Critical/transformative reflection
The tentative exploration of ideas continues and other possible reasons are identified. The main change, however, is that factors/persons beyond the immediate context are identified and explored (university’s handling assignment criteria, encouragement or lack thereof of critical thinking, lack of procedures in place to handle group dynamics when they sour etc): elements of the wider social, political and economic context. Issues of ‘power’, ‘authority’, ‘status’ and ‘control’ are especially identified. In this way, the understanding of an incident/interaction/conversation becomes not only deeper, but that understanding is transformational. Because of that transformed understanding the thoughts/words/actions of the person doing the reflecting are changed, become different, to those that they might have had/said/done prior to the transformed understanding.
EXAMPLE
Isn’t it interesting how every time the issue of workplace bullying comes up around issues of power and control any discussion becomes really heated. I wonder if that’s because we have all in some way had to deal with bullies and we really haven’t resolved our reactions to and feelings about those?
I think part of Serena’s defensiveness probably comes from her desire to look deeply into the hypothetical incident and explore the dynamics of bullying from multiple perspectives to change behaviour as well as confront the perpetrator. Although I think Daniel’s response may be all about his own experience and walking away from a job because he felt powerless to confront the bully. Serena was probably trying to deconstruct the incident so that we could examine bullying at a more abstract level and we could influence real change that went beyond this one incident. She probably feels really misrepresented like she was trying to defend the bully’s actions, which I know wasn’t her intention at all. I know what Serena was attempting to do and I should have tried to influence the direction of the discussion to take the heat out and to debate more calmly. It did appear that Daniel had suffered from a past incident, especially when he began talking in the first person. And then I think for some in the group there was just concern that we have to get this presentation together and Serena’s suggestion just added a layer of complexity, even if it has the potential to look into the dynamics of bullying at a deeper level. It is the end of semester, we’re tired and we just want to make things a bit easy for us with so many other assignments and exams. No wonder everyone was anxious.
I wish the people who design these assignments would make the criteria more transparent. At university level shouldn’t we be encouraged to examine different perspectives and to question beyond the facts at hand. The way this hypothetical incident was presented only encouraged us to make comments at the level of the players themselves rather than at the level of company policy and culture. I’m also worried that it isn’t clear how we resolve volatile group situations such as this, where so much is felt at a personal level by the members. I wonder how I can address this when we next meet and whether I should speak to our tutor. I feel that I have a responsibility here to find a way out of this impasse where all members can retain their dignity and not feel censured. I will speak to the tutor and I will draw up a plan of action for the presentation based on the decisions that we did make as a group.
Identifiers:
- Evidence of Dialogic Reflection But going beyond to demonstrate Explicit evidence of awareness that the action/event/ experience and actors/reasons for its occurrence are not only located in the immediate context but in the wider historical, political, social and economic contexts of the region/state/nation/world: justice, power, authority