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

Last week for me, I found that I had not reflected on enough last week, which is the response that I got from most of my comments on my Learning Journal. However, once reflecting on why that was, I felt that the week had not been a large enough impact to allow for me to truly think into why I could not analyse the situation from every angle. I only stumbled upon this when I recognised how large of a week this turnover had been, and it has completely changed my groups interaction with the simulator and one another. 

No one was interested in buying the company's firm, therefore, with just the cash injection we were requiring a decent strategy to get us through. This is where I started to challenge the way that myself and the group had interacted and behaved. Previously our decisions had been so hasty and not discussed in real depth. Today we were looking over every aspect in the simulation to work with our tight budget and minimal sales, which meant full on in depth, no interruption discussion of the simulator. It was brilliant, we knew what each other intended on doing, how it fit into the budget, something which we thought we were doing so successfully once before, which is now an obsolete option compared to the intricate time spent coordinating specific plans. Just as Daudelin explains, "reflection is so natural and familiar" (1996), which is something I can agree with now that I compare the behavior of my team now compared to before. I am not implying that my team were not adequate before, as previously we worked very well together, we all knew the goal, however we all managed our own sector and weren't too aware of one anothers details, which probably lead to our downfall, not being aware at all times.

When assessing the readings, it makes me consider how my group could have been, or what other path we could have taken. As Davenport (2006) explains some workplaces can be chaos, spread sheets, inconsistent data and confusion. To be fair, we had confusion, we had inconsistent data, however we still held it together, and I really value my team for it. We could have approached our way of working with the simulation a very different way, we could have began our work by assisting each other rather than being independent, but we thought we were doing what was best for us and the team, though not the simulation. Had we however, become more hostile at one another, we would have never recognized the error of our ways, and then we would have once again gone bust and under. Therefore I am proud to say that we are still a mature bunch who can hold down a stressful situation without chaos and rationalization instead.

From here on, we know how to work together with the simulation, one of the group members even said: "we should do this from now on". As Baghai (2009) "Growth is Granular", and to be fair, the growing that it has taken to get here has been stimulating and eye opening. To be honest, I have always been able to see the investment that is required to activate the simulation, however I can now understand why your time is required. We are put into these groups to share knowledge, not to be the boss of a department, combined knowledge is key, which I noticed when we collectively talked about situations, and shouted out ideas which could potentially pull our company through. So this reflection, I hope that I have reflected adequately, I truly feel as if I have learnt from this situation to be more aware and less relaxed, to look for every opportunity to thrive with others, as 6 people combined have more knowledge than one.

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

Baghai, M., Smit, S., & Viguerie, P. (2009). Is your growth strategy flying blind? Harvard Business Review, 87(5), 86---96.

Davenport, T. H. (2006). Competing on analyticsHarvard Business Review, 84(1), 98--107.


  1. Review for Week09 Learning Journals

    Katy Kohut

    You have followed Daudelin’s steps but please use theory to back up what you are saying. You very good insight but you need to apply the theory to achieve higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Last time I said you need to paraphrase the theorists and stop using too many quotes however as I said above, there isn’t much theory integrated into your journal.

    You could something like this E.g. According to Daudelin (1996), this theorist emphasised the importance of learning through reflection by carefully thinking about and critiquing oneself in order to learn properly.

    Last time I said (last feedback for week 04) ‘I found this journal quite difficult to read’. However this week’s journal for you was very easy to read as it had simple language and I found this quite interesting to read over.

  2. Hi Katy,

    I found this journal easy to read, but I found that I was reading a descriptive journal instead of a learning journal.  This has been pointed out to me in my journal entries where I have not clearly stated the problem and identified how I could of improved this or what the overall take home message was.  Here you have stated that you have learnt to be more aware and relaxed, but to identify this problem you have to re-read your journal in order to see where you have subtly placed your problem in amongst a description of your thoughts and week.  

    The theory for this learning was present, but you need to integrate it more into your journal.  This could of been done simply by paraphrasing Baghai's "Growth is Granular" instead of putting the quote in and talking around it.  This would also allow your journal to have a guideline of how to talk about the problem.  If you were to simply state: "The problem this week was..." it would add more structure to your thought pattern, which might help with the theory integration.  Also, you use the word 'we' to describe what has been happening in your group, but because this is your learning journal it would help if you were to narrow it down into "I" where you can identify the problem and point out what you were doing instead of collectively mentioning the whole team because you would of each individually learnt something different from this week.    

    In previous feedback (week 4) I stated that your writing style was difficult and it is obvious from this entry that you have developed your writing style in order to make it easier to read and understand.  Though I still found that the theory was not integrated into your journal and this is something that you can work to improve on.

    Your journal provided interesting insight into what your team has been doing, and the language has a nice flow to it.  Good luck for the final few rollovers!   

  3. Hi Katy,

    I agree with Anna's comments on stating the problem clearly by saying "The problem this week was...". I too had to search hard for the exactly problem/area you were trying to discuss but this should be what you make clear to the reader.

    A few weeks ago Mr Smith commented on my reflection and he said that I had a great reflection inside of a good one. I feel this is the same with your reflection. You have written quite a lot that I feel just don't need to be there... "When assessing the readings, it makes me consider how my group could have been, or what other path we could have taken" is an example as I think we all feel this... I think this is just stating the obvious and it has created sentences that just aren't necessary and lead to the "descriptive journal" as Anna again said. Work hard to just get to the point and keep it minimal then you will be able to achieve your great journal that I feel is in there.

    Remember to read through your journal. Some parts just didn't make sense... For example "As Baghai (2009) "Growth is Granular", and to be fair, the growing..." or "No one was interested in buying the company's firm" - just little bits that I had to read twice and which takes away from the flow of your reflection. Im sure you will check your summative journal several times though so it is not a big problem, but rather something to just keep in mind.

    Well done.

  4. Hello Katy,

    I enjoyed your journal this week and between your work and the others feedback there is not much to say!

    I agree with both Anna and Timothy's points and thought Peters point that Timothy brought was relevant. You have all the points and thoughts that make a good reading journal, you may just need to sand of the edges a bit to make it flow better. I would add that it dose flow well between the paragraphs and that I don't think that would need to be changed.

    I hope this helps and that you continue to improve within your group!