Further Our Understanding of Reflection through I-Statement Analysis€¦ · · 2013-06-11Further...
44
Further Our Understanding of Reflection through I-Statement Analysis Sherri Yi-Chun Wei Hui-Ching Hsu Fu Jen Catholic University 4 th Asia-Pacific Regional Conference on Service-Learning 6 June 2013
Transcript of Further Our Understanding of Reflection through I-Statement Analysis€¦ · · 2013-06-11Further...
Further Our Understanding of Reflection through I-Statement Analysis
Sherri Yi-Chun Wei Hui-Ching Hsu
Fu Jen Catholic University
4th Asia-Pacific Regional Conference on Service-Learning 6 June 2013
Background
Reflection
I-Statement Analysis
Data Collection & Analysis
Discussion
Background of the Study
from volunteerism to S-L
Bridging the
English Divide
921 Earthquake
Remote area
2005-- English
majors, FJU
2-week English Camp
Background of the Study: Participants
English Department, Fu Jen Catholic University • New Taipei City • 8 student participants • 2 teacher researchers
Chang-fu Elementary School • Nantou, Central Taiwan • 3 teachers in charge • 48 students
Stages of S-L
Ground-Laying
3/2-6/18
Compromising 6/18-6/30
Collaborating 7/1-7/14
Celebration 7/14-10/31
Investigation Planning Action Reflection Demonstration (Kaye, 2010)
Ground-Laying
3/2-6/18
Compromising 6/18-6/30
Collaborating 7/1-7/14
Celebration 7/14-10/31
Stages of S-L Investigation Planning Action Reflection Demonstration
(Kaye, 2010)
Continuous, Connected, Challenging, Contextualized
(Eyler & Giles, 1999)
Why Reflection? Personal and Social outcomes Reflection (nature, type and frequency)
(Furco, 2013)
Rodgers (2002): 6 Steps to Reflection
Experimenting or testing the selected hypothesis
ramifying the explanations into full-blown hypotheses
Generating possible explanations for the problem(s) or questions(s)
Naming the problem(s) or the question(s) that arises out of the experience
Spontaneous interpretation of the experience
An experience
What
Now what
So what
The social dimension of Reflection
Reflection requires a perspective transformation 1. to free us from our habitual ways of
thinking and acting 2. and becoming more critically aware of
how and why our assumptions about the world in which we operate
3. have come to constrain the way we see ourselves and our relationships with others (Boud et al, 1985, p. 23).
Stepping back & making sense of small moments
Reflection
Self-awareness
Critical Thinking Reflection
(Finlay, 2008: 5)
Reflective Practice
Tool for promoting self- & social-awareness and social action
Improving self-expression, learning and cooperation
Emotion
The Role of Emotions “Integrating emotion into the service-learning literature would mean we re-define effective reflection in service-learning as a process involving the interplay of emotion and cognition in which people (students, teachers, and community partners) intentionally connect service experiences with academic learning objectives.”
(Felten et al, 2006: 42)
To Evade or to Embrace?
Pre-conception • Emotions are bad and thus
should be hidden. • Conflicts should be avoided.
Reality • We all have our ups and
downs. • Conflicts are unavoidable in
groups. We even have conflicts with our own minds from time to time.
• What can I do when I have conflicts with my peers?
Research Questions
1. How does the application of I-statement analysis help us better understand the process of reflection in S-L projects?
2. How do evidences in students’ reflective accounts reveal individual differences ?
Multimodality of Reflection Activity forum
discussion Video Text Interview Project
Ground laying 3/2-6/8 ◎ ● ★
Compromising 6/18-6/30 ◎ ●
Collaborating 7/1-7/14 ◎ ● ▲
Celebration 7/15-10/31
◎ ● ▲ ★
I-statement Analysis
• Gee (2001) – how teenagers fashion themselves through the choice of language – one of the discourse analytic tools he applied in order to give a “snapshot” of teenagers’ actual use of language so as to further explore the underlying identity formation (Gee, 2001, p. 177).
• Fang & Warschauer (2004) – to analyse interviews – to identify evidences of autonomy [More Action Statements]
• Brown, Smith and Ushioda (2007) – to analyse students’ reflective writing
• Ushioda (2010) – to analyse written reflective accounts – more detailed discussions on methodological issues.
I-statement Analysis Categories Examples
1. Action “I use/do…” 2. Affective “I feel a bit frustrated …”
3. Cognitive “I think maybe …” or “I found that. . . "
4. Constraint “I don’t know why…”
5. Achievement “I have learned to…”
6. State “Today is. . . ”
7. Appreciation “I appreciate. . .”
8. Expectation “I hope that. . . “
9. We statement “We are. . . .”
I-statement Analysis: Coding
Categories Examples
1. Action “I use/do…”
2. Affective “I feel a bit frustrated …”
3. Cognitive “I think maybe …” “I found that. . . "
4. Constraint “I don’t know why…”
5. Achievement “I have learned to…”
6. State “Today is. . . .”
7. Appreciation “I appreciate. . .”
8. Expectation “I hope that. . . “
9. We statement
“We are . . . .”
Example Student A, 6/27
J
J K J
The Combination of Statements 6/27 Chang-fu workshop 9a.m. ~ 6p.m.
The warm-up (ping-pong) we did this morning was interesting! LJ and I have done a similar pass and catch in basketball class, but a basketball is much larger than a ping-pong. Although we dropped [the ping-pong] all the time, we tried and tried, to find a way to succeed, though eventually we didn’t. Thanks to Sherri. She showed us the photo of me and LJ practicing. Our butts were so high; it’s indeed very funny. We also discussed problems about how K and LJ’s cooperation, and I got some precious words: I need to “switch the channels” so as to be in tune with that of another person. Maybe we all tend to assume that we or others aren’t willing to adjust. . . .
J
J
J
J
J
J
K
K
I-Statement No. Frequency Action 115 12
Affective 217 22
Cognition 297 30
Achievement 29 3
State 91 9
Constraint 85 9
Expectation 73 7
Appreciation 27 3
We Statement 58 6
Total 992
Different Layers in I-statement Analysis
Holist Analysis
Individual Differences
Case Study: Student A, B, C
Visualizing Textual Data
Compromising 6/18 – 6/30 (Practicum)
Collaborating 7/1 – 7/14 (Two-weeks in Chang-fu)
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Ref.1 Ref.2 Ref.3 Ref.4 Ref.5 Ref.6
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
actionaffectivecognitionachievementstateconstraintexpectationappreciation
Students’ Self Analysis
6月18日 6月20日 6月21日 6月26日 6月27日 6月28日正向情緒 10 6 9 12 12 13負向情緒 16 19 13 11 7 8積極行動 9 12 8 6 7 8被動行動 3 2 2 3 2 0限制 15 9 12 11 4 6成就 3 6 4 4 4 3其他 3 2 3 1 0 2
0
5
10
15
20
次數
Practicum
7月1日
7月2日
7月3日
7月4日
7月5日
7月6日
7月9日
7月10日
7月11日
7月12日
7月13日
正向情緒 8 27 7 15 9 15 9 4 1 17 10負向情緒 7 9 5 3 5 9 6 12 2 5 6積極行動 5 14 3 10 12 7 4 8 3 10 3被動行動 1 0 0 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 0限制 1 10 2 1 8 4 1 6 2 5 3成就 4 3 0 8 6 1 7 2 0 4 7其他 2 4 2 3 2 9 4 5 0 5 0
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
次數
Two Weeks in Chang-FuCelebration 7/14-10/31
Three Major Dimensions of Reflection
05
10152025303540
Ref. 1Ref. 2
Ref. 3
Ref. 4
Ref. 5
Ref. 6
Ref. 7
Ref. 8Ref. 9Ref. 10
Ref. 11
Ref. 12
Ref. 13
Ref. 14
Ref. 15
Ref. 16
Ref. 17
actionaffectivecognition
Three Major Dimensions of Reflection
Action
Affection
Cognition
Cognition (297)
Affection (217)
Action (115)
Constraint (85)
Achievement (29)
Expectation (73)
Appreciation (27)
Different Layers of I-statement Analysis
Holist Analysis
Individual Differences
Case Study: Student A (Freshman) Student B (Junior) Student C (Sophomore)
Ground-Laying 3/2-6/18
Compro-mising 6/18-6/30
Collab-orating 7/1-7/14
Celebra-tion 7/14-10/31
Obstacles & Opportunities
Cognition (30)
Affection (42)
Action (14)
Constraint (7)
Achievement (4)
Expectation (14)
Appreciation (6)
Student A (Freshman)
Student A (Freshman)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Compromising Collaborating Total
CognitiveAffectiveAction
Student A (Freshman)
J
J K
Collaborating 7/1-7/14
Compromising 6/18 - 6/30
J
Student B (Junior)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Compromising Collaborating Total
CognitiveAffectiveAction
Cognition (24)
Affection (19)
Action (7)
Constraint (12)
