Wiki contents

Journals

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

Blog updates

Recently Updated

Recent updates

Recently Updated

All updates

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Things are going well and I can’t really complain, so I often find it hard each week to come with key problems to reflect on. I also at times find it hard to display one thing I have learnt on when it seems that every week it is simply building on knowledge from the previous week.

Referring back to the learning circle whereby we learn from experience (Kolb, 1976), this week I would like to reflect on the concrete experience during the team meeting. We decided at the end of the first half of the semester that we would continue with only on two hour meeting each week. Everything would be discussed in the one meeting and that we make all decisions then too. From this I observed that this meeting was lead with little structure and little slowing concentration. I think as a group we came to realise the importance of learning our own parts thoroughly and coming with concrete decisions. This week we made all decisions as a team but it feels as though we were slightly optimistic in some areas and got lucky in other areas. Which relates to this week’s reading.

I believe our underlying strategy of both high quality and high prices have been the focus of the group since we started MikesBikes. Reflecting on the rules which guide our underlying assumptions and therefore lead to our actions and results (Synnott, 2013), it seems our group has consistently been adjusting actions rather than the underlying assumptions when making rules and goals each week, which I have now realised refers to single loop learning. Whilst this has worked for us, minimal learning has been done which was something our group discussed this week. From this article I have learnt that we can deepen our knowledge by reflecting on not only our actions and results (being the decisions and the SHV from our rollovers each week) but by looking deeper into our underlying decisions.

Instead of simply following the rules each week, we need to learn to change them. This week I look forward to implementing that and will reflect on the results next week!

 

References

Kolb, D. A. (1976). Management and the learning process. California Management Review, 8(3), 21--31

Synnott, M. (2013). Reflection and double loop learning: The case of HS2. Teaching Public Administration, 31(1), 124--134. doi:10.1177/0144739413479950

2 Comments

  1. Hi Jess

    First off, I like how you used Kolb's learning cycle as opposed to Daudelin's process, it makes a nice change to read something different; I think you followed his cycle well in your reflection. 

    I think the area you could improve upon is your use of theory. You really only use it to back up and label your thoughts, which only just demonstrates the application level of Bloom's Taxonomy. To improve this, you could have further explored what is meant by 'single-loop' learning, how it relates to your team and how we could progress to 'double-loop' learning. Maybe analysing the weaknesses of the theory along the way. 

    Finally, your writing style was pretty good, it perhaps could be improved by proof-reading it more, as there were some small mistakes that could have been easily picked up. But overall, thats just me looking for something to comment on, it really is a small thing. Otherwise, nice reflection =) 

    P.S. 

    I purposely didn't comment on what you thought about the team, we can talk about it in the meeting; suffice to say I thought you made some really good points, that seem to echo what others are saying as well. 

     

     

  2. Hi Jess

    I felt that your reflection this week was more focused on observations you had noticed rather than attempting to create insights from your analysis of a particular issue in the week. You talked about about team meetings and associated results and then went onto things that you had learn based on the readings. While this is a good component to have within your reflections, by going into detail on one specific issue, reflecting on (e.g.) the reasons it has occurred, components of the issue and potential solutions, you will be able to reach the deeper level of blooms that our summative learning journals require.

    I know it's a classic piece of feedback for many of the reflections on this wiki, but I feel you should to keep to Daudelin's framework: 

    1. Articulation of a problem
    2. Analysis of that problem
    3. Formulation and testing of a tentative theory to explain the problem
    4. Action (or deciding whether to act)

    I understand that it's often difficult to identify a 'problem' to reflect on, but the further you dive into a seemingly surface issue, the more complex it becomes when your look at underlying assumptions, perspectives, politics between people etc. It often seems hard, but I guess that the whole point of this. 

    Good luck and I look forward to your entry next week.