Paper title: Double-loop reflective practice as annrl.northumbria.ac.uk/27580/1/Double-loop reflective practice as an... · is argued that repertory grid interviews have the potential

Citation: Gribbin, John, Aftab, Mersha, Young, Robert and Park, Sumin (2016) Double-loop reflective practice as an approach to understanding knowledge and experience. Proceedings of DRS 2016 International Conference: Future – Focused Thinking, 8. pp. 3181-3198. ISSN 2398-3132

Published by: Design Research Society

URL: http://www.drs2016.org/proceedings/ <http://www.drs2016.org/proceedings/>

This version was downloaded from Northumbria Research Link: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/27580/

Northumbria University has developed Northumbria Research Link (NRL) to enable users to access the University’s research output. Copyright © and moral rights for items on NRL are retained by the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. Single copies of full items can be reproduced, displayed or performed, and given to third parties in any format or medium for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge, provided the authors, title and full bibliographic details are given, as well as a hyperlink and/or URL to the original metadata page. The content must not be changed in any way. Full items must not be sold commercially in any format or medium without formal permission of the copyright holder. The full policy is available online: http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html

This document may differ from the final, published version of the research and has been made available online in accordance with publisher policies. To read and/or cite from the published version of the research, please visit the publisher’s website (a subscription may be required.)

http://nrl.northumbria.ac.uk/policies.html

ThisworkislicensedunderaCreativeCommonsAttribution-NonCommercial4.0InternationalLicense.

1

Papertitle:Double-loopreflectivepracticeasanapproachtounderstandingknowledgeandexperience.

JohnGribbin*,MershaAftab,RobertYoung,SuminPark

NorthumbriaUniversity*Correspondingauthore-mail:[email protected]

Abstract: The main aim of this paper is to consider the way in which reflectivepractice can assist practitioners in better understanding their individual knowledgeandexperience.Transitioningfromadesignnovicetoadesignexpertisdescribedasavagueprocess, inwhichreflectivepracticecanoffera levelofunderstandingthatprovidesanimportantinsightintoprofessionaldevelopmentwithindesign.Throughacomparisonoftwomethodsofreflectionandanalysisofreflectivepracticedata,itisarguedthatrepertorygridinterviewshavethepotentialtobeacatalystfordouble-looplearningwithinindividuals;providingpeoplewithaplatformtoreflectontheirbeliefs and values in addition to their approach towards problem solving. Thisargument isbasedon theabilityof repertorygrids touncover someof the implicitknowledge developed by designers, which is a distinct advantage to alternativemethods of reflection and which is necessary to improve professional practiceunderstandingandlearning.

Keywords:Reflection,Designknowledge,Designexperience,Repertorygrids.

1.IntroductionWithindesignpractice,reflectioniscriticallyimportantintranslatingexperienceintothedevelopmentofnewskills,attitudes,knowledgeandcapabilities.ThisisepitomisedbySchön(1991),whoarguesthatexperiencealonedoesnotnecessarilyleadtolearningandthatadeliberatereflectiononactionisnecessaryinordertofullyunderstandone’sexperiences.Theresultingexperience,knowledgeandintuitionbecomecriticalinadesigner’sattempttosolvecomplexproblemsandnavigateadesignspacewhencreatinginnovativesolutions.Experienceddesignershavethecapabilitytoapplytheirknowledgetoanygivencontextandthispaperwillconsiderthewayinwhichreflectivepracticecan

JohnGribbin,MershaAftab,RobertYoung,SuminPark

2

supportthis,byallowingpractitionerstobecomemoreawareoftheirknowledgeandexperiences.

Withintheleadershipfunctionoforganisations,Aftab(2013)identifiesthatdesignerscantypicallybecategorisedintothinkersandpractitioners.Designthinkersarethosewhoworkwithstrategiesandsolutionstoproblemsfacingorganisationsinthedistantfuture(overtwentyyears)andconsequentlyhaveaninvolvementintheformulationofthefutureofthecompany.Contrastingly,practitionersarethosewhoworktocreatescenariosthatareapplicableinthepresent,intermsofrelevantproductsandservices.Indoingthis,theyfollowthedirectionprovidedbythethinkerinordertoachievethegoalsidentifiedforthefuture.Bothoftheserolesrequireavarietyoftacit,implicitandexplicitknowledge,howeverthispaperarguesthatpropositionalandnon-propositionalknowledgestandoutasakeydifferentiatorbetweenthetworoles.

Theauthorsofthecurrentpapertaketheviewpointofoutsideresearcherslookingintoorganisationalinnovationpractices,asopposedtothatofareflectivepractitionerreflectingupontheirownactions.Italsofollowsthebeliefthatnotallknowledgecanbeexplicated,howeveritistheroleofresearcherstouncoveranddocumentasmuchofthisknowledgeaspossible.ThisisaviewpointunderpinnedbyPolanyi(1958),whoarguesthatnotalltypesofknowledgecanbeunderstood;insteadsometypesofknowledgesuchastheartshavelimitedcapabilityfortransfer;theycannotbetransferredbyprescription,sincenoprescriptionforitexists.Subsequentlytheonlywayforthistypeofknowledgetobetransferredisfrompersontoperson,suchasfromanexperttoanovice.Asaresult,itisonlypossibletoexplicateafiniteamountofknowledgeinanygivensituation.

Theintentionofthepaperistoconsidermethodsthatwilltranslateasmuchoftheimplicitskillsandknowledgeofthedesignpracticeprocessaspossible,whichmergesintotacitelements.Thepaperwillbeginwithadiscussionofknowledgeinrelationtodesignprofessionals,beforeconsideringtherelationshipthatknowledgehaswithexperience.

2.Knowledgewithindesign

2.1ThinkersandpractitionersThearticulationofdesignknowledgeentailsdefiningwhatdesigners‘knowingly-think’(explicitknowledge),‘knowinglydo’(implicitskills)and‘unknowinglydo’(tacitknowledge).Inreality,mostknowledgeindesignpracticehasbeenclaimedtobeeithertacitorimplicit(Cross,1984),oracombinationofboth(Smith,2001).Furthermore,Young(2008)confirmedthatcertainformsofimplicitknowledgecanbemadeexplicitsuchas‘craftsmanshipanditsstrategy’intheformofadesignoutcome,butthisisnotlikelythecaseforotherformsoftacitknowledge,whicharebothhardtounderstandaswellasdifficulttoarticulateexplicitly.

Polanyi(1958)andWilson(1999)providetwodifferentandrathercontradictoryviewsonknowledge.WhilstPolanyibelievesthatcertaintypesofknowledgewillalwaysremaintacit

Double-loopreflectivepracticeasanapproachtounderstandingknowledgeandexperience.

3

andinbuiltinhumanintellect,Wilsonprovidestheconceptofconsilience,whichmaintainsthatinfutureallbranchesofknowledgewillbeknown,madeorderlyandorganised.Arguably,designknowledgeposesachallengetoWilson’snotionofconsilience,asknowledgeindesignhasbeenacontentiousmatter,whichismadeworsebecauseoftheconflictbetweendesigntheoryanditspractice.Theevidencecollectedduringaninvestigationwithmultinationalorganisations(Aftab2013)alsoconfirmedthisconflict;wherethethinkersandthepractitionerswithintheinnovationteamweredividedintheirknowledge,wayofworkingandpriorities.Thinkersintheorganisationprovedtohaveastrongfoundationofpropositionalknowledge(Gemma2014),basedonanawarenessof‘how’aninnovationprocessshouldworktoovercomefuturechallenges.Contrastingly,thepractitionersheldtheworkingknowledgeof‘what’needstobedonetomakeinnovationhappenonaday-to-daybasis;morecloselyaligningpractitionerswithafoundationofproceduralknowledge(Niedderer2007).

Boththinkersandpractitionersholdtwoveryimportanttypesofknowledge,i.e.explicitknowledgeandimplicitskills.Nevertheless,therewasonepeculiarknowledgetypethatexistedinboththegroups,andwasverydifficulttoarticulatei.e.tacitknowledge.Casakin(2007),Cross(2008),Pugh(1990)haveallidentifiedwheretacitknowledgeresideswithindesignactivities,butthewaysinwhichthisknowledgecouldorcanbemadeexplicitandrecognisedbythepractitionerisstillinchoate.

2.2ArticulatingknowledgeandexperienceindesigninnovationpracticeAftab(2013)confirmsthattheexplicitdefinitionofcertainaspectsofdesignknowledge,suchasprocess,methods,andtoolsfordesign,isessentialinorderfordesigntogainandmaintainafunctionalleadershiprolewithinanorganisation.Thisinvolvesmakingsurethateveryindividualworkingwithintheinnovationprocess(whetherathinkerorapractitioner)isawareofwhattheyaredoing,toimprovetheirdesignperformanceinproblemsolving;aprocessthatSchön(1987)namedasknowing-in-action.Schöndescribed,Reflection-in-actionashavingacriticalfunction,questioningtheassumptionstructureofknowing-in-action,morecommonlyalsoknownascritique(Evans,Powell,andTalbot,1982).Schön(1987,pp.39)explainedthatindividualsreflectontheirwayofthinkingwhichplacesthemintoaparticularsituation;andthroughthisprocessofreflectiontheseindividualsmayreorganisestrategiesoftheiraction,understandingtheexperience,ortechniquesofproblemframing.

Itisimportanttonoteherethatknowledgeappearstodevelopthroughexperiencewithindesignpractice,whereexperientialknowledgebecomesanimportantfactorunderpinningthedecisionsmadebypractitioners.Novicestendtosolveproblemsbyattemptingtorepresentandclassifytheproblemsbytheirsurfacefeatures,whereasexpertsrepresentthemintermsoftheirunderlyingfeatures(Chi,Feltovichetal.1981).Robinson(2010)highlightsthatexpertsareatagreatadvantageinsolvingcomplexproblems,inthatthey


4

havearicherstoreofrelevantknowledgeandanabilitytoconceptualiseitinwaysthatenablethemtoperceivepossibleproblemsolutions.Voss(1989)furtheremphasisesthisview,indicatingthatgoodproblemsolvingemergesfromapersonhavingasubstantialknowledgebaseintegratedwithknowinghowtoapplythatknowledgetoawiderangeofproblemcontexts.Thissuggeststhatasdesignersgainmoreexperience,theiroverallcompetenceintermsofsolvingcomplexproblemsalsoincreases.Theirexposuretoavarietyofproblemsituationsprovidesasolidbasisfromwhichtheyareabletodrawexperienceandtailortheirabilitiestowardsthenewproblemsthattheyface.Thenextsectionwillfurtherconsidertheroleofexperiencewithinthedevelopmentofdesignprofessionals.

3.ExperiencewithindesignLawsonandDorst(2009,p.216)arguethatexpertisewithindesignisnotacquiredinacontinuousseamlessmanner,insteaditissuggestedthatthereappeartobemoreorlessdistinctlayersofexpertisethatallowdifferentmodesofthinkingandaction.Itiswidelybelievedthatexpertsdifferfromnovicesinthatexpertsareawareofagreaternumberofconcepts,organiseinformationonthebasisofidentifyingprinciplesandarecapableofapplyingconceptsinaflexiblefashioncontingentonthekeycharacteristicsofasituation(Mumford,Marksetal.2000).Transitioningfromnovicetoexpertisofcoreimportancewhenconsideringthejourneyofadesignprofessional,howeverthereismuchdebatesurroundingthedistinctionofindividualexperiencelevelsthatoccuronthisjourney.Heskett(2002)writesaboutthisprocessaslayering,wherenewdevelopmentsthroughexperienceareaddedovertimetowhatalreadyexists.Inthiscontext,layeringisausefultermtodescribetheprocessbywhichdesignknowledgeisformedbyintegrating‘designerly’approachestoidentifytherichnessofdesignactivity.ThejourneyfromnovicetoexpertisdocumentedintherestofthissectionandissummarisedinAppendix2.

PerhapsthemostextensivelyutilisedmodelofskillacquisitionisprovidedbyDreyfusandDreyfus(1986,2002),whosuggestthattherearefivestagesinthehumanskillacquisitionprocesswithanindividualtransitioningfromnovicetoexpertwithincreasingexposuretoskilfulpractice.Thefirststageofnoviceoccurswhenapersonisprovidedwithrulesfordeterminingactionswithinagivensituation,whichtheywillfollowrigidlyuntiltheyreachthedesiredoutcome.Thelearnerthentransitionstoadvancedbeginnerwhentheyhavegainedexperienceworkingwithinrealsituationsandlearnedthattherulesdon’tnecessarilyapplytoallsituations.Furthermore,thisisthestageinwhichexperiencebecomesmoreimportantthananyformofverbaldescription.Upongainingacertainamountofexperience,peoplethenenterthecompetencyphase,inwhichthenumberofrecognisablecontext-freeandsituationalelementspresentinareal-worldcircumstanceeventuallybecomeoverwhelming.Peoplelearnahierarchalprocedureofdecisionmakinginordertosolvetheseproblems,bychoosingaplantoorganiseasituationandexaminingthemostimportantfactorstothatplan.


5

Whenpeopleenterthetwohighestlevelsofskill,theirapproachtoproblemsolvingischaracterisedbyarapid,fluid,involvedkindofbehaviourthatcontraststotheproblemsolvingapproachesusedwithinthelowerlevels.Proficientlearnersarecapableofconsideringtherulestoasituation,beforemakingconsciouschoicesofbothgoalsanddecisionsafterreflectinguponarangeofalternatives.Proficiencyisonlydevelopedifexperienceisassimilatedinawayinwhichintuitivebehaviourreplacesreasonedresponses(Dreyfus2002).Theexpertperformerdiffersfromtheproficientperformerinthattheexpertiscapableofseeingwhatneedstobeachievedandseeshowtoachievetheirgoal.Withenoughexperience,theexpertiscapableofprovidinganimmediateintuitivesituationalresponsetoaproblem,duetotheirexperienceinavarietyofdifferentsituations.

