Reflective Essay on Active Learning - Personal Statement Example

Reflective Essay on Active Learning Recently, the learning experience I have gained has made a remarkable change in the way I approach learning and deal with people. I can claim that the change has made me transition into a more mature learner and would definitely help me in dealing with future challenges in my career. The experience relates to the idea of Reg Revan’s Action Learning, which we applied in fulfilling an important academic requirement for the (Course/Subject) class. In this paper, I will expound on the learning I had and the insights I gained, and relate the relevance of Action Learning to my experience. As part of the requirements of the course (Name), we were assigned as a group to report on injection therapy for Achilles tendinopathy. The group presentation we had to prepare should last for 15 minutes, which for me was rather long and would require heavy preparation, especially research. I have worked with other people before but only for short assignments, thus this experience was quite new to me because this time, I had to work with others for a duration, meet up with them, and adjust with different personalities. However, just like any group, ours encountered some difficulties and even failure. This experience taught me a good lesson, which I could clearly relate with the theory of Action Learning. According to Revan (1999), learning can be expressed in the following equation: L= P+Q where L is the learning, P is programming or programmed knowledge, and Q is questioning. Taking from this idea, Marquardt (2004; Marquardt, Leonard, Freedman, & Hill 2009), adds reflection (R), thus: L=P+Q+R The enhancement that Macquardt did made the theory more valuable. Reflecting upon my recent experience, I believe that the proponents of Action Learning are correct. Our professor assigned us to work in small groups. When our group first met, I noted that each of us had different ideas, which could be attributed to having different personalities. These were our programmed knowledge. We all wanted to share in our ideas about the topic, thus ending up not knowing our focus. To resolve the problem, we decided to meet again the next day in order to gather resources on ourselves then present our materials to the group. There were many questions we needed to address, and a number of subtopics had to be covered. As Revan proposes, there were multi-level questions (cited in Serrat 2008), but we failed to focus on them because we had different ideas. When we met again for the second time, we felt very disappointed because some members did not attend. It was difficult to finalise everything with such situation. I felt the lack of commitment of some of our groupmates. Pedler (1997) claims that for a learning group to succeed, members should be responsible for their own learning. I could see that many of us were willing to do our best but we had our own priorities. Some were busy with other subject requirements while some were simply reluctant to attend because probably, they did not feel their role in the group. In addition, Pedler (1997) believes that for a group to succeed, members should know their roles and functions. Without clear roles, some members could have felt the group could do things without them but this was wrong because participation is important in Action Learning sets. The next step was to decide on the approaches and tools we were supposed to use for the presentation. I noted that once again, there were many suggestions. Some inisisted we do role-playing, poster-making, presenting in MSWord, and so on. There were varied suggestions, and each of the members wanted to be recognised. Relating this experience to the idea of Active Learning, we could identify this as one of our attitudes as the main roots of the problem because like what McGill and Beaty (1995) claim, action learning sets work best when individuals focus on the problem together. In our case, each of us was trying to insist our ideas. Some wanted their ideas alone to be recognised, thus leading us to a narrower set of choices. It was natural that some members of the group really have a strong personality and want to rule over others. In my case, all I wanted was to help and contribute my part, which was what I did throughout the practices. We finally decided to have the presentation in Word and to use a handmade poster. We thought that a handmade poster would best represent our concept and the team’s effort. Having planned this, we met again for the dry run of the presentation. I believe some were disappointed at how it turned out. Because the topic was not something personal to us, most of us just read our script, which made it sound stilted. As Bowman (1998) advises, a public speaker should not deliver speech from a prepared text on paper. From there, we knew something was wrong but it was too late to change everything so we just encouraged each other to memorise our part. The day of the presentation came. I was nervous when we started but being with my groupmates helped to feel a litte confidence. I could tell from the panel’s faces that they were not satisfied with the presentation. They questioned the poster that we did, which also did not turn out very well. At the end of it, many realisations came up, and it was as if we had to start all over again. The failure we experienced made us reflect on what happened, where we actually failed, and what could be done to resolve the problem. This is where Macquardt’s (2004; Marquardt, Leonard, Freedman, & Hill, 2009) idea of reflection (+R) can be applied. Definitely, like any group activity, the learning process we went through involved many challenges. Part of it was being composed of a group, which largely affected the output. Although there are many advantages in grouping, there seemed to us more disadvantages because we did not handle the problem correctly. According to Revan (cited in Serrat 2008), people learn best when they share ideas with others. Before we started with the group activity, I had the idea that doing things on my own would make things easier. I could choose the time I want to conduct my research, decide on the materials to use for my presentation, and practice my speech in front of the mirror. With that idea, I am the boss, and there will be no hassles. However, because we were made to work in groups, I needed to work with others and share my ideas. Sharing ideas with others is not easy especially if you tend to feel that your ideas will not be accepted. McArdle (2010) emphasises the importance of planning in action learning sets. Planning the process that the group will go through is a form of reflection which could be done individually and together as a group. McGill and Beaty (2001) suggest that testing should be done too to examine if the plan was correct. From the 12Manage web site (2011), I learned that there are ten steps in action learning. First, clarify the objective; second, group formation; third, analise the issue; fourth, present the problems; fifth, reframe the problem; sixth, determine goals; seventh, develop action strategies; eighth, take action; ninth, repeat cycle; and tenth, capture learning. Although these steps do not include the term “reflect,” I noted that steps 1–7 require processes of reflection. Therefore, to achieve success, group members should be encouraged to express reflections throughout the preparation stage. In our case, we wanted to pursue the goal but lacked planning and reflection. All we cared about was the output. We became too output-oriented, thus failed to see the loopholes and lacked the ability to reflect. Reflection served as a very important aspect when we did the revision. In reflecting on the panellists’ suggestions, we tried to identify the problem, which was very crucial. We took notes of the panel’s suggestions, and saw the mistakes we had in the past. First of all, we failed because most of us wanted our ideas to be recognised. Others, like me, were just polite to give in to the ideas presented, without questioning why they should be accepted. This was very important. Questioning is a form of clarifying motives and testing knowledge but we neglected this part. From there, I realised the truth in Revan’s (cited in Serrat 2008) idea that issues can be better resolved if members would admit that they lack knowledge of a certain topic. Instead of being bosses and wanting others to follow, group members in active learning sets should learn to be open to suggestiosn in order to weigh the importance of those ideas logically. Talkng or manipulating the group reflections will limit the sharing, thus hindering possibiites for learning or gaining deeper insights. During the post-presentation, it helped to identify the problems using multi-level questions. Importantly, we identified the low-level questions and the higher level ones. Revan (1980) claims that low-level questions such as ‘What is Achilles tendinopathy?’ are designed to seek factual answers or those information that have been established as facts. In contrast, higher level questions are formed to theorise, reflect, and formulate ideas. As such, we came up with a list of low-level questions first then also thought of higher level questions. Good questioning, as Walker (2003) suggests, along with sharing prior knowledge and experience, could lead to the best solutions to a problem. Based on our experience, the questions guided us to narrow down the topic to see what should be discussed and what should be discarded. Afterwards, we also found out that questioning could enrich the original idea that was originally suggested. In addition, brainstorming also helped us come up with varied ideas to present. Finaly, we thought of doing a PowerPoint presentation. We also retained the poster to add to the visual appeal of the presentation. At the end, we all hoped that the team efforts we made and the learning we experienced would eventually lead us to reap rewards. Meanwhile, the learning experience I gained from the action learning set made me realise more the value of good questioning and reflection. Through systematic questioning, I learned that addressing the issue would be easier and more comprehensive in scope. Furthermore, the failure of our group served as a challenge to us. Аs Jаsper (2003) claims, bаrriers should be seen as а chаllenge to make them easy for us to overcome. I believe that the first presentation that did not work out served as a challenge for us to be serious with the task, expand our programmed knowledge, make in-depth reflections, and situate ourselves in the group. One thing that I found to be an advantage of working in a small group is the learning that members get from each other. Another thing is the importance of rapport to lead to a more fruitful reflection. Therefore, if I were to further enhance Revan’s theory of Action Learning, I would add another R, which stands for rapport, thus: L=P+Q+R+R. The rapport among group members does not necessarily mean having good relations or being friends with each other. Rapport could mean openness, encouragement, and abiity to listen. Members should be open to suggestions, questions, and clarifications to explore their knowledge on a specific issue. They should encourage members to give reflections, share their experiences that are related to the issue. Additionally, they should give time to listen to others. Everyone’s suggestions should be heard, and after which, the team should decide which opinions would directly address the issues. I can apply the learning experience I gained in my future career. Working with others is usually the common aspect in the medical field. As such, when dealing with issues, I would pay attention to what others think, and always incorporate reflection in every process. Likewise, I would always remember that the success of a group depends on the commitment of all the members. The more members participate, the easier it would be for the group to achieve its goals. References 12Manage. (Action Learning). [Online]. Available from:http://www.12manage.com/methods_revans_action_learning.html [Accessed 2 August 2011]. Ardle, G. 2010. Instructional Design for Active Learning. NY: American Management Association. Bowmаn, D. 1998. Presentаtions. U.S.А: Аdаms Mediа. Jаsper, M. 2003. Beginning Reflective Prаctice. Cheltenhаm: Nelson Thornas Ltd. Marquardt,M.J. 2004. Optimising the Power of Action Learning. CA: Davies-Black. Marquardt, M.J., Leonard, S., Freedman, S. & Hill, C.. 2009. Action Learning for Developing Leaders and Organizations. Washington, DC: American Psychological Press. McGill, I. & Beaty, L. 1995. Action Learning: A\ guide for Professional, Management and Educational Development. London: Kogan Page. McGill, I. & Beaty, L. A. 2001. Action Learning: A Guide for Professional, Management and Educational Development. London: Kogan Page. Pedler,M. 1997. Action Learning in Practice, Third Edition. Hampshire: Gower Publishing. Serrat, O. 2008. Action learning. [Online]. Available from: http://www.adb.org/Documents/Information/Knowledge-Solutions/Action-Learning.pdf [Accessed 1 August 2011]. Walker, S. Active learning strategies to promote critical thinking. Journal of Athletics Training. Vol. 38 No.3. pp. 263-267. Read More