The effect of reflective education of conversation on reflective attitude in/on conversation
Submitted by:
Seongseog Park
Abstract:
Reflection helps in problem solving (Dewey, 1933). The difference between professionals and novices revolves around how they reflect on their practices (Schon, 1983). Furthermore, it is crucial for practices to receive the right direction that practitioners critically reflect on their premises (Mezirow, 1991). Many scholars in education have emphasized the importance of reflective education for practice. Oracy is a competency relevant in communicational practices; as such, oracy educators need to regard reflective education as a significant aspect of their pedagogy. Conversation can be defined as interpersonal communication, which is a dialectically dynamic process (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996), as well as a kind of social system that is operated by double contingency (Luhmann, 1984). Thus, there are no strategies or skills that are useful in every conversational context. In this setting, this research regards reflective education as a way to encourage students’ competence to cope with their diverse conversational situations. This research aims to design education for encouraging reflective conversants, and verify the effect of the design. Our design includes three classes: (a) abductive inference of intention, (b) dialectically dynamic regulation of self-disclosure, and (c) personal orientations in conversation. All of these classes have two phases: theory learning and reflecting on one’s conversations. Reflective-journal-writing and peer-group-dialogue are conducted in the second phase. To examine the effect of our design, 90 students were divided into three groups (experiment, comparison, and control). The experiment group participated in the full range of classes including (a), (b), and (c), while the comparison group participated in (a) and (b). The control group did not participate in the classes. All students’ reflective attitude in/on conversation (RAC) were measured three times (before, after, and delayed) by QRAC (Min & Park, in press). The result of RM-ANOVA showed that the experiment and comparison groups’ RAC increased significantly after participating while the control group did not. In addition, the experiment group showed increases in all three constructs of RAC (Thoughtful Action, Process/Content Reflection, and Premise Reflection), while the comparison group did not show increase in Premise Reflection. Some implications will be discussed.
Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. Guilford Press.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the reflective thinking to the educative process. Heath.
Luhmann, N. (1984). Soziale systeme (Vol. 478). Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.
Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner.