Wiki contents


2019 Learning journals
2018 Learning journals
2015 Learning journals
2014 Learning journals
2013 Learning journals

Smartsims Support Centre

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

The second half of the semester started and I am now expecting that our competition will get fiercer. I reckon that our performance of the rollover before the break has positively motivated us to pursue our goal for the rest of this semester. One of the biggest challenges we faced in this week might be our limited budget. Generally speaking, I think that we had plenty of budgets to keep our operation but in order to pursue our goal and strategy which can differentiate ourselves from other firms, we wanted to do various things within the limited budget. The result of the last rollover was, I guess, the particular one that should be regarded as the process to achieve our objective in the long run although our current issue was a bit problematic in the short run.

According to the reading “Teaching smart people how to learn (Argyris, 1991)”, good learning is not just about problem solving with action strategy or technique which is most commonly accepted as single-loop learning. There is other type of learning that is double-loop learning by which people re-evaluate their long-term goals or conceptual frameworks by considering the results or consequences. I think the double loop learning process is very important in order to ensure whether or not we are still on a right track to our final goal. For instance, by single-loop learning, the problem of our limited budget can be solved in several ways such as borrowing money or issuing shares. Through those short-term solutions, we can learn how to avoid the same negative situation but those solutions do not always help us achieve our specific goal because each of solutions results in different outcomes. Therefore, we need to select the optimal alternative depending on our goal or main strategy and I personally think that this optimal selection may sometimes be not to solve the current problem as soon as possible because considering underlying assumptions, facing a particular issue cannot sometimes be avoided. It is certain that our team experienced issues we have not faced in MikesBikes before and most of us probably did not feel positive way about them in the short run. However, in terms of double-loop learning, it can be said that we are still on a right track to our long-term goal and now have a valuable chance to learn more than ever before. I think that double-loop learning may provide two main different conclusions for us. The first possible conclusion is that we probably need to solve the problem and also modify our goal or strategy as well because the current situation may be suitable for other goals or strategies. The second one is that we are required to solve the current issue but we can still stick to our existing goal because the issues we are facing may be regarded as just a process we need to pass through. I guess that our team will reach the second conclusion considering that we still have enough capabilities to achieve our long-term objective and the current market situation is not the one which forces us to modify our assumption to the entire operation.

Overall, I found this week’s reading very interesting and beneficial for our team success in the long run. Hopefully, our team can learn something including a way of problem solving and realize whether or not our long-term goal or strategy can be achieved through double-loop learning. I personally think that we are on a right track but it seems necessary to ensure that all other members also think so. If not, our team probably needs double-loop learning as a team.

 Argyris, C. (1991). Teaching smart people how to learnReflections, 4(2), 4--15


  1. Such an embarrassing moment. 

    Ummm I guess that I could point out the current issues I'm facing and understanding of the article "Teaching smart people how to learn" is ok.
    However, the application of the idea of the reading is a bit ambiguous. Comparing with other students' journals, I guess that I can put more reasonable examples to my argument. Also, I probably need to compare and contrast the reading with the other readings but this time I was afraid of making the structure too complex and hard to follow. I could reach personal conclusion (not solution at this time) to the current issues, which is good.

    Overall, compared with my team members' journals that I'm supposed to review, my journal has no excellence or terribleness. I just tried to be objective but it was too hard. If it's easy, we don't need peer review anymore. But anyway there are still rooms to be improved as mentioned above. Read others' journal more and learn more. 

  2. Hey Sho!

    I liked your journal for this week and found it interesting to read. Unfortunately, although your journal this week did show elements of the Daudelin structure it could have perhaps been set out better. You identified the problem of our limited budget, analyzed it, and came up with the solution but it was just difficult to follow it all in that big paragraph. This didn't stop you from doing well in terms of Bloom's taxonomy. You did an excellent job of reaching the evaluation stage by comparing the different alternative courses of action. In particular, your part about the fact that some problems are unavoidable (such as the expense of our preparations for the next rollover) showed that you have a very high understanding of the reading. Good Job.