Dear Bill and everybody-
Bill wrote,
> Reflective practice as compared to non-reflective practice means a change
in
> the relations among elements as well as the elements, i.e. the ecology, of
> activity. For example, mediation changes and occurs more frequently by
> tertiary artifiacts in reflective practice as well as a change in what
those
> tertiary artifacts are. That is to say, teachers spend more time
*thinking
> about the activity in which they participate* in reflective practice and
that
> new time spent thinking is mediated by new concepts, which in turn, and in
> part, are constructed by more time spent thinking. Hmm.. quite cyclic.
> Collaborative reflection, that is, thinking together with other people, is
a
> change in the division of labor as well -- and one might expect a change
in
> discourse among those people who are thinking together, because discourse
> makes possible collaborative ideation, through the exchange of utterances.
I wonder if all practices are reflective - the issue seems to be what is
reflected upon in the practice and what is not. For example, some of my
students, preservice teachers, are very reflective on why parents of
low-income children "neglect" their children. I found that it is useful for
me, as an instructor, to think that I disagree with my students' reflections
than to think that they are not reflective. By doing that, we can focus on a
shared problem that my students try to solve and I consider very important
(e.g., the children from low-income families often disrupt their
expectations and pedagogical regimes my students try to set in their
classrooms). We try together to lay out different approaches to these
problems and consider their consequences. Seeing my students to be always
thoughtful and reflective helps me set a dialogue and collaboration with
them. Even more, my own "reflective" ideas are often transformed through
this dialogue there diverse positions collide and tested.
In our classroom dialogues, I often insist that it is not very important for
us, teachers, to decide whose reflection is more true (e.g., finding all
reasons of why kids are lazy) but rather whose reflection is more useful for
promoting learning and relationship with the children we want to promote.
What do you think?
Eugene
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bill Barowy [mailto:wbarowy@attbi.com]
> Sent: Friday, March 19, 2004 1:36 PM
> To: xmca@weber.ucsd.edu
> Subject: Reflection and change in a CHAT/Cultural Psychology paradigm
>
> All below is IMHO. Opinions, being like belly buttons, sometimes are
> odoriferous and other times opiferous. Well, belly buttons are opiferous
at
> least once in one's life. I'll leave it for you to decide.
>
> I'd like to help you deconstruct constructivism -- it's a great start on
how
> humans construct understandings and it stands against positivist
approaches,
> but misses a primary question -- with what do humans construct their
> understandings? I think it is just best to plunge into activity theory
and
> leave an approach that is dangerously close to solipsism behind.
>
> That being the case, teaching practice can be considered one form of
activity,
> and activity is the unit of analysis -- not change -- because change has
to
> occur in something substantive, material and ideal, and those things are
what
> we can point to for a discussion about what has changed.
>
> Reflective practice as compared to non-reflective practice means a change
in
> the relations among elements as well as the elements, i.e. the ecology, of
> activity. For example, mediation changes and occurs more frequently by
> tertiary artifiacts in reflective practice as well as a change in what
those
> tertiary artifacts are. That is to say, teachers spend more time
*thinking
> about the activity in which they participate* in reflective practice and
that
> new time spent thinking is mediated by new concepts, which in turn, and in
> part, are constructed by more time spent thinking. Hmm.. quite cyclic.
> Collaborative reflection, that is, thinking together with other people, is
a
> change in the division of labor as well -- and one might expect a change
in
> discourse among those people who are thinking together, because discourse
> makes possible collaborative ideation, through the exchange of utterances.
>
> Anyway, just off the cuff, 'cause I happen to be thinking about teaching
> practive and change.
>
> bb
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:42:23 PST