This message was sent to xmca by a new member and apparently did not make
it through (or this is a repeat!). It seems relevant to ongoing discussion.
mike
-------
>From emateus@weber.ucsd.edu Fri Aug 20 10:46:28 2004
as a new member of the list I'll take the chance of
being redundant and I'll bring back the reflective
process issue.
Most of the discussion regarding reflection is based
on hierarquical notions of "kinds of reflection",
"low to high reflectivity"; "sociological,
individualistic and narcissistic reflectivity";
"authentic reflection", "technical, practical and
critical reflection", "instrumental and social
reflection", etc. This hierarquical order usually
values reflectivity that changes institutions, that
reconstructs social contexts, that is said to be
critical. In this sense, educational research has
strongly contributed to the narrative of
"unreflective" school teachers (as paradoxical as it
might be).
My concern is, then, what is the relation between
reflection and criticism? Can we rank reflection? And
if so, how can we assure which "kind" of reflection
produces a change that is more valuable or empowering
than any other?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Nov 09 2004 - 11:43:01 PST