Task 2C: Reflective theory

John Dewey coined the term 'reflective thought'.  He defined the process as "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 conclusion to which it tends". (Dewey, 1933).  Dewey's most basic assumption was that learning arose from the intensity how one experienced an event, and the process of reflection upon it.  For me, being aware of the idea of reflective thought is one of the most important tools for my own reflective practice.

 Dewey made special reference to how reflection was especially important to professionals with careers based on a process of change.  Working in the arts we depend on a continual growth in our work.  Reflective thought is a constant process invaluable in creation or teaching.   Be it when creating a lesson plan for young dancers, or creating a dance work, we use reflective thought as a process to enlighten our work.  Dewey described reflective thought as 'continual reorganization, reconstruction and transformation of experience' (Dewey 1933).  For me, this translates as a process of three stages.  Initially being fully present or ‘in the moment’ in the event.  This will allow clarity when I then record what took place, and my initial feelings on what happened.  The next stage would be to evaluate the event, taking care to acknowledge my own biases and strengths; why I felt a certain way about what had occurred.  From there I can reflect on my conclusion of what took place, and how this could shape future outcomes. 

David Kolb published his model of the learning cycle in 1984.   His theory was largely influenced by John Dewey’s ideas, among others.  “Learning is the process whereby knowledge is created through the transformation of experience” (Kolb, 1984).  He created this model:

 

He created the model on the conclusion that everyone experiences the event in the same way:  we experience the event, we observe others, we think about the experience and we actively experiment (or test the idea).  The process of learning would be to make a full loop on the cycle, reflecting in each of the different forms and going full circle.

What ‘type’ of learner we are depends on where we enter the cycle, according to Kolb’s model.   What I take from this is that we are not only one type of learner but all enter the cycle at different stages depending on the experience.   In the majority of cases, and the events I have recorded in my journal I believe that to feel something is understood I have to test the idea myself.    Clarity for me doesn’t come from experiencing or watching others.  When learning, as I am now writing this essay, I needed to read up on the idea.  I then created notes and graphs and read other peoples’ thoughts through their blogs or articles.  Not until the point of active experimentation (now) do I feel the Kolb’s theory is starting to be understood.

Around the same time as David Kolb produced his ‘learning cycle’ other ideas of learning styles were published.  Howard Gardner, as well as Peter Honey and Alan Mumford creating different models of learning styles. 

Gardner produced a list of intelligences.  This was not to say that people could be pigeon-holed into being one type of learner, but a way to create awareness of the different intelligences that we use as tools to learn.

‘Anything that is worth teaching can be presented in many different ways. These multiple ways can make use of our multiple intelligences.’ (Gardner, H).  Later Gardner speculated on the idea that we use multiple ‘lenses’ to learn and that we can cross over.   After a recent group discussion with Adesola and other module one students, it occurred to me that we all probably use all of these styles to learn in different situations.   I developed my thoughts on this further after the discussion on my blog:  http://catherinehayward.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/group-skype-session-with-adesola-18th.html

Another important theory that relates to professional practice, particularly for myself in dance pedagogy is the idea of reflection ‘in-action’ and ‘on-action’.  This idea was coined by Donald Schon in the 1980’s.  He said that there are two types of reflection: we reflect during the moment and ‘critically respond’ to what we are experiencing, 'in-action' or we reflect ‘on-action’ and think through / discuss the event after it has taken place.  

There is an argument that ‘in-action’ is harder to achieve as it relies on independent thought and reacting in the moment.  I enjoy the idea of ‘in-action’ being harder to achieve because we as performers have to do this in our professional work, such as when we are learning choreography but have to perfect it and take correction at the same time.  However,  my initial thoughts upon reading about Donald Schon’s theory was that perhaps we don’t always naturally respond ‘in-action’ but that it is something we learn through our practice.   From my experience children learning to dance don’t naturally analyse and think ahead while learning for example, but it is something we as performers learn to do so that we can become better, quicker.  I believe that reflection 'in-action' is a skill and like all skills it requires practice.   While teaching now, I am more aware of changing my plan 'in-action'.  If I can see that something is not being absorbed by the students I am not afraid to change what I am doing and teach it from a different angle or change the content in that moment.  I have found that with time I am becoming more confident in this approach.

Now I am consciously aware of the theories behind reflection and learning strategies, I noticed I am more thoughtful of the approach I take when teaching children and adults.  More that this I am also intentionally aware of my own learning process and what works for me.  I have found that rather than always going to my ‘default’ way of explaining something that I have been more willing to try a different approach teaching.  This way I have been able to try out the idea of learning styles with my dance and drama groups.  I want to see if there are students who are quicker at picking something up if I mix up the order I would usually teach.  For example, this week in my drama lesson I started with the students lying down and listening to someone perform what they were about to learn.  Then I asked them what they thought of the performance and what they would change.  My usual approach would be to go straight into teaching the lines and listening to somebody else afterwards.  It was interesting because it sparked an interest in a couple of children who would normally not be so forthcoming in having an input.  This idea of changing structure to appeal to different learning styles is something I would like to practically try out further. 

Reflective practice is invaluable to the arts, in that we are dependent on growth and change to create our work.  Therefore it is something that I have always carried out, however I am now intentionally recording and analysing experiences using different tools I haven’t used in the past.  This has meant a greater depth of questioning the process behind my own work, and where I am headed.   Moreover, recording reflections through my journal has revealed common thoughts that occur not always consciously.  These thoughts need the attention of being recorded in a journal to allow them to be acknowledged as recurring ideas.  From there they can be addressed; to be learnt from or to be used as material for creation.

 

Atherton J S (2013) Learning and Teaching; Reflection and Reflective Practice [On-line: UK] retrieved 22 March 2015 from http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/reflecti.htm


Dewey, J How we think, (2007) reprint, Champaign: Standard Publications, Inc.


Gardner, Howard (1983) Frames of Mind the Theory of Multiple intelligences, New York: Basic Books

McLeod, S. A. (2010). Kolb - Learning Styles. Retrieved from http://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html