Utilization of the Reflective Practitioner Model for the Training Program - Assignment Example

UTILIZATION OF THE REFLECTIVE PRACTITIONER MODEL FOR THE TRAINING PROGRAM TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN THE ORGANIZATION As a Human Resource Manager, there are tasks that are needed to be focused on. In this case, as an HR manager, training would be given an in depth focus. With this training, it should utilize the 'reflective practitioner' model. The 'Reflective Practitioner' Model The 'reflective practitioner' model is more like a “mentor-student” relationship where both the mentor and the student or the one who is guided by the mentor is able to learn from one another. The so called reflective practitioners are the reflection of action and research, as well as practice and theory (‘The Reflective Practitioner: A Model for Staff Development?’ 2007). They also strongly believe in the definition that reflection should result in self-understandings and self-knowledge. There are also some who suppose that action should also be integrated in the learning process. In the process, reflective practitioners are most encouraged to be aware of their own theory-belief thus, compare the mental models and that of which appears in the reality. Reflective practice seeks to identify, evaluate, and change the beliefs and assumptions that guide and influence our actions (Osterman & Kottkamp, 2004). Reflective practice places a main focus on learning, by actively involving the learner and learner’s experiences, or the mentor-mentees in the construction of knowledge, providing opportunities for exploration and articulation of own ideas, personal beliefs, knowledge, and experience (thus its emphasis on experiential learning), ongoing analysis of personal theory-in-use, and designing activities that are collaborative in nature (Tim McMahon, 2007). The professional autonomy of the mentors are again taken into consideration and being re-thought, reconsidered and reassessed. How does the Model Work? If one is to compare the action model and Kolb’s learning cycle, they both emphasize the importance of reflection. Reflection in turn is meant to be transformative (Tim McMahon, 2007). Reflective practice is “an inquiry approach to teaching that involves a personal commitment to continuous learning and improvement” (York-Barr et al., 2001, p. 3). This stage also involves the participants’ linguistic behavior and even their own experiences. One important distinction between reflective practitioner method and action research method is their form of inquiry. However, in this paper we would be focusing on the convergence of the two models as an essential step towards achieving a common goal for a company. A reflective practitioner does not need to answer series of questions and define their answers but merely share their experiences. They would also be able to act as if they are just sharing their views but getting more in return. Who is it Suitable For? Reflective practitioner model is suitable in areas of professional practice which includes psychology, education, as well as architecture. This model propose directions, purposes and methods for exploring extending as well as conforming professional standards of practice (Campone, F., 2004). Group of Worker that the Model is Suitable In a study conducted for staff development which aimed to have a more efficient staff, the reflective practitioner model was utilized. In the said study they concluded that the development of a more reflective staff would bring about more change. Thus, the development of more reflective practitioners is recommended. Movement initiatives are already being exploited. One interest group that has been set up in England is the Senior Women Managers Network. The group specializes in training the staff to develop their potentials to become managers of the future. The people saw the emerging problem of outside recruitment so to address such problem; they were able to come up with an answer to the challenge. In 2004, the group utilized the pilot mentoring scheme that accepted initial participants of 20 staffs. Although the study is able present such in the staff level, it should also be notable that this can work in almost any level of the organization. A Critical Assessment of the Model: Strengths and Weaknesses The 'reflective practitioner' model is an efficient model in terms of gathering the data needed, in a research, and of “training” by sharing experiences, in a corporate level. The model persuades the students to form a relationship with the mentors-researchers in a non judgmental and non hierarchical way. This would definitely reduce the inferiority feeling that one may feel if the dialogue is between staffs and their officers while still maintaining the level of professionalism between the parties, if probable. The model also offers a higher level of organizational bond because it makes puts forward the more personal part of the mentors while sharing their views. In return, the students would be able to present themselves in a different light while learning. The learning would help the students in setting their goals, or re aligning these goals. In a reflective practitioner model, the students would be able to discover their own strengths and weaknesses as a staff, and vice-versa for the mentors. In a reflective practice, the staff would also discover an ability to understand and respect various points of view and the influence of own and other’s ethics and values. They can also benefit from the spiral of professional development because they can have a self-evaluation and observe the professional practices of colleagues. For students, they would be able to reflect on their personal practice thus, giving them a chance to information age to improve on themselves (Tim McMahon, 2007). The same is true for all level, even in a corporate world where staffs can improve on themselves by acquiring new skills and trainings. While involving the learner and learner’s experiences in the construction of knowledge, and by providing opportunities for exploration and articulation of new ideas, personal beliefs, knowledge, and