Withindesignpractice,LawsonandDorst(2009)criticisetheuseoftheDreyfusframeworkinthatdesignisnotjustlimitedtopeoplewhoareformallytrainedinthesubject.Thisleavesquestionssurroundingaframeworkthatbeginsatthenovicelevel,giventhatpeoplearecapableofdesigningwithoutevenrealisingthattheyaredoingso.Despitethis,LawsonandDorst(ibid.)arguethattheDreyfusframeworkprovidesastrongfoundationtoencouragethinkingaboutthedevelopmentofexpertiseindesign.Dorst(in:PoggenpohlandSatō2009)takesmeasurestobuildontheDreyfusframeworkinawaythataddresseshisearliercritique;suggestingthata‘naïve’levelshouldbeaddedinordertoprecedethenovicestageofskill.The‘naïve’stateofdesigningisadequateforexplainingthedesign-liketasksthatnon-designerscarryoutintheirdaytodaylife,inwhichpeoplehaveunsystematicallygatheredexperience.Furthermore,Dorst(ibid.)proposesanadditionallevelofexperience,supersedingmastery,intheformofa‘visionary’,inwhichapersonbecomessointerestedindevelopingnewideasthatthenormallevelofexpectedprofessionalcompetencebecomeslessimportant.Theworkofsuchdesignersmayoftennotberealisedbutitisdeemednecessaryasvisionariesareexplicitlyredefiningthedesignfieldthattheyareworkingin.ThisisechoedbySennett(2008),whoreferstocraftsmeninsocietywhoarecapableofutilisingtheirmasteryinordertochangethemethodsandtoolsoftheircraftinordertocontendwiththeevolvingnatureoftheproblemsandcontextsthattheyareworkingwithin.

Ultimately,thisleadstoarefinedframeworkofexperiencethatcouldbemappedagainstarangeofdesigncareerpaths,howevertherearestillquestionsthatneedtobeansweredinorderforthesetypesofframeworkstocomprehensivelyexplainthewayinwhichindividualdesignersdevelopmasteryoftheirsubject.Theexistingframeworkisparticularlyorientedaroundtheskillsofadesigner,whenarguablyotherfactorsmustalsobeconsideredtoprovideacomprehensiveexplanationofadesigner’sexpertise.Aspectssuchasknowledgeandattitudealsoplayanimportantroleindesignproblemsolvingandshouldbereflectedinfutureframeworks.Furthermore,itcanalsobedifficulttorecognisewhenpeoplearetransitioningfromoneleveltothenext.Dorst(in:PoggenpohlandSatō2009)arguesthatinorderforpeopletoprogresstheymustfirstacquiresufficientknowledgewithinaparticularlevel.Nexttheymustundergoamentalrealisationthattheirnewlyacquiredknowledgeand


6

skillscanbeutilisedinanewanddifferentway.Thispaperarguesthatreflectioniscapableofbeingacatalystforthisprocess,astheleapfromonelevelofexperiencetothenextcanbeadifficulttransitionforindividuallearners.

4.Reflectionanddouble-looplearningSchön(1991)arguesthatwithinthecontextofdesign,experiencealonedoesnotnecessarilyleadtolearningandthatadeliberatereflectiononactionisnecessary.Inorderforpeopletotranslatetheirtacitunderstandingandimplicitskillsandexperiencesintolearningandexplicitknowledge,theymustengagewiththeprocessofreflectioninordertoarticulatethisvalue.Beingabletoreflectuponexperienceinthiswaycanhelpindividuallearnerstoaligntheirindividualcompetencieswithinagivenframeworkofexpertiseandformabetterunderstandingoftheirdevelopmentasadesignprofessional.

SchönandArgyris(1974)highlighttwodifferentlearningstrategiesthatinvolveexperience-basedlearningandcanbedrivenbytheprocessofreflectionandisvisualisedwithinfigure1.Thefirststrategyissingle-looplearningthatinvolvesthecreationandadoptionofnewactionstrategiesinordertounderstandinnervalues.Thisoftentakestheformofproblemsolvingwithindividualsattemptingtoimprovethesystemstheyoperatewithin.Contrastingly,double-looplearningoccurswhenpeoplefocusontheimprovementoftheirinnervaluesasopposedtomerelyunderstandingthem.Peoplebegintoquestiontheunderlyingassumptionsbehindtheirtechniques,goalsandvaluesinordertounderstandwhytheydowhattheydo,asemphasisedbyCartwright(2002,p.68)whoindicatesthat‘double-looplearningisaneducationalconceptandprocessthatinvolvesteachingpeopletothinkmoredeeplyabouttheirownassumptionsandbeliefs’.Withinthecontextofthesetwostrategies,thepurposeofreflectivepracticeistoallowindividualstodescribeaworldthatmorefaithfullyreflectsthevaluesandbeliefsofthepeopleinit(Greenwood1998).

Figure1:Singleanddouble-looplearning.


7

AccordingtoArgyris(1976),double-looplearningisfocuseduponimprovingtheproblemsolvingcapabilitiesofpeoplewhoareinvolvedinsolvingcomplexandill-structuredproblems,whicharecapableofevolvingasproblemsolvingadvances.Thismakesdouble-looplearningespeciallydesirablewithinthecontextofdesign-ledorganisations,whereboththinkersandpractitionersaretypicallyexpectedtosolveproblemsthatoperatewithintheseboundaries(RittelandWebber1973,Stacey,etal.2000,Coyne2005,Dorst2011).Furthermore,thisstyleoflearningispertinentwithinculturesthatembracefailureandviewitasanimportanttoolforlearning(LiepėandSakalas2015).Thisisanapproachtypicallyfavouredbyorganisationsseekingtoengagewithradicalinnovationbyfollowingdesign-ledinnovationpractices(Verganti2009).Inthissituation,organisationsthatlearnhowtofailintelligentlyconsistentlyoutperformthosethatseektominimisethefrequencyoffailure(Schrage1989,Sudheim2013).

Double-looplearningcanthereforebeusedtohelpbothorganisationsandpractitionersbetterunderstandtheunderlyingbeliefsandassumptionsthatgoverntheiractions.Inthecaseoforganisations,thiscanbenefitinnovationpractices,byimprovingperformancewhensolvingwickedproblemsthatpresentthemselves.Withregardstoindividualpractitioners,double-looplearningcanprovideindividualswithamoreholisticlearningexperience,ensuringthatindividualsarebetterawareoftheirprofessionalexperiences,whichisofgreatimportancewithinpractice-ledprofessionallearning.Withthesebenefitsinmind,thenextsectionwilldiscussthemethodologythatthepaperadoptsinconsideringwhichmethodsaremostappropriateinfacilitatingdouble-looplearning.

5.MethodologyThispaperfollowstheapproachofgroundedtheory,combinedwithcasestudyanalysisinordertoinvestigatemethodsthatarecapableoffacilitatingreflection.GroundedtheorywasinitiallyproposedbyGlaserandStrauss(1967)asa‘systematicgeneratingoftheoryfromdatathatitselfissystematicallyobtainedfromsocialresearch’(Glaser,1978in:Hussein,etal.2014).Itisaninductivemethodofgeneratingtheorythroughthesimultaneouscollectionandanalysisofdata,withthegoalofgeneratingrelevantandsignificantknowledgethroughsocialresearch.Groundedtheoryhaslimitationsinthatresearcherscanoftenblurmethodologicallinesbyselectingpurposefulinsteadoftheoreticalsampling(Charmaz1990),whichmustbecontrolledbysamplingbasedonemergingtheory.Withinthispaper,thegoalofgroundedtheorywastoderivefreshinsightsintoexistingcasestudiesandassuch,thesamplingwasguidedbytheselectionofrelevantcases.