Achievement (2)
Expectation (1)
Appreciation (0)
Student B
Student B 6/18
6/21
Compromising 6/18 - 6/30
Cognition (52)
Affection (18)
Action (24)
Constraint (12)
Achievement (8)
Expectation (7)
Appreciation (8)
Student C (Sophomore)
Student C (Sophomore)
0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%
100%
Compromising Collaborating Total
CognitiveAffectiveAction
C Compromising 6/18-6/30
Collaborating 7/1-7/14
7/6
Collaborating 7/1-7/14
7/5
“The purpose of reflection is therefore to bring our reasoning processes and behaviour patterns to the surface and make them explicit. . . . It is only when something goes wrong or something unexpected happens that we may stop and think about what we did and what we could or should have done in the situation.” (Maughan, 1996: 76)
The Interplay of Emotions & Cognition
Action
Affection
Cognition
Constraint Expectation
Achievement Appreciation
Stages of S-L Investigation Planning Action Reflection Demonstration
(Kaye, 2010)
Continuous, Connected, Challenging, Contextualized
Ground-Laying
3/2-6/18
Compromising 6/18-6/30
Collaborating 7/1-7/14
Celebration 7/14-10/31
(Eyler & Giles, 1999)
Conclusion • I-Statement analysis
– Systematic analysis of reflection – A methodological tool and a pedagogical tool – Emotions as a positive force (as a pushing
hand) – Implications
• To embrace the “something goes wrong” moments
• Teacher-researchers: analysis on reflection • Student participants: reflection on reflection
References Boud, D. Keogh, R. & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. London: Kogan Page. Bosma, L., et al. (2010). Elements for successful collaboration between K-8 School, community agency, and university partners: The
Lead Peace partnership. Journal of School Health, 80(10), 501-507. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Collier Books. Eyler, J., Giles, Jr., D.E. and Schmiede, A. (1996). A Practitioner’s Guide to Reflection in Service-Learning: Student Voices and Reflections.
Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University. Fang, X, & Warschauer, M. (2004). Technology and curricular reform in China: A case study. TESOL Quarterly 38(2), 301-323. Felten, P., Gilchrist, L. Z., & Darby, A. (2006). Emotion and learning: Feeling our way toward a new theory of reflection in Service-Learning. Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, 12(2), 38-46. Finlay, L.(2008) Reflecting on ‘Reflective practice’. A discussion paper prepared for Practice-based Professional Learning Centre (PBPL
CETL). The Open University’s Centres for Excellence in Teaching and Learning, 52. UK Retrieved April 26, 2013 from http://www.open.ac.uk/cetl-workspace/cetlcontent/documents/4bf2b48887459.pdf.
Gee, J. P., Allen, A.-r., & Clinton, K. (2001). Language, class, identity: Teenagers fashioning themselves through language. Linguistics and Education, 12(2), 175-194.
Kaye, C. B. (2010). Complete guide to service learning (Second ed.). Minneapolis: Free Spirit Publishing. Maughan, C. (1996). Learning how to learn: The skilled developer’s guide to experiential learning. In Julian S. Webb and Caroline
Maughan (eds), Teaching Lawyers’ Skills . London: Butterworths. Murawski, W.W., & Dieker, L.A. (2004). Tips and strategies for co-teaching at the secondary level. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36(5),
52-58. Rodgers, C. (2002) Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking. Teachers College Record, 4(4), 842-866. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. Ushioda, E. (2010). Researching growth in autonomy through I-statement analysis in B. O'Rourke and L. Carson (eds), Language
Learner Autonomy: Policy, Curriculum, Classroom (pp. 45- 62). Bern: Peter Lang. Wagner, T. (2009). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don‘t teach the new survival skills our children need--and
what we can do about It. Basic Books: New York.