experience, this also provides an avenue for students to become independent learners and problem-solvers. Although the model seems to portray the key model to achieve growth in the staff of the company, there are also some vague areas in this model. Some of these vague areas include: (1) the mentor-student conditioning may be faced with some resistance; (2) the model would need long term planning and implementation; and, (3) the implementation has the possibility of over doing it. First, the model is faced with some resistance, especially, in the case at hand. If we are to consider the HR manager who would be conducting the training, there are possible effects to the staff, with regards to experience. Some would be looking at the age of the speaker, how is the person able to provide a mentor-student credible relationship if s/he is younger than the staff. There can also be considerations in terms of tenure in the company. Some tenured staffs would be observing the changes over the year, while if the HR manager is relatively new, there might be possible setbacks. This is where the hegemony of one may set in or the inferiority of one as well. Though, these setbacks may not be present in all organization, these are also things to consider before using the said model. Despite those facts these can still be considered as conditional and hypothetical circumstances. Second, the long term planning and implementation for the model would require a certain level of commitment for all the staff. Although as mentioned earlier, there are possibilities of setbacks, with such there could be a longer time frame so that the HR manager would be able to modify the model into a workable model molded for the needs of the organization. The setbacks will be extending the time for the implementation. The model also ensue a long term commitment because, if the model will be utilized, it would be used as long as the staff would feel the need to use it. Thus, if an adjustment will be needed, there might be objections to change. The third reason falls under the development of the relationship in this mentor-student position. In such a model, it encourages undergoing a more personal level of knowledge about one another. This may lead to possible repercussion like over familiarity and the lost of professionalism. Though, professionalism is sometimes viewed as a barrier to a harmonious working environment, it should also be considered as a sergeant for peace. This keeps everything at hand, because over familiarity leads to involvement of personal circumstances to be brought to work. This may lead to lower efficiency as oppose to the desired effect of the training. If the participants’ would be able to overcome such events then, the model would be able to be useful for the organization. Strengths and Weakness of the Model Schon’s work on reflective practice has created a significant impact when it comes to many training and education programmes for teachers as well as informal educators adopting his core notions in both organizing experiences and in teaching content. With regards to this model there have been criticisms: First, the distinction between reflections in an on action has been subjected to debate (Eraut, 1994 and Usher et al., 1997). Schon had failed to clarify what is involved in the reflective process and according to Eraut (1994, p.145), problem is created when time is extremely short, therefore, decisions must be rapid and scope of reflection is limited. Moreover, there have been no psychological elaborations of the psychological realities of reflection in action. However, Schon appeared to have focused on the significance of taking reflections in and on action together. Practitioners were able to describe how they think, as well as how they make use of the repertoire of images, metaphors and theories. Secondly, there have been question as to what extent to which conceptualization of reflective practice entails praxis. Action being informed is clearly given emphasis, however, less focus on the commitments entailed was given. Schon, have created a descriptive concept which is quite empty of content (Richardson, 1990, p.14). Third, while Schon is engaged in generation of formal theory, it is evident that reflection by him, on his own textual practice, in giving some account, is not found in this. Furthermore, he does not interrogate his own method (Usher, et al., 1997, p. 149). Conclusions Despite all the possible consequences, the model can still prove its essence. This is an excellent model to adopt because the possible hindrances of the model are more incidental than definite. This model would be very essential if this would be applied for training people, or managing people. According to Catcher (2006), to be an effective learning organization and to grow our own leaders of the future, then we must invest in ourselves and be prepared to learn more about ourselves and learn from each other, using the techniques which will help us to do so, thus, using the same model that she used for the Senior Women Managers Network. They also used a mentoring type of model, though she also used Action Research process. As mentioned earlier, there are benefits that would be gathered from the reflective practices. These practices results to several improved positions and circumstances to the staff. Most importantly, the model should therefore be utilized because the benefits outweigh the circumstantial hindrances. Another consideration falls under the cost of the project or training. The cost would be comparably less than the benefits that can be gathered by the organization. Thus, if external recruitment would be utilized, it means more qualified people should also be employed to look for candidates that can fill the positions. This would cost more than using and improving what you already have. The people that are recruited from outside tends to also need more adjustment period before they can launch a superb job where the company’s goals, visions and missions are incorporated. The time that an old employee that would be promoted to a higher position would take lesser time to adjust and his or her performance has already been put to test that the company knows their capabilities. Recommendations Recommendations drawn here are based on the conclusions above which are crucial reflection of practitioner model, this type of management training development is appropriate for a company which want to adopt this model. The model as proven by several instances that has utilized (almost) the same model is a very excellent contribution to the company. This model may not only be utilized in a classroom setting but also in the corporate level. The company would benefit in the training set because they would be able to manage the people well with it. The reflective model has shown that it would be able to impart positive working attitude to the staff, such attitudes includes, professionalism, being independent learners and problem-solvers and also being able to engage in self-evaluation. In the case at hand where the HR manager needs to apply this to the staff, s/he would need to be prepared before she uses the model. The model would not only be beneficial to the staff but also to the organization as a whole. If the company wishes to upgrade the current level of business they have, then the people in the business would also need an upgrade. In order to come up with a better employee, a training is essential, but to come up with a better person to serve the business and influence the business, an inner evaluation is considered necessary. More ‘better’ people in the company would mean more ‘better’ quality of work. References Part 1: Campone, F., 2004, A Well-Informed Curiosity: Evolving a Model of Coaching Research. Catcher, Fiona, 2006, Management Development Fiona Catcher Project, The Effectiveness of Mentoring as a Component of CPD   http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:uTE7pJNWiyQJ:www.virtualstaffcollege.co.uk/downloads/MDP%2520ECS%2520Bristol%2520Fiona%2520Catcher%2520MDP%2520FINAL.doc+%27reflective+practitioner%27+model+of+management+development&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9 Eraut, M., 1994, Developing Professional Knowledge and Competence, London: Falmer. (Richardson, V., 1990, The Evolution of Reflective Teaching and Teacher Education’ in R.T. Clift, W.R. Houston and M.C. Pugach (eds.) Encouraging Reflective Practice in Education, An Analysis of Issues and Programs, New York: Teachers College Press, p.14. The Reflective Practitioner: A Model for Staff Development? 2007, http://72.14.253.104/search?q=cache:38h4ZBviB0IJ:ahero.uwc.ac.za/index.php%3Fmodule%3Dcshe%26action%3Ddownloadfile%26fileid%3D81806115511751698118924+%27reflective+practitioner%27+model+of+management+development&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=29 Tim McMahon, 2007, University Centre for Learning and Teaching, Anglia Polytechnic University, The Queen’s Building, Bishop Hall Lane, Chelmsford CM1 1SQ, Essex, United Kingdom (t.j.mcmahon@anglia.ac.uk). Usher, et al., 1997, Adult Education and the Post Modern Challenge. London: Routledge. York-Barr, J., Sommers, W. A., Ghere, G. S., & Montie, J., 2001, Reflective Practice to Improve Schools: An action guide for educators. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Part 2 Kolb’s learning cycle has four stages, which provides a framework to aid learning. Any topic area can be broken down with this structured approach and absorbed effectively by identifying the key stages of experiencing, reflecting, conceptualizing as well as planning. This cycle suggests that none of us could learn and understand until we have been around the whole cycle (‘Learning Styles-Self Assessment,’ 2008). Kolb’s model of the experiential learning cycle requires reflection followed by generalization and abstract conceptualization. In Kolb’s cycle it involves completing actions which are analogous to part of the action research cycle. Both Kolb’s learning cycle as well as the action research spiral emphasizes the importance of reflection on action and experience. Reflection is intended in both models to be transformative and this transformation in the case of learning cycle can be mainly internal, for example, it may be concerned with knowledge or attitude. There is always strategic attempt to improve practice in the case of action research spiral. However, within the practitioner model when learning cycle is used, greater emphasis is put on the externally observable results of transformation in terms of improvements to practical actions either as a student or as a teacher, as Ashcroft and Foreman-Peck (1994) suggested. By a deliberate and planned intent to solve a particular problem or set of problems, an action researched is distinguished. Action research, involves strategic actions and such is not integral to the reflective practitioner model of learning and teaching. As expressed in the Kolb’s learning cycle, that reflective practitioner model involves going through part of the action research spiral, does not make it action research. What distinguishes action research from the reflective practitioner model of teaching and learning as described by Ashcroft and Foreman-Peck (1994) is strategic action. According to Schon (1983, 1987), this distinction would not hold for reflective practitioner model of research. Strategic intent, in this version is present. In Schon’s model, the rigor of action research is lacking, when the latter is carried out in accordance with the six principles that was established by Winter (1989). Schon had described reflective practitioner research as non-rigorous inquiry (Schon, 1987, p.3). Strategic Dimension is not only the most valid distinguishing feature, in terms of the reflective practitioner model, but also the key to an understanding of how the two can be usefully related in practice. In addition to that, to identify problems, reflective practice can be used and action research can seek to provide solutions. In case an HR director would be conducting training for the staff. This model or theory would serve the purpose of the training. The staff would undergo several stages where they would be thinking and acting; they would also be able to observe and reflect on certain experiences; then, the staff would also lead to possible imitation; and then the creation of new experiences. The staff of the organization would be the learners but for certain groups there would be mentors. Like for example, on the management team, the directors would serve as mentors. These mentors may or may not be within the company but should be someone who is close to the staff. Many times, if the mentor is from an outside institution the tendency is resistance because that person is not aware of the situation within the organization. Though this, may serve as an advantage, because this may result in a less personal approach of dilemmas encountered by the staff. The learning cycle would be able to accommodate the different people in the different levels of the organization. This is possible through the ‘options’ provided for by the model. The learning styles that Kolb provides includes: diverging; assimilating; converging; and accommodating. With the preferred learning style, the staff in all levels would have room for. And the way the staff responds to the new learning environment being introduced would now introduce the way of grasping the experience. Though several stimulus would be introduced to different people, who are working in different areas in the organization, the model involved gives the opportunity of how the people or learners to ‘accept’ the learning. In his model, the different reactions to stimuli or tasks would pin point on the preferred learning styles. In the Kolb’s learning cycle, the first step that the staff would undergo involves thinking about their inner selves. This would involve self-reflection and evaluation, then moving towards the creation of new experiences that can be shared in the future. Now, for a staff that responds to tasks by doing the tasks and feeling the experience would prefer the accommodating learning style. This style is usually appropriate for people who are involved in decision making. According to Kolb, the style is for people who prefer the practical and experimental approach. These people are usually the ones who rely for other people for analysis. The members of the organization that would benefit most from this are those in the teams. Team leaders and members would gain an advantage undergoing the training because they are the ones who usually needs to experiment and come up with feasible results. For the part of the organization who specializes, like technical specialist and other specialist. Kolb would prefer the converging style. These are the people who approach the tasks by doing and thinking. Many times, these are the people behind the institutions who do not really bother on the interpersonal relationships of the people around. They are more task-focused than the others. They are usually the ones who find the practical use of the theories and models. The Human Resource team could be considered as the ones who can benefit from this type of learning style. These can also include the technical side of the organization that focuses on keeping the technology of the organization on an upright position. Accounting specialist may also be included. On the other hand, Kolb also offers the assimilating learning style where there is even less bother about the people around. These are usually preferred by those who are very task-oriented and that the ideas and theories are given more focus than the people who would be executing the tasks. Most of the time, these people are associated with those that work on the outer side of the organization. Some of them may be more interested in the theories Thus, in Kolb’s diagram they are the ones who responds to stimuli by watching and thinking. These people would be focusing more on how to develop a more efficient method in approaching problems of the company. They tend to be less dynamic in terms of people interaction but has he greater ability to gather information and use them. These people usually are in the information handling departments. The fourth learning style is the diverging technique. This approach usually covers the people that are in the artistic side of the company. For example, the company that we have handles their own advertising then the people in this side of the organization tends to use this type of learning style. From time to time they are more sensitive. They favor to watch rather than do their tasks, they tend to draw together information and use imagination to solve the problem. This learning style is somehow an opposite of assimilating style. They are more interested in people. In a company, those in the arts department would need information in order to come up with catchy tag lines or advertisements. They are also open to getting personal feed backs. Upon checking the four learning styles offered by Kolb, it is quite notable that they serve up almost every part of the organization, from the lowest to the highest positions. This ‘training cycle’ would be effective. Thus, the human resource manager of the company is going to do good to accept this model. The model also offers that these are only learning styles, but are open to the next stages of assimilating all the knowledge gathered then; the members of the organization should also be able to inject these into their actions to produce more productive results. This in turn will be the start of restructuring the business of ABC industries. And as a result, it builds a more successful business. References Part 2 Ashcroft, L., and Foreman-Peck L., 1994, Managing Teaching and Learning in Further and Higher Education, London: Falmer. David Kolb’s Learning Styles Model and Experiential Learning Theory (ELT), 2008, http://www.businessballs.com/kolblearningstyles.htm kolb learning styles, downloaded 10 January. Learning Styles-Self Assessment, 2008, Personal Development Planning, Bournemouth University, retrieved 6 January. Schon, D.A., 1983, The Reflective Practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Schon, D.A., 1987, Educating the Reflective Practitioner, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Winter, R., 1989, Learning from Experience, London: Falmer Press. Read More