Yin(2014)identifiescasestudiesofempiricalenquirythatinvestigateacontemporaryphenomenonindepthandwithinitsreal-worldcontext;particularlywhentheboundariesbetweenphenomenonandcontextmaynotbeclearlyevident.Similartogroundedtheory,casesprovideanopportunitytoexplorepropositionsandgeneratetheoryfromtheresultingdata.Groundedtheoryisoftenlimitedintermsofitsgeneralisabilitywiththeoriesoftenonlyrelevanttothecontextinwhichtheyarederived(Stebbins2001).Combiningitwith


8

casestudyresearchappearstomitigatetheeffectsofthisissue,astheuseofmultiplecasesbeginstoprovideexamplesderivedfrommultipleexperimentsthatinvestigatephenomenaunderdifferentconditions(Lipset,etal.1956,Hammersley,Fosteretal.2000,Johansson2003).

Eisenhardt(1989)highlightsthatcasestudiestypicallycombinemultiplemethods,whichmaybequalitativeorquantitativeinnature.Withinthisstudytheprimarydatacollectedwasqualitativeandcollectedthroughworkshopsthatoccurredwithinthesettingofdesigneducation.Theworkshopsaimedtoencouragereflectionintwelvemultidisciplinarypostgraduatestudents,withtheaimofexplicatingsomeoftheknowledgeandskillsthatweredevelopedoverthecourseofthreedifferentdesignfocusedprojects.Theprojectsinquestionwereallclientdriven,withthefirstfocusingonstakeholderengagementforanon-profitorganisation.Thesecondprojectaimedtoanalysethestructureofanorganisationthroughanevaluationofmembershipplatformsavailabletotheirclients;whilstthefinalprojectwasbranddriven,offeringafreshperspectiveonpotentialavenuesoffuturebusinessdevelopmentaswellasalternativemethodsofimprovingcustomerexperience.

6.Analysisofmethods

6.1IntroductionTheprevioussectionsofthispaperhavediscussedtheimportanceofreflectivepracticetobothorganisationallearningandindividualdesignprofessionals.Thissectionwillbuildonthisdiscussionbyoutliningthemethodsthatareavailabletoindividualdesignpractitionersinordertofacilitatereflectivepracticewiththegoalofcreatingdouble-looplearning.Primarily,anobjectiveresearcherhasfacilitatedthesemethodsandassistedintheinterpretationoffindingsinordertomaximisethevaluegainedbythereflectivepractitioner.

6.2AnoverviewofreflectivemethodsReflectivepracticeiscommonacrossawiderangeofdisciplines,withavarietyofmethodsbeingutilisedtofacilitatetheprocess.Inordertoanalysesomeofthesemethodsinmoredetail,Appendix1providesanindepthoverview;outliningadefinitionofeachmethodalongsideanyadvantagesanddisadvantagesnotedbyotherstudies,aswellashighlightinganystudiesthatutilisethemethodtofacilitatereflection.

Duetothescopeofthepaper,itisimpossibletofurtherdiscusseachmethodofreflectionindividually;thereforetheremainderofthepaperwilldiscussmethodsthatappeartobemostrelevantinfacilitatingdouble-looplearningwithindesignpractitioners.Whilstallofthementionedmethodsareeffectivewhenitcomestofacilitatingreflection,notallofthemethodsarecapableofelicitingimplicitknowledgeandskillleadingtothetacitdimension,whichreducestheirappropriatenessforthiswork.


9

6.3TherepertorygridtechniqueAlthoughworkshopsfacilitatedwithinterviewsandobservationsprovedtobeausefultoolinunderstandingtheexplicitknowledgethatisheldbypractitioners,theyonlyofferedasmallinsightintotheimplicitelementsthatcontributetoprofessionalpractice.Asaresult,itisimportanttoconsidermethodsofreflectionthatarecapableofbeginningtouncoversomeofthisknowledge.Appendix1showsthatrepertorygridinterviewsfitthesecriteria.Subsequentlythissectionwillconsiderthemeritsoftheapproachasareflectivemethod.

Arepertorygridisamethodforelicitingpersonalconstructsinrelationtoagiventopic.ThemethodwasderivedbyKelly(1955),whoexpressedthatpeoplearecontinuallyengagedintheprocessofdevisingnewtheories,testinghypothesesbasedonthesetheoriesandactingontheirfindings(Giles2002).Kelly(1955)describedthisprocessaspersonalconstructtheory,arguingthatindividualsconstructrationalworldsbasedontheirexperiences,whichshapeapatternthatcanbedefinedas‘personalconstructs’.Candy(1990)describesasystemofpersonalconstructsasarepositoryofwhatapersonhaslearned,astatementoftheirintentandthevaluesbywhichtheylive.Asapersonbuildsuptheirconstructionofreality,moreandmoreconstructsarederiveduntileventuallyacomplexanduniquepictureofone’srealityisformed;thusdemonstratingthewayinwhichapersonorganisestheirsocialworld,whichisthenopentointerpretation.

Repertorygridsareoftenutilisedinordertofacilitatethearticulationofvariouspersonalconstructs.Arepertorygridtakestheformofatableormatrixthatcancontaineitherquantitativeorqualitativedata.Tablesconsistofcolumnsofelements,whichdefinetheareaofstudyandrowsofconstructs,whicharethemesthatlinkvariouselementstogether(Giles2002).Constructswithinthegridarealwaysbipolar,meaningthattheycomprisetwoopposingvalues,whichhelpstoensurethattheycanbedistinguishedfromotherconcepts.ThisprocessisperhapsbestdescribedbyPersson(2009,p.254),whoexpressesitwithinthecontextofaninterviewsituation:

“IfAnneisinterviewedandthetopicis[her]friendsshemightsaythatMaryandJohnareniceandSallyisnot.Thisistheelicitationofonepoleofaconstructbutitwouldnotbecompletewithouttheotherpole.AnnewillnowdescribetheattributethatSallyhasthatiscontrastingtonice.IfshesaysthatSallyisunpleasantcomparedtotheothertwo,thetwopolesoftheconstruct[are]niceandunpleasant.Annewillthenrankalltheelements,herfriends,accordingtoascale.TheprocedurecontinuesuntilitisnolongerpossibleforAnnetoelicitmoreconstructs.”

Whenconductingarepertorygridinterview,thefacilitatorcanaskquestionsinawaythattargetbothemergentandimplicitconstructs(Fransella,Belletal.2004).Emergentpollscanbederivedbyaskingapersontoexplainthewayinwhichtwoelementsofatriadareinsomeimportantwaysimilarandthusdifferentfromthethirdelement.Inordertouncover


10

implicitconstructs,thefacilitatorcanthenaskhowthethirdelementisdifferentfromthetwothatwerestatedtobesimilar.Björklund(2008)suggeststhatelicitingconstructsinthiswayallowsresearcherstounderstandtheimplicitlearningthatoccursthroughtheprogressionofaprofessionalcraftsmanfromnovicetoexpert.Therepertorygridtechniquecanelicitimplicitconstructsandpatternsthatwouldnotbepossibletoelicitthroughregularordinaryinterviewtechniquesastheinformationisnotstoredinverbalform.Therefore,askingparticipantstoconsiderimplicitconstructsinthiswaybeginstouncoversomeofthetacitknowledgethattheypossess.

