Criticial Evaluation

6,720 views

Published on

Annotated slides for a presentation around Brookfield's four lenses of evaluation

Published in: Education, Technology
3 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
6,720
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
57
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
110
Comments
3
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Criticial Evaluation

  1. 1. Reflective Practice and Critical Evaluation Associate Teachers’ Course 27 March 09
  2. 2. Gibbs’ cycle Gibbs’ cyclical model of reviewing practice and critical incidents Unusually, this model pays attention to feelings, as powerful components of the experience Description What happened? Conclusion What else could you have done? Action Plan If it arose again, what would you do? Feelings What were you thinking and feeling? Evaluation What was good and bad about the experience? Analysis What sense can you make of the situation?
  3. 3. Brookfield’s four “lenses” There’s nothing exclusive about choosing these particular lenses or perspectives. It is their multiplicity which is important.
  4. 4. Four lenses <ul><li>Autobiographical </li></ul><ul><li>Student </li></ul><ul><li>Peer </li></ul><ul><li>Theoretical </li></ul>This is the standard, personal reflective lens. It includes, for critical reflection, the question of the extent to which practice and experience are products of background and roles.
  5. 5. Four lenses <ul><li>Autobiographical </li></ul><ul><li>Student </li></ul><ul><li>Peer </li></ul><ul><li>Theoretical </li></ul>What does it all look like to the student? Can you put yourself in their position?
  6. 6. What is taught, and what is learned One tool to think about the student experience is the notion of the “hidden curriculum”
  7. 7. “ Sending messages” <ul><li>All social practices have a sub-text, or send a message. </li></ul><ul><li>… usually about values and relationships </li></ul><ul><li>There is no way to avoid these messages </li></ul><ul><ul><li>The only question is whether they are “good” messages or “bad” ones </li></ul></ul>
  8. 8. Four lenses <ul><li>Autobiographical </li></ul><ul><li>Student </li></ul><ul><li>Peer </li></ul><ul><li>Theoretical </li></ul>We teach as part of a community of practice, living with all the tensions that entails. Research vs. teaching. Assumptions about teaching and learning…
  9. 9. I didn’t actually use this slide, but it illustrates the “yin and yang” of a community of practice Based on Wenger E (1998) Communities of Practice Cambridge; CUP p. 63 Participation Reification meaning world experience negotiation living in the world membership acting interacting mutuality forms points of focus documents monuments instruments projection
  10. 10. Hunting Assumptions <ul><li>Assumption 1 </li></ul><ul><li>It’s common sense to cut lecturing down to a minimum, since lecturing induces passivity in students and kills critical thinking </li></ul><ul><li>Assumption 2 </li></ul><ul><li>It’s common sense that students like group discussion because they feel involved and respected in such a setting. Discussion methods build on principles of participatory, active learning. </li></ul><ul><li>Assumption 3 </li></ul><ul><li>It’s common sense that respectful, empathic teachers will downplay their position of presumed superiority and acknowledge their students as co-teachers. </li></ul><ul><li>Etc…. </li></ul>Brookfield talks about hunting the assumptions implicit in practice; they are not necessarily wrong, but they must embody values which need to be scrutinised
  11. 11. Espoused theories and theories-in-use <ul><li>Argyris and Schön differentiate between </li></ul><ul><li>espoused theories : what people say they are doing, and </li></ul><ul><li>theories-in-use : what they are “in fact” doing, as it might appear to an informed outsider </li></ul>And are the public values and theories of the community the same as those people are actually using?
  12. 12. Four lenses <ul><li>Autobiographical </li></ul><ul><li>Student </li></ul><ul><li>Peer </li></ul><ul><li>Theoretical </li></ul>No time to go into detail about this one, I’m afraid.
  13. 13. Kirkpatrick <ul><li>Reaction </li></ul><ul><li>Learning </li></ul><ul><li>Behaviour </li></ul><ul><li>Impact (results) </li></ul><ul><li>Kirkpatrick D and Kirkpatrick J (2006) Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3 rd edn.) NY; Berrett-Koehler </li></ul>This only got touched on, but is included for completeness

×