Reflection in Education : Theories of Action

Reflective Engagement and Theories of Action

Presentation at Seminar on Curriculum for excellence in teacher education

April 8th and 9th, 2013Tata Institute of Social Sciences, Mumbai

Gopal Midha, Research Associate, TISS

Monday, April 8, 2013

Reflective Engagement...Yes!

Reflective thought is an 'active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends' (Dewey 1933: 118)


Reflective Engagement...Yes!

Reflective thought is an 'active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends' (Dewey 1933: 118)

But really, how do we do it?


Theory of Action counterbalanced the emphasis in training groups on affective experiences

• Developed by Chris Argyris and Donald Schon in the 1970s

• Builds on the work of John Dewey (1933) and Kurt Lewin (1951)

• Argyris and Schon's work examines conscious and unconscious reasoning processes and has precedents in the work of Freud and Jung; in models such as the Johari Window and Ideal Self and Actual Self. It is based on the belief that people are designers of action. They design action in order to achieve intended consequences and monitor to learn if their actions are effective.


Theories of Action : A way to understand why people continue to act the way they do

• People have mental maps with regard to how to act in situations. This involves the way they plan, implement and review their actions.

• It is these maps that guide people’s actions rather than the theories they explicitly espouse or say.

• What is more, fewer people are aware of the maps or theories they do use. And others don’t usually tell them either!


Espoused theory Vs Theory in Use

A student teacher example during practice teaching


Espoused theory Vs Theory in Use

A teacher educator example during practice teaching


So, we cannot learn someone’s theory-in-use by simply asking


But it can be constructed because every theory-in-use has an underlying model

Governing Variables: those dimensions that people are trying to keep within acceptable limits.

Action Strategies: the moves and plans used by people to control their governing values.

Consequences: what happens as a result of the action.

Maintain classroom discipline, Appear Competent, Suppress anxiety, Ignore conflict, Informed choice, Rich content, Respect feelings

Incentivize students, Threat them with punishment from Principal, Critical(?) feedback, Encourage dialogue, Attribute and evaluate with relatively directly observable data

Student participation is low, student teacher feels less confident, perceived bias of teacher educator, Authentic participation, increased likelihood of reflective thinking and learning


And a simple but powerful tool ...

• A two column approach

• First fill the Right Column on the actual or expected dialogue

• Then fill the left on what you were thinking and feeling

• Explore your (un)observed data, values, beliefs and meanings attributed to what was said


..can bring out what really happens within


And this can lead to understanding our responses..

• RESPONSE A: The detection and correction of error. Where something goes wrong, many people look for another strategy that will address and work within the governing variables. In other words, given or chosen goals, values, plans and rules are operationalized rather than questioned. According to Argyris and Schön (1974), this is single-loop learning.

• Let me try singing the poem so that they listen!

• RESPONSE B: An alternative response is to question to governing variables themselves, to subject them to critical scrutiny. Such learning may then lead to an alteration in the governing variables and, thus, a shift in the way in which strategies and consequences are framed. This they describe as double-loop learning.

• Am I teaching for understanding or for the observer-teacher?


Governing Variables: those dimensions that people are trying to keep within acceptable limits. Action Strategies: the moves and plans used by people to control their governing valuesConsequences: what happens as a result of the action

Double loop learning changes the field of

constancy itselfMonday, April 8, 2013

Theories of Action: a few uses

• Useful to bring tensions when learning to teach - Constructing a “teaching Voice”- borrowed and made; tradition and change; importance of social experience (Britzman, 2003). And not just in teacher identity but also the compartmentalization of knowledge, separation of knowledge from perspectives and pedagogy, folk pedagogy (Bruner, 1996)

• Can be used to reflect upon organizational goals, assumptions, action strategies and expected consequences

• Supplements the motivational approach to change


References

• Argyris, C., & Schon, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

• Bruner, J. (1996). The Culture of Education. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

• Dewey, J. (1933). How We Think, New York: D. C. Heath.

• Britzman, D.P. (2003). Practice Makes Practice: A Critical Study of Learning to Teach. NY: State University.

• Lewin, K. (1951). Field Theory in Social Science, New York: Harper and Row.

• Senge, P. (1990) The Fifth Discipline. The art and practice of the learning organization, London: Random House.

• Schön, D. A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. How professionals think in action, London: Temple Smith.

For more details, you may email me at [email protected]


mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

And this can be done by self reflection or in Groups

• The group reflection model

• Each person writes down a critical incident that he or she experienced. Give the incident the following label: Planning and Preparation; Pedagogy or Professional Responsibility

• Each person fills the left column

• Each person shares the critical incident. No questions or embellishments

• The Group decides one critical incident to discuss more fully

• The Group asks the teller for more details- they think deeply and hypothesize about the Governing Variables, probe about the Action strategies and how does it lead to the Consequences. No Judgements.

• The Group ‘reflects’ on the implicit assumptions behind teaching-learning

• The facilitator summarizes the discussion