Oneofthebiggestadvantagesoftherepertorygridtechniqueisthatitcanbeusedinfacilitatingdouble-looplearningforindividualpractitioners.Theaimofpersonalconstructtheoryistodocumentaperson’srealitywithregardstoindividualsituations,whichcanbedirectlyutilisedwhenunderstandingthebeliefsandassumptionsthatunderpintheirdecisionswithinaparticularcontext(Kelly1955).Furthermore,thetechniquecanprovideaninsightintothetacitknowledgeheldbypractitioners(Jankowicz2004),whichishugelybeneficialinthedesignprofessionwhereboththinkersandpractitionersneedtobecomemoreawareofthetacitfactorsthatcontributetotheiroverallexpertise.

Asaresearchmethod,repertorygridsareparticularlyusefulinunderstandingtheviewsofotherswithoutmisinterpretationfromanoutsidesource(e.g.aresearcher).Itiseasytotalktoapersonandbelievethatwehaveunderstoodthem,howeverunlesstheirpersonalconstructsarewellunderstoodthereisariskthatourownthinkingwillsimplybetransferredtothesituation(Jankowicz2004).Byhighlightingasmanypersonalconstructsaspossibleandensuringthatthepersonreflectingspendstimedevelopingbipolarconstructs,thereisminimalinterruptionfromthefacilitatorleadingtoaspecificinsightintoasituation,thusreducingthepotentialforbiasasaresearchmethod.

AuthorssuchasTofanetal,(2011)andAnderson(1990)findthatwhenusingtherepertorygridtechniquewithindifferentsituations,oneofthemaindisadvantagesisthetimethatittakestoimplementthemethodparticularlyinrelationtoalternativepsychometrictests.Equally,Tofan(ibid.)highlightsthatparticipantscanfinditdifficulttointerpretthedatathattheycreatewhenreflectingthroughthismethod.Subsequently,theimplementationofthemethodasatoolforreflectivepracticewouldhavetobecarefullyfacilitatedinordertoguideparticipantsinbothcreatingandinterpretingtheirowngrids.Despitethisdrawback,therepertorygridtechniqueappearstobeoneofthemostusefultechniquesforencouragingreflectionanddouble-looplearningwithindesignthinkersandpractitioners.Theyareaviabletoolinuncoveringthepersonalconstructsofindividuals,whichprovidesaninsightintothetacitandexplicitknowledgeandexperiencethattheyhaveacquiredintheirpractice.Asaresultitispossiblethattherepertorygridcanbeutilisedinordertohelpthinkersandpractitionersbetterunderstandtheirexperienceinrelationtoagivenframeworkofexpertise.


11

6.4AreflectionontherepertorygridprocessOneoftheprimaryaimsofthepilotstudywastoexplorewhetheritwaspossibletoimplementtherepertorygridtechniqueinaworkshopsetting,ratherthanthroughindividualinterviews.Thesuccessofthemethodunderthesecircumstanceswouldhaveallowedaresearchertoprovideagreaterownershipofthemethodtotheparticipants,resultinginamethodcapableoffacilitatingdouble-looplearningwithoutanindependentresearcherhavingtoguidetheprocess.Fromthis,itwouldhavebeenpossibletoutilisethemethodinagreaterrangeofcircumstances,asitwouldbelessresourceintensivetoimplementit.However,thedataprovidedbythestudentsintheworkshopsettingwasconsistentwiththeapproachofsingle-looplearning,withalargefocusonthemethodsthatwereusedthroughouttheprojectsandlittlecomparisonofthedeeperbeliefsandassumptionsthatunderpinneddecisions.Withinaoneononeinterviewprocess,itispossibleforaresearchertoovercomethisissuebyusingaprocessofladdering,inwhichconstructsofahigherorderofabstractioncanbeelicited(Fransella,Belletal.2004).Ladderinginvolvestheelicitationofconstructsthroughtriadiccomparisons,beforeaskingapersontosaybywhichpoleofeachconstructtheywouldprefertobedescribed.Fromthistheyareaskedtoconsiderwhytheypreferthatparticularconstructandtheadvantagestothatconstructastheyseethem(Hinkle1965).Thisprocessallowsthestudentstoconsiderthesystemthroughwhichtheyareworkinginmuchgreaterfocus.

Theresultsoftheworkshopalsoprovidedaninterestinginsightintotheattitudesofthestudentstakingpartintheprojects.Throughconductingacorrelationanalysisonthenumericalratingsthatstudentsgavetoeachindividualconstruct,itwaspossibletodeterminewhichaspectsoftheprojectswerestatisticallyrelated.Thishighlightedtheaspectsofeachprojectthatstudentsfoundengagingandwhichtheyfoundfrustrating.Thisisofimportancetoresearchersinvestigatingagrowingbodyofresearchsurroundingdesignattitude(BolandandCollopy2004,Michlewski2006,NelsonandStolterman2012).Thistypeofstudyfrequentlyinvestigatesthefactorsthatdesignersandpeoplefromabroaderrangeofdisciplinesfindengagingandfrustratingwhencollaboratingacrossinnovationprojects;whichisessentialwhentryingtoderiveapictureofthecultureofanorganisation.

Furthermore,thestudentsthemselvesrespondedpositivelytothemethodwhenaskedhowtheyfeltabouttheprocess.Theyparticularlyfeltthatthecomparisonbetweenprojectsmadethroughrepertorygridgaveitadistinctadvantageovertheothermethodsofreflectionthattheyhadpreviouslyutilised.Throughthecomparisonofdifferentprojects,theyweremadetothinkdifferentlyabouttheskillsandknowledgethattheyhaddevelopedovermultipleprojectsandweregiventheopportunitytoconsiderhowtheseaspectsoftheircompetencyhadbeendevelopedovertime.Perhapsmostimportantly,thestudentsappearedengagedthroughouttheentireprocess,asitiscriticalthatamethodofreflectionhasthiseffectasiftheoppositeistrueitisunlikelythatpeoplewillfullyengageandthatanydouble-looplearningwilloccur.


12

7.Conclusion

7.1SummaryThemainaimofthispaperwastoconsiderthewayinwhichreflectivepracticecouldassistpractitionersinbetterunderstandingtheirexperiences,inordertoimprovetheiroverallpractice.Designknowledgeisoftenreferredtoasbeingepisodic,inthatitisderivedthroughourexperiences(LawsonandDorst2009).AuthorssuchasChietal.(1981),Robinson(2010)andVoss(1989)allhighlightthatknowledgedevelopswithexperienceofdesignpractice;resultinginexpertsbeingabletoproblemsolvemoreeffectivelythanotherswhomaybelessexperienced.Despitethis,Dorst(in:PoggenpohlandSatō2009)indicatesthatwearestillunawareofthewayinwhichaprofessionalmightincreasetheirconsideredlevelofexpertise.Transitioningfromnovicetoexpertcanbeavagueprocess,howevertherearecleardistinctionsastothestepsthatoccuralongtheway.Itisarguedthatreflectivepracticecanhelppractitionerstounderstandtheirownexperienceandknowledge,inturnassistingthemastheirexpertisedevelopsovertheircareers.

