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

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

This week has been an interesting one in management 300. Usually by third week of a course I am well and truly settled in the course, know what I’m doing and have found my feet. This course is not the case; my feet are well and truly lost. That’s not to say I am not enjoying this course, I really am starting to. However my issue lies in getting comfortable with this course, there is definitely still something that still isn’t sitting right. Unfortunately while I found these weeks readings interesting, they did not really apply to what this week’s learning experiences I have had so they will not be included sorry.


So So in order to reflect on my learning this week i need to use Daudelin's (1996) structure to do an analysis my problem so therefore i can learn from the problem. So what is the problem? I am very happy with my team, we are all really motivated and seem to genuinely get on so its not that aspect. Mikes Bikes? Well we are all having issues with that one. I think my problem is trying to figure out how everything fits together in this course. Are the readings just there to help us understand what is happening in our groups? Because that’s what it is feeling likeI feel like i need to figure out how everything links together so then i can figure out what am i meant to be getting out of the readings, the group work and Mikes Bikes. I feel like i need to figure this out now so when it comes to writing my 80% learning journal it is easy because i am on the right track from now.

How to work through these issues? To follow Daudelin's (1996) structure i need to test a theory/ solution to my issue. My theory is to somehow figure out what i want from this course personally and how the different aspects link together. I am doing this because as my first reading reflection and the suggested solution failed. My solution to my issues around ambiguity is just to embrace the course and its ambiguity of what it wants from us. This unfortunately hasn't worked out, but i think the issue was in the solution. I can't decide to just embrace it, i need to work through why i have these issues with the course. So this is what i have done above, now i need to figure out what i want from this course so then i can relate and link my learning together. So i start with the title of this paper 'Management in Dynamic Contexts'. I am taking from the title, the dynamic context would Mikes Bikes. So alone from the title of this course, it is figuring out how to manage ourselves (using readings) and people (using teams) in a dynamic context such as Mikes Bikes stimulation. So that is what for me how the course links itself together. It is applying the relevant theories from not only this paper but also our previous experiences to a real life situation, and then reflecting on how the stimulation is helping us understand these concepts. My second part of my solution is to figure out what i want personally. First of all i want to succeed, second of all i want to understand how all my learning from university can link together and i feel like this course could very well achieve this!

The fourth step in Daudelin's (1996) structure is to follow though with the action, which i have done, and also reflect on what it has made you learn, From working through these steps I have shown that i have learnt something very important this week, what i want out of this course and how all the different aspects link together. To me this is probably the most beneficial learning i will have this whole semester, and i might even use this reflection process to figure out what i want from my other courses so i can be more focused and narrowed in on my learning for the semester.


Daudelin, M. W. (1996). Learning from experience through reflection. Organizational Dynamics, 24(3), 36--48