the consummation of a movement” (Dewey 1934).

I can certainly draw comparisons for Dewey’s view in my own reflection. Since starting a journal logging my recent professional activities, I have realised after studying Dewey’s theory that a large number of my entries have all begun from an end point and I have looked to work backwards in creating an account to accommodate. I can, however, recognise why practitioner’s came to challenge Dewey’s arguments. I have covered a number of different styles within Nola, Reid and Moon’s framework in tackling reflection, a few of which provoke differing starting points for entry into the reflective process. Donald Schön saw that Dewey’s view could be considered narrow and did not best reflect all forms of practice. He recognised Dewey’s view on conclusion provoking premise and proposition but argued that such a process need not be so rigorous and that reflection can begin much earlier. He developed two methods for describing reflection past Dewey’s aforementioned; ‘reflection-in-action’ and ‘reflection-on-action’.

“When a practitioner reflects in and on his practice, the possible objects of his reflection are as varied                               as the kinds of phenomena before him and the systems of knowing-in-practice which he brings to                                 them. He may reflect on the tacit norms and appreciations which underlies a judgement, or on the                       strategies and theories implicit a pattern of behaviour.” (Schön 1983)

Schön show emphasis for action over education as the former provokes a more generalised, immediate oversight for what has taken place. It keeps everything relevant to what has happened within that particular experience, as opposed to how it relates or fits in a grander scheme. Reflection-in-action supports an identification of patterns for past experiences that have occurred not long before reflection begins therefore allowing for a more accurate account of any hindsight’s. It often begs for the subject to draw comparisons in the moment between other experiences maybe of their own or more universally shared, and that initial imagery will prompt use for adjectives or metaphors in an attempt for the account to appear relative. Reflection-on-action promotes an opposite process in many respects, collating an experience a while after it has taken place. This means that nuanced description for individual experiences can be lost and become more generalised, and makes reflecting more of a means to be mindful for future events.

In terms of my own professional practice I have realised that I will often use reflection in and on action simultaneously. If I am preparing for a role I will often perform character observations, the act of researching a specific figure who could inform my role and help my understanding of their actions in the play. The amount of detail recorded will be within the frame I am studying the subject, it is not to be laboured over at a later date as this takes away from analysis constructed in the moment. In another area of my preparation I will research the context of the world of the play. Whether it be from a point of cultural, political, religious or other historical influence inhabited within the text they will all be research by product of past experiences but aiming to draw conclusive evidence that allude to themes and motives indicated by the narrative. While not directly related to the purpose of reflection, the outcome is often conceived of a similar design. Both are examples of reflection in and on action, respectively. Only since beginning my study of reflective practice and from keeping a journal have I noticed that I have been unknowingly showing evidence of both methods within my day to day practice. It is also worth noting that practitioner’s such as John Cowan have gone on to strengthen Schön’s view, stating that there is fact a third method for presenting reflection. This has been referred to as ‘reflection-for-action’.

                                                                "It is a reflection                                                                                             which establishes priorities for subsequent learning by identifying the needs, aspir-                     ations and objectives which will subsequently be kept prominently in the learner’s       mind.” (Cowan 1998)

A lot of Cowan’s theories and in fact others aforementioned have been influenced by the work of practitioner David Kolb, particularly with his system referred to as the ‘model of experiential learning’. Kolb was, in turn, influenced by the work of Dewey and Kurt Lewin. Based on their previous models’ Kolb adapted his own that has arguably gone on to become the most popular for citing what style of learning an individual best enters.

 

Upon first look at the diagram, it is difficult to point to an exact stage in which I enter the cycle as I feel different experiences require different entrances. I can recall several moments as an actor in training when techniques could only be informed by my teacher presenting me with an exercise. This creates a concrete experience for myself and then follow the cycle as displayed. When I was teaching drama, I would attempt to take my lessons learned at college and incorporate them in a fashion that could be made understandable for the children. That would be active experimentation, planning and trying out what I have learned to bring a new experience before others, to then reflect on the experience and eventually conceptualise and learn from it. As a performer on the job I would say I also start from the same place as I would a teacher. When preparing for a role or reflecting on my practice I would start with reflective observation. As aforementioned, to describe an experience I most often find myself starting with its conclusion. I have become aware when thinking about my own experience that reflective observation and abstract conceptualisation are closely interlinked. It could be argued that the conclusion of an experience then provokes cause for reflection but I can understand this is only when sharing it physically e.g. the dance class is concluded and the teacher then goes on to give critique for their students to work on. However, I can also understand the capacity for the student to independently critically reflect whilst carrying out an exercise before it concludes. I suppose it relies in what party the two processes take place. The two examples can give cause to both a mental and physical experience whereas I feel the demands of active and concrete experience can only be informed by physical practice. I will, however, disclose that in my own practice I find reflective observation super cedes in most circumstances. My previous experience provided in relation to this section also further proves that I do in fact reflect in as well as on action.

The relationship between mental and physical input involved in experiential learning was one of keen interest to practitioner Howard Gardner (1983). He expands and takes the focus of reflective practice away from cycles and presents a more list-like fashion as to the multiple intelligences that allow for learning. They include abilities such as spatial, verbal linguistic, logical-mathematics, bodily-kinaesthetic, musical, interpersonal, intrapersonal and naturalistic that the learner employs. They are all examples of physical and mental activity operating to find meaning for experience. Gardner felt that previous practitioners had internalised too much of reflection and instead put forward the notion that a learner could look outside the initial parameters of an experience to what surrounds them. The space in which a student/teacher takes a class or the singer rehearses, for example, can matter and inform in equal measure to the immediate action taking place. He later (Gardner 2005) developed the idea of multiple ‘lenses’, the concept of seeing things in varying circumstances, giving purpose to different ways in which an experience can be engaged. He felt this would help undo a sense of tunnel-vision that could be brought on by various iterations of the learning cycle and tempt one to be mindful of detail found in environment. The views of Gardner are particularly useful in my own professional practice as art is usually subject to an opinion formed by environment. A piece of acting performed in a public area like a town centre to a passing crowd will be received differently to that of one performed in a booked theatre in front of a paying audience. The mechanics and structure of the activity are on different scales and so reflection in and on action will be subject to exterior influences.

Building upon Gardner’s theories are the views taken by Jennifer Moon (1999), “the importance of finding ways to articulate tacit knowledge and experiences, not only because they are only ‘real’ when they are put into words but because they have understanding and meaning in them that are important to access.” I have been working extensively with Moon’s framework in regards to critical reflection within part two of module one for the course. As mentioned previously, the process of keeping journal and logging activities in differing writing styles has revealed my tendency to reflect-in-action unconsciously. This was revelatory for me as up until this time I had always considered my reflection most effective once I had taken a distance away from the experience. I did not contemplate the level of detail I was sacrificing and the subsequent learning I have lost from neglecting this method.

The study of reflective theory has been of the most significance during my time on the course thus far. The opportunity to study practitioner’s relating and contrasting theories have exposed weaknesses in my own practice of reflection as well as giving me a large assortment of tools to work with when conducting my own reflection. Although, it hasn’t only served to develop in the aforementioned field but also in my structure of writing. Starting with practitioner’s as early as Dewey and examining his theories written in 1934, I found his prose a hard read and was checking back over sections to make sure I had fully understood his views. Moving forward to practitioner’s like Moon, the texts have been written for an audience of today. Whether that tells of today’s society showing an incompetence for understanding theories at a higher level of literate knowledge is another cause for debate. It becomes irrelevant, however, when presented with an evolution in ideals as to how the process of critical reflection can be pushed forward and by what means.

Bibliography

Dewey, J (1934) Art as experience, 1958 reprint, New York: Putnam

Cowan, J (1998) On becoming an innovative university teacher, 2nd edition, England: Open University Press

Gardner, H 1983 “Frames of mind” BAPP Module 1 reader 2 [online] Available at: Put link here [Accessed 26 Apr. 2015]

Moon, J 2004 “Resources for reflective learning” A handbook of reflective and experiential learning [online] Available at: http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CCEQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cemp.ac.uk%2Fdownloads%2Fresourcesforreflectivelearning.doc&ei=_3o9VYuJDYXtaoytgKgJ&usg=AFQjCNFLaheYAyMzMSyLDhLdNcXPpJveWQ&sig2=veEax9_vjVVOG8pqbZer6Q&bvm=bv.91665533,d.d2s [Accessed 26 Apr. 2015]

Schön, D 1983 “The reflective practitioner” How professionals think in action [online] Available at: http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar_url?url=http://smeduquedecaxias.rj.gov.br/nead/Biblioteca/Forma%25C3%25A7%25C3%25A3o%2520Continuada/Artigos%2520Diversos/reflective%2520practitioner%2520-%2520schon.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm3f2As46TQAy6VSUihgQjSqCfsd1g&nossl=1&oi=scholarr&ei=P349VezaH9PpaMnvgegC&sqi=2&ved=0CCAQgAMoATAA [Accessed 25 Apr. 2015]