Thepaperadoptedamethodologyofgroundedtheoryandcasestudyanalysistoconsiderarangeofreflectivemethodsthatcouldgivepractitionersabetterinsightintotheirexperience.Throughworkshops,itwasdeterminedthatdesignprofessionalsappeartodevelopthespecialistknowledgeassociatedwiththeroleofthinkersorpractitionerswhentheybegintheircareerwithinanorganisation(Aftab,2013).Furthermore,incertainsituations,effectivereflectivemethodsneedtoallowapersontoreflectontheinfluenceofothersaswellasthemselvesinthedecisionmakingprocess.Fromthemethodsanalysis,itappearsthattherepertorygridtechniquehasthepotentialtobeasuitablemethodforenablingdouble-looplearningwithindesignprofessionals,withitsabilitytouncovertacitknowledgebeingaparticularlystrongadvantageoverthealternativereviewedmethods.

Repertorygridhasthepotentialtobeutilisedasanindependentformofenquiry,howeverforbestresultsitshouldperhapsbecombinedwithaformofreflectiveorreflexiveconversation.Thecurrentstudyutilisedworkshopsasawayoffacilitatingtheseconversations,engagingwithmultiplepractitionersatthesametimeinordertoefficientlycollectdata.Repertorygridalsoneedstobefacilitatedbyanobjectiveresearcherinordertoguidetheprocessandencouragetheparticipanttoreflectonappropriateincidents.Furtherresearchshouldlooktoimplementthisapproachanddocumentthefindingsinrelationtomappingouttheexperienceofdesignpractitioners.

7.2ImplicationsforfutureworkAnargumenthasbeenconstructed,throughalimitedempiricalstudy,infavouroftheuseofrepertorygridsasaneffectivemethodtocreatedouble-looplearningindesignpractice.Itappearstobethemosteffectivemethodofreflectionthatiscapableofuncoveringtacitknowledgewithinpractitionerswhilstallowingpeopletoreflectdeeplyontheirbeliefsandassumptionsaswellastheiractionsinagivensituation.Tofurtherthiswork,studiesshould


13

seektoimplementtherepertorygridapproachacrossdesignprofessionalsfromarangeofexperiencelevelsinordertoascertainrelationships;betweenlevelsofexperienceandbreadthsanddepthsofexplicit,implicitandtacitknowledgeandwhetherandhowthesemightreinforcedouble-looplearningtosupportthegrowthofprofessionalknowledge.Suchstudieswouldfurthervalidatethemethod’sappropriatenessinhelpingindividualdesignerstobetterunderstandtheirdesignpracticeandasaresulthelptoimprovetheiroverallperformance.Also,theywouldhelpreducethevaguenessoftheprocessofdesignerstransitioningfromanovicetoanexpertpractitionerandhowthisrelatestodescriptionsofcompetenceinorganisations.


14

8.ReferencesAftab,M.(2013)Designasafunctionalleader:Acasestudytoinvestigatetheroleofdesignasa

potentialleadingdisciplineinmultinationalorganisations.(PhD),NorthumbriaUniversity.Al-karasneh,S.M.(2014)ReflectiveJournalWritingasaTooltoTeachAspectsofSocialStudies.

EuropeanJournalofEducation,49(3),395-408.Anderson,N.(1990)Repertorygridtechniqueinemployeeselection.PersonnelReview,19(3),9-15.Argyris,C.(1976)Increasingleadershipeffectiveness.NewYork:Wiley.Björklund,L.(2008)TheRepertoryGridTechnique:MakingTacitKnowledgeExplicit:Assessing

CreativeWorkandProblemSolvingSkillls.Black,A.L.,&Halliwell,G.(2000)Accessingpracticalknowledge:how?why?TeachingandTeacher

Education,16(1),103-115.Bolland,R.,&Collopy,F.(2002)Managingasdesigning.Calafornia:StanfordUniversityPress.Butterfield,L.D.,Borgen,W.A.,Amundson,N.E.,&Maglio,A.-S.T.(2005)Fiftyyearsofthecritical

incidenttechnique:1954-2004andbeyond.Qualitativeresearch,5(4),475-497.Candy,P.(1990)Repertorygrids:Playingverbalchess.InJ.Mezirow(Ed.),Fosteringcriticalreflection

inadulthood:aguidetotransformativeandemancipatorylearning(pp.271-295):Jossey-BassPublishers.

Cartwright,S.(2002)Double-looplearning:Aconceptandprocessforleadershipeducators.JournalofLeadershipEducation,1(1),68-71.

Casakin,H.P.(2007)Metaphorsindesignproblemsolving:Implicationsforcreativity.InternationalJournalofDesign,1(2),21-33.

Charmaz,K.(1990)'Discovering’chronicillness:Usinggroundedtheory.Socialscience&medicine,30(11),1161-1172.

Chi,M.T.,Feltovich,P.J.,&Glaser,R.(1981)Categorizationandrepresentationofphysicsproblemsbyexpertsandnovices.Cognitivescience,5(2),121-152.

Cope,J.,&Watts,G.(2000)Learningbydoing-Anexplorationofexperience,criticalincidentsandreflectioninentrepreneuriallearning.InternationalJournalofEntrepreneurialBehavior&Research,6(3),104-124.

Coyne,R.(2005)Wickedproblemsrevisited.DesignStudies,26(1),5-17.Cross,N.(1984)DevelopmentsinDesignMethodology.JohnWiley,Chichester.Cross,N.(2008)Designerlywaysofknowing.Berlin:Birkhauser.Dorst,K.(2011)Thecoreof‘designthinking’anditsapplication.DesignStudies,32(6),521-532.Dreyfus,H.(2002)Intelligencewithoutrepresentation–Merleau-Ponty'scritiqueofmental

representationTherelevanceofphenomenologytoscientificexplanation.PhenomenologyandtheCognitiveSciences,1(4),367-383.

Dreyfus,H.,&Dreyfus,S.(1986)Mindovermachine:Thepowerofhumanintuitionandexpertiseintheeraofthecomputer.NewYork,USA:TheFreePress.

Eisenhardt,K.M.(1989)Buildingtheoriesfromcasestudyresearch.TheAcademyofManagementReview,14(4),532-550.

Evans,B.,Powell,J.,andTalbot,R.(1982)ChangingDesign.England:PageBros.Francis,D.(1995)Thereflectivejournal:Awindowtopreserviceteachers'practicalknowledge.

TeachingandTeacherEducation,11(3),229-241.Fransella,F.,Bell,R.,&Bannister,D.(2004)Amanualforrepertorygridtechnique(2nded.).


15

Gemma,W.(2014)The6typesofknowledge:Fromaprioritoprocedural.Retrievedfromhttps://blog.udemy.com/types-of-knowledge/

Giles,D.(2002)Advancedresearchmethodsinpsychology.NewYork:Routledge.Glasser,B.,&Strauss,A.(1967)Thediscoveryofgroundedtheory.Strategiesforqualitativeresearch.

Chicago,Illinois:AldinePublishingCompany.Goodfellow,J.(2000)Knowingfromtheinside:Reflectiveconversationswithandthroughthe

narrativesofonecooperatingteacher.Reflectivepractice,1(1),25-42.Gray,D.E.(2007)Facilitatingmanagementlearningdevelopingcriticalreflectionthroughreflective

tools.Managementlearning,38(5),495-517.Greenwood,J.(1998)Theroleofreflectioninsingleanddoublelooplearning.Journalofadvanced

nursing,27(5),1048-1053.Hammersley,M.,Foster,P.,&Gomm,R.(2000)Casestudyandgeneralisation.InR.Gomm,M.

Hammersley,&P.Foster(Eds.),Casestudymethod:Keyissues,Keytexts(pp.98-115).London,UnitedKingdom:Sage.

Hassenzahl,M.,&Wessler,R.(2000)Capturingdesignspacefromauserperspective:Therepertorygridtechniquerevisited.InternationalJournalofHuman-ComputerInteraction,12(3-4),441-459.

Heskett,J.(2002)Toothpicksandlogos:Designineverydaylife.UnitedKingdom:OxfordUniversityPress.

Hill,K.,Wittkowski,A.,Hodgkinson,E.,Bell,R.,&Hare,D.J.(2015)UsingtheRepertoryGridTechniquetoExamineTraineeClinicalPsychologists'ConstrualofTheirPersonalandProfessionalDevelopment.Clinicalpsychology&psychotherapy.

Hinkle,D.(1965)Thechangeofpersonalconstructsfromtheviewpointofatheoryofconstructimplications.(PhD)OhioStateUniversity.

Hughes,H.,Williamson,K.,&Lloyd,A.(2007)Criticalincidenttechnique.Exploringmethodsininformationliteracyresearch.TopicsinAustralasianLibraryandInformationStudies,28,49-66.

Hussein,M.E.,Hirst,S.,Salyers,V.,&Osuji,J.(2014)Usinggroundedtheoryasamethodofinquiry:Advantagesanddisadvantages.TheQualitativeReport,19(27),1-15.

Jankowicz,D.(2004)Theeasyguidetorepertorygrids.London,UnitedKingdom:JohnWiley&Sons.Johansson,R.(2003)Casestudymethodology.PaperpresentedatthetheInternationalConference

onMethodologiesinHousingResearch,Stockholm.Kearns,K.P.,Livingston,J.,Scherer,S.,&McShane,L.(2015)Leadershipskillsasconstruedby

nonprofitchiefexecutives.Leadership&OrganizationDevelopmentJournal,36(6),712-727.Kelly,G.(1955)Thenatureofpersonalconstructs.Thepsychologyofpersonalconstructs,1,105-183.Korthagen,F.A.J.(1993)Twomodesofreflection.TeachingandTeacherEducation,9(3),317-326.Lawson,B.,&Dorst,K.(2009)Designexpertise.JordanHill,Oxford:Elsevier.Liepė,Ž.,&Sakalas,A.(2015)Thethree-looplearningmodelapplianceinnewproductdevelopment.

EngineeringEconomics,58(3).Lipset,S.M.,Trow,M.,&Coleman,J.(1956)Uniondemocracy:Theinsidepoliticsofthe

InternationalTypographicalUnion.Glencoe,Ill.:FreePress.LipsetUnionDemocracy:TheInsidePoliticsoftheInternationalTypographicalUnion1956.

Michlewski,K.(2006)Towardsanunderstandingoftherolethecultureofdesingerscanplayinorganisations.(PhD).NorthumbriaUniversity.

Moore,R.A.,&Aspegren,C.M.(2001)Reflectiveconversationsbetweentwolearners:Retrospectivemiscueanalysis.JournalofAdolescent&AdultLiteracy,492-503.


16

Mumford,M.D.,Marks,M.A.,Connelly,M.S.,Zaccaro,S.J.,&Reiter-Palmon,R.(2000)Developmentofleadershipskills:Experienceandtiming.TheLeadershipQuarterly,11(1),87-114.

Nelson,H.,&Stolterman,E.(2012)Thedesignway.Massachusetts:MITPress.Niedderer,K.(2007)Mappingthemeaningofknowledgeindesignresearch.DesignResearchQuarterly,2(2),4-13.Paton,M.(2012)Reflectivejournalsandcriticalthinking.PaperpresentedattheProceedingsofThe

AustralianConferenceonScienceandMathematicsEducation(formerlyUniServeScienceConference).

Persson,H.(2009)Repertorygridtechnique-awindowtoprofessionalthinking?PaperpresentedatthePATT-22conference,Delft,theNetherlands.

Phani,A.S.(2012)Reflectivelearninginalargecorecourseinmechanicalengineering.Poggenpohl,S.H.,&Satō,K.(2009)Designintegrations:researchandcollaboration:IntellectBooks.Polanyi,M.(1958)Personalknowledge:Towardsapost-criticalphilosophy.Chicago:Universityof

ChicagoPress.Pugh,S.(1990)TotalDesign:Integratedmethodsforsuccessfulproductengineering.Harlow:

PearsonEducation.Pyhtila,J.I.,Tofade,T.S.,&Beardsley,R.S.(2014)UsefulnessOfReflectiveJournalsInAContinuing

ProfessionalDevelopmentProcessForAPharmacyLeadershipCourse.PharmacyEducation,14.Rittel,H.W.,&Webber,M.M.(1973)Dilemmasinageneraltheoryofplanning.Policysciences,4(2),

155-169.Robinson,V.M.(2010)Frominstructionalleadershiptoleadershipcapabilities:Empiricalfindings

andmethodologicalchallenges.LeadershipandPolicyinSchools,9(1),1-26.Schön,D.(1991)Thereflectivepracticioner:Howprofessionalsthinkinaction(6ed.).Aldershot,

GreatBritain:AshgatePublishingLimited.Schon,D.(1987)EducatingtheReflectivePractitioner.SanFrancisco:Jossey-BassPublishers.Schön,D.,&Argyris,C.(1974)Theoryinpractice:Increasingprofessionaleffectiveness.San

Francisco:Jossey-BassPublishers.Schrage,M.(1989)Innovationandappliedfailure.HarvardBusinessReview(Nov-Dec1989).

Retrievedfromhttps://hbr.org/1989/11/innovation-and-applied-failureSennett,R.(2008)Thecraftsmen.YaleUniversityPress.Smith,E.A.(2001)Theroleoftacitandexplicitknowledgeintheworkplace.JournalofKnowledge

Management,5(4),311-321.Solas,J.(1992)Investigatingteacherandstudentthinkingabouttheprocessofteachingandlearning

usingautobiographyandrepertorygrid.ReviewofEducationalResearch,62(2),205-225.Stacey,R.D.,Griffin,D.,&Shaw,P.(2000)Complexityandmanagement:fadorradicalchallengeto

systemsthinking?:PsychologyPress.Stebbins,R.A.(2001)Exploratoryresearchinthesocialsciences(Vol.48):Sage.Sudheim,D.(2013)Toincreaseinnovation,takethestingoutoffailure.HarvardBusinessReview.

