Analysis of Resource 6



From the reflection cycle, I extracted the following characteristics that distinguishes a reflective writing from a descriptive one:

1.       Description vs. Reflection.
2.       Reinterpreting from different points of view (others’ point of view).
3.       Exploring the impact of events on her emotions and behavior.
4.       Exploring the event at a different time.
5.       Relevant past and present experiences not compared.
6.       Willingness to be critical of own actions, behavior and motives. 
7.       Evidence of ‘standing back’ from the event and reconsidering the event objectively.

This list is not exhaustive and I am sure that you can easily come up with more criteria to add to it, but this set of criteria is good enough to make our assessment of Resource 6 consistent across all three samples. Having a common standard, such as a definite set of criteria, is essential to produce a reliable and objective measure of the quality of a given work independent of human emotions and biases.


When you work on your Evidence of Reflection for PDQ, you will need to keep in mind these criteria, and accordingly articulate and analyze your experiences.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Presentation 1 – (Weak reflection: Barely scratches the surface)

1.       Description vs. Reflection
It is mostly a descriptive account.

2.       Reinterpreting from different points of view (others’ point of view)
No attempt made to look at the event from a different point of view.

3.       Exploring the impact of events on her emotions and behavior
She acknowledges that she is not feeling good about how her presentation went but she does not make any attempt at exploring the underlying factors that make her feel this way.

4.       Exploring the event at a different time
The narrative was written at a specific point in time. No attempt was made to revisit and reflect on the event at another time.

5.       Relevant past and present experiences not compared.

6.       Willingness to be critical of own actions, behavior and motives
There is acknowledgement of the fact that she needs to improve her presentation skills. Consequently, she asked for Mrs. Shaw’s feedback. However, she does not spend time on questioning the validity of Mrs. Shaw’s suggestions or how she would accommodate these suggestions in her practice.

7.       No evidence of ‘standing back’ from the event and reconsidering the event objectively.

This account does not qualify as reasonably reflective account.


  

Presentation 2 - (A decent attempt at reflection)

1.       Description vs. reflection
There is description of the event, but the description is accompanied by reflection in appropriate places.   
2.       Reinterpreting from different points of view (others’ point of view)
“It was not the figures they wanted”. She had a clear voice and a lot of figures, but the it was clear from audience’s questions that she was not able to convey her ideas clearly. She realized “It was not the figures they wanted,” but she did not explore this important aspect of her experience. Had she given consideration to the what the audience really wanted, she could have elicited exactly what has been lacking in her presentation. This would have helped her come up with a definitive list of things she would need to address to make her future presentations better.

She did seek feedback from her colleagues on her presentation and learned that Mrs. Shaw’s interruptions were not a function of the quality of her presentation, rather, this was typical of her behavior. This made her feel better, but she did not think of the steps she would need to take should Mrs. Shaw interrupt again in future presentations.

3.       Exploring the impact of events on her emotions and behavior
She has linked her emotions and feelings concerning the event to specific issues that surfaced during the event.

4.       Exploring the event at a different time
The reflection was written at one point in time. There is no acknowledge of the possibility that revisiting the event at a later time might enable her to view the event from a different perspective, hence, derive a different inference and learning from it.

5.       Comparing past and present experiences
She admits that her previous experience with presentation was not satisfactory, but she does not compare the two experiences. Such a comparison could have helped her better define areas in which she could improve. 

6.       Willingness to be critical of own actions, behavior and motives
There is willingness to be self-critical—she recognizes the limited usefulness of her acting skills, her lack of experience with PPT, the difference in her expectations and audience’s concerns and element of superficiality in her motive for using PPT.

7.       Evidence of ‘standing back’ from the event and reconsidering the event objectively

To conclude, there is evidence of some reflection—she realizes that there are areas where she needs to improve; however, her reflection lacks depth which, in consequence, limits the utility of her learning from her experience.




Presentation 3 – (Deep reflection)

1.       Description vs. reflection
There is description of the event, but all descriptive details are explored through adequate reflection.  
2.       Reinterpreting from different points of view (others’ point of view)
She actively solicited her colleagues’ feedback concerning Mrs. Shaw’s intrusions during her presentation which put her at ease—she learned that Mrs. Shaw’s behavior was typical of her and did not say anything about the quality of her presentation. To better deal with Mrs. Shaw’s interruptions in future, she thought of using ideas from a book on assertiveness she had encountered earlier in the library.

From her colleagues, she also learned that the presentation was not as bad as remembers; perhaps she was being over critical of herself.

With these things sorted, she was able to shift her focus to the matter that required her to invest time and effort—learning PPT, and discussing data and figures in greater depth.

3.       Exploring the impact of events on her emotions and behavior
She considers how Mrs. Behavior fueled her low esteemed which in turn lead to negative emotions and unhealthy self-criticism. She identifies low self-esteem as one of the issues she needs to work on.

4.       Exploring the event at a different time
The event was considered at different times. She acknowledges the shift in her attitude, feelings and perspective. She has become more objective and confident of the steps that need to be taken to improve. She learns the importance of reflecting on an event at different times and resolves to use it as tool to process future events.

5.       Comparing past and present experiences
She compares her previous experience with presentation current one, considers the commonalities between the two and elicits the underlying issues she needs to address to become better at presenting. 

6.       Willingness to be critical of own actions, behavior and motives
There is willingness to be self-critical—she recognizes the limited usefulness of her acting skills, her lack of experience with PPT, the difference in her expectations and audience’s concerns, element of superficiality in her motive for using PPT, her low self-esteem.

7.       Strong evidence of ‘standing back’ from the event and reconsidering the event objectively

In conclusion, she has gained deeper insights through colleagues’ feedback, reconsidering the event at different times, comparing the past and present events, ‘standing back’ from the event and looking things objectively, linking ideas and other experiences.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Reflection on Learning Theories 1

For December 2019 Vacation