Retrievedfromhttps://hbr.org/2013/01/to-increase-innovation-take-th&cm_sp=Article-_-Links-_-Top%20of%20Page%20Recirculation

Tofan,D.,Galster,M.,&Avgeriou,P.(2011)Capturingtacitarchitecturalknowledgeusingtherepertorygridtechnique(NIERtrack).PaperpresentedattheProceedingsofthe33rdInternationalConferenceonSoftwareEngineering.


17

Tripp,D.(2011)CriticalIncidentsinTeaching(ClassicEdition):DevelopingProfessionalJudgement:Routledge.

Uline,C.,Wilson,J.D.,&Cordry,S.(2004)Reflectivejournals:Avaluabletoolforteacherpreparation.Education,124(3),456.

Verganti,R.(2009)Design-driveninnovation:Changingtherulesofcompetitionbyradicallyinnovatingwhatthingsmean.Boston,Massachusetts:HarvardBusinessSchoolPublishingCorporation.

Voss,J.(1989)Problem-solvingandtheeducationalprocess.InA.Lesgold&K.Glaser(Eds.),Foundationsforapsychologyofeducation.Hillsdale,NJ:LawrenceErlbaum.

Wilson,E.O.(1999)Consilience:TheUnityofKnowledge.NewYork:VintageBooks.Yin,R.(2014)Casestudyresearch:Designandmethods(5thed.).ThousandOaks,Calafornia:SAGE

PublicationsInc.Young,R.(1989)Arefinementofthedesignprocessthroughananalysisofthefactorsaffectingthe

designofcommunicationcontrolconsoles.PhDthesis,CNAA.Young,R.(2008)Anintegratedmodelofdesigningtoaidunderstandingofthecomplexityparadigm

indesignpractice.FuturesJournal,Elsevier.2.


18

Appendix1

Reflective processes & methods

Description Studies Advantages Disadvantages

Critical incident analysis

A set of procedures for collecting observations of human behaviour in such a way as to facilitate their potential usefulness in solving practical problems and developing broad psychological principles’ (Flanagan, 1954, p.1).

Butterfield et al, 2005; Tripp, 2011; Cope and Watts, 2000; Hughes et al, 2007

Data is collected directly from the participants in their own words. Flexible method for participants to engage with. Highlights key points for personal change/development.

Critical events may not be recognised at the time. People might not recognise the importance of an event within a wider social context. Biased towards events that are considered recent.

Reflective journals

Reflective practice journals give space for regular, frequent, private, explorative and expressive writing (Bolton, 2014).

Uline, 2004; Francis, 1995; Pyhtila, 2014; Al-karasneh, 2014; Phani, 2012; Paton, 2012

Can make different connections between different situations. The writer can share aspects of the journal at their own discretion.

Not everyone prefers to communicate through writing or drawing. May be largely descriptive with little analysis. Difficult to uncover tacit knowledge.

Repertory grids

An interview technique utilised in order to elicit personal constructs and individual beliefs.

Kearns et al, 2003; Anderson, 1990; Hassenzahl, 2000; Korthagen, 1993; Solas, 1992; Hill et al, 2015; Young, 1989

Can be difficult to implement. Elicitation of personal constructs needs to be handled in a sensitive manner. Can be used to explicate tacit knowledge.

The interviewer can access the participants views of their own worlds. Can offer insights into a rich source of data. Construct elicitation comes entirely from the participant, minimal researcher intervention.

Reflective and reflexive

conversations

Conversations in which the facilitator asks a series of questions designed to encourage reflection in participants.

Goodfellow, 2000; Moore et al, 2001; Gray, 2007; Black et al, 2000

Can help the process of reflection in action and the search for new perspectives of a situation.

Need to critique assumptions that are made through the process (Palmer and Dumford, 1996).


19

Appendix2Thefollowingtablecollatesdefinitionsofthesevenlevelsofexperiencewithindesign,withdefinitionstakenfrom:DreyfusandDreyfus(1986),Dorst(in:PoggenpohlandSatō2009)andLawsonandDorst(2009).

Stage of Expertise Description

NAIVE

The Naive state of experience is adequate for explaining the design-like tasks that non-designers carry out in their day to day lives, in which they have unsystematically gained experience in the discipline. This is primarily derived through people engaging with problem solving in a designerly, yet uninformed way.

NOVICE A novice will consider the objective features of a situation, as they are given by the experts, and will follow strict rules to deal with the problem.

ADVANCED BEGINNER For an advanced beginner the situational aspects are important, there is some sensitivity to exceptions to the ‘hard’ rules of the novice. Maxims are used for guidance through the problem situation.

COMPETENT

A competent problem solver works in a radically different way. Elements in a situation are selected for special attention because of their relevance. A plan is developed to achieve the goals. This selection and choice can only be made on the basis of a much higher involvement in the problem situation than displayed by a novice or an advanced beginner. Problem solving at this level involves the seeking of opportunities. The process takes on a trial-and-error character, with some learning and reflection. A problem solver that goes on to be proficient immediately sees the most important issues and appropriate plan, and then reasons out what to do.

EXPERT

The expert responds to a specific situation intuitively, and performs the appropriate action straightaway. There is no problem solving and reasoning that can be distinguished at this level of working. This is a very comfortable level to be functioning on, and a lot of professionals do not progress beyond this point.

MASTER

The master sees the standard ways of working that experienced professionals use not as natural but as contingent. A master displays a deeper involvement into the professional field as a whole, dwelling on successes and failures. This attitude requires an acute sense of context, and openness to subtle cues.

VISIONARY

The visionary consciously strives to extend the domain of operation developing new ways of doing things, outcomes, definitions of the issues, opens new worlds and creates new domains. The visionary operates more on the margins of a domain, paying attention to other domains as well, and to anomalies and marginal practices that hold promises of a new vision of the domain.


20

AbouttheAuthors:

JohnGribbinisacurrentdoctoralstudentatNorthumbriaUniversity.John’s work focuses on identifying the skills, knowledge, attitudesand capabilities of designers across postgraduate education andorganisational innovation practices in order to improveunderstandingofcomplexinnovationprocesses.

Mersha Aftab is a Senior Lecturer in Innovation at NorthumbriaUniversity. Mersha’s work has led her to collaborate with Philips,Nokia,Daimler,SonyErricson,Lego,GoogleandSamsung.Mersha’sinterest lies inexploring the roleofdesign in triggeringa change intheorganisationalculture.

Robert(Bob)YoungisaProfessorofDesignPracticeintheFacultyofArts, Design and Social ScienceswithinNorthumbriaUniversity andhead of its Design Innovation Practices research community. Hisspecific interests are in design-led innovation, service design andsocialinnovation.

SuminParkisaninteriorDesignerinSouthKoreawithover14yearsexperience working in this field, leading design teams to deliverinterior schemes. As a postgraduate student, Sumin has tried toaccurately define the roles and responsibilities of Designers withinorganisations.

Documents

Paper title: Double-loop reflective practice as annrl.northumbria.ac.uk/27580/1/Double-loop reflective practice as an... · is argued that repertory grid interviews have the potential