Reflective Practicum: A Framework of Sensitising Concepts to Design for Transformative Reflection

CHI, pp. 2696-2707, 2017.

Cited by: 38|Bibtex|Views33|Links
EI
Keywords:
reflective practicum frameworktransformative reflectionSocial-emotional skillshci workReflective InformaticsMore(10+)
Weibo:
Using the core aspects of the reflective practicum as sensitising concepts, we abstracted the strategies and curricular components that provide such scaffolding, and suggested a framework of questions and roles for technology that might guide designers in designing for transforma...

Abstract:

Designing for reflection is becoming an increasingly important part of many HCI systems in a wide range of application domains. However, there is a gap in our understanding of how the process of reflection can be supported through technology. In fact, an implicit assumption in the majority of existing work is that, just by providing acces...More

Code:

Data:

Introduction
  • A substantial work has already been undertaken in HCI around design for reflection, spanning a range of applications including behavioural change [8, 28], personal informatics [19], mental health [40] and emotional wellbeing [31].
  • While many of these works aim to lead to transformative reflection – i.e., eliciting change in behaviour or mental schemas – there is a clear gap in the understanding of how such in-depth reflection can be facilitated through technology.
  • It is not yet clear (i) what are the key ingredients/components of a reflective process.
  • For example a reference to Schon’s reflection-in-action is common in most of these works, the intricacies of how people do reflect and how the reflection process can be supported through technology seems to be mostly missing from the HCI work so far
Highlights
  • Over recent years, a substantial work has already been undertaken in HCI around design for reflection, spanning a range of applications including behavioural change [8, 28], personal informatics [19], mental health [40] and emotional wellbeing [31]
  • While many of these works aim to lead to transformative reflection – i.e., eliciting change in behaviour or mental schemas – there is a clear gap in our understanding of how such in-depth reflection can be facilitated through technology
  • This paper aims to address this gap and argues for a framework to design for transformative reflection by highlighting the need to scaffold the reflection process, rather than assuming the ability to reflect is a trait that can be readily triggered by providing the relevant information
  • Reflective practicum – summary Based on the literature above, we summarise Schon’s concept of reflective practicum into a set of core points: The key assumption that the expertise cannot be taught to the learners, but needs to be actively constructed by the students who rely on the practicum to facilitate and scaffold their experiences to lead to learning
  • IN SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL LEARNING CONTEXTS We argue that the lens of the reflective practicum can serve as a guide to designers aiming to develop a technology-based system for transformative reflection, in the context of social-emotional learning
  • Using the core aspects of the reflective practicum as sensitising concepts, we abstracted the strategies and curricular components that provide such scaffolding, and suggested a framework of questions and roles for technology that might guide designers in designing for transformative reflection in social-emotional learning. We argue that this design framework could be used in contexts beyond social-emotional learning, emphasising the need to move past triggering reflection on data and toward scaffolding reflection within experience if transformative reflection is to arise
Results
  • For example a reference to Schon’s reflection-in-action is common in most of these works, the intricacies of how people do reflect and how the reflection process can be supported through technology seems to be mostly missing from the HCI work so far.
  • Coming from a long line of evidence-based research, such curricula are in more than 44% of US schools [7]
Conclusion
  • MOVING BEYOND SEL CONTEXTS This section aims to extend the argument by illustrating how aspects of reflection scaffolding similar to those described by the reflective practicum framework in SEL can be seen in other HCI work.
  • Using the core aspects of the reflective practicum as sensitising concepts, the authors abstracted the strategies and curricular components that provide such scaffolding, and suggested a framework of questions and roles for technology that might guide designers in designing for transformative reflection in SEL
  • The authors argue that this design framework could be used in contexts beyond SEL, emphasising the need to move past triggering reflection on data and toward scaffolding reflection within experience if transformative reflection is to arise
Summary
  • Introduction:

    A substantial work has already been undertaken in HCI around design for reflection, spanning a range of applications including behavioural change [8, 28], personal informatics [19], mental health [40] and emotional wellbeing [31].
  • While many of these works aim to lead to transformative reflection – i.e., eliciting change in behaviour or mental schemas – there is a clear gap in the understanding of how such in-depth reflection can be facilitated through technology.
  • It is not yet clear (i) what are the key ingredients/components of a reflective process.
  • For example a reference to Schon’s reflection-in-action is common in most of these works, the intricacies of how people do reflect and how the reflection process can be supported through technology seems to be mostly missing from the HCI work so far
  • Objectives:

    This paper aims to address this gap and argues for a framework to design for transformative reflection by highlighting the need to scaffold the reflection process, rather than assuming the ability to reflect is a trait that can be readily triggered by providing the relevant information
  • Results:

    For example a reference to Schon’s reflection-in-action is common in most of these works, the intricacies of how people do reflect and how the reflection process can be supported through technology seems to be mostly missing from the HCI work so far.
  • Coming from a long line of evidence-based research, such curricula are in more than 44% of US schools [7]
  • Conclusion:

    MOVING BEYOND SEL CONTEXTS This section aims to extend the argument by illustrating how aspects of reflection scaffolding similar to those described by the reflective practicum framework in SEL can be seen in other HCI work.
  • Using the core aspects of the reflective practicum as sensitising concepts, the authors abstracted the strategies and curricular components that provide such scaffolding, and suggested a framework of questions and roles for technology that might guide designers in designing for transformative reflection in SEL
  • The authors argue that this design framework could be used in contexts beyond SEL, emphasising the need to move past triggering reflection on data and toward scaffolding reflection within experience if transformative reflection is to arise
Related work
  • Over the last decade, HCI researchers have shown increasing interest in designing systems to support reflection. These have been fueled by the realisation of the key role that reflection plays in areas such as education [12], behavioural change [8], design for wellbeing [31, 40], personal informatics [19], or reflective design [34]. These developments are further emphasised by a series of recent review papers (including at DIS and CHI), taking stock of the field [1, 2, 13]. As such, we do not replicate their synthesising work in what follows, and instead directly build on their analyses to motivate and set the gap addressed in this paper.

    While various conceptual and theoretical accounts of reflection co-exist across HCI work (cf., [2]), there is a shared understanding that reflection can take multiple forms differing in its ‘depth’: from simple ‘revisiting’ of an event to ‘transformative’ reflection that leads to change in practice or understanding of why and what happened [1, 13, 22]. Such a transformative effect—i.e., leading to a change in behaviour or an insight—is what makes reflection a key process for education [6, 18, 22, 32, 33] as well as a crucial part of systems in behavioural change, personal informatics, and wellbeing.
Funding
  • Develops a conceptual framework that extends the concept of the reflective practicum towards identifying appropriate roles of technology to support transformative reflection
  • Argues that a deeper understanding of these opportunities can benefit designing for reflection in other areas
  • Aims to address this gap and argues for a framework to design for transformative reflection by highlighting the need to scaffold the reflection process, rather than assuming the ability to reflect is a trait that can be readily triggered by providing the relevant information
  • Argues is the key characteristics of reflective practicum: as reflection-in-action and the underlying expertise cannot be directly taught to students, the role of the practicum is to arrange the right sorts of experiences for the students
  • For example a reference to Schon’s reflection-in-action is common in most of these works , the intricacies of how people do reflect and how the reflection process can be supported through technology seems to be mostly missing from the HCI work so far
Reference
  • Eric P.S. Baumer. 2015. Reflective Informatics: Conceptual Dimensions for Designing Technologies of Reflection. In CHI ’15. 585–594. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702234
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Eric P S Baumer, Vera Khovanskaya, Mark Matthews, Lindsay Reynolds, Schwanda Sosik, and Geri K Gay. 2014. Reviewing Reflection: On the Use of Reflection in Interactive System Design. In DIS’14.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Steve Benford, Chris Greenhalgh, Gabriella Giannachi, Brendan Walker, Joe Marshall, and Tom Rodden. 2012. Uncomfortable interactions. In CHI ’12. ACM Press, 2005–2014. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=2207676.2208347
    Findings
  • H. Blumer. 1954. What is Wrong with Social Theory? American Sociological Review 19, 1 (1954), 3–10. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2088165
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Stephane Bouchard, Francois Bernier, Eric Boivin, Brian Morin, and Genevieve Robillard. 2012. Using biofeedback while immersed in a stressful videogame increases the effectiveness of stress management skills in soldiers. PloS one 7, 4 (jan 2012), e36169. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036169
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • David Boud, Rosemary Keogh, and David Walker. 2013. Reflection: Turning experience into learning. Routledge.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • J Bridgeland, M Bruce, and A Hariharan. 2013. The missing piece: A national teacher survey on how social and emotional learning can empower children and transform schools. (2013).
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Sunny Consolvo, David W. McDonald, and James A. Landay. 2009. Theory-driven design strategies for technologies that support behavior change in everyday life. In CHI ’09. ACM Press, 405—-414. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1518701.1518766
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Sebastian Deterding. 2015. The Lens of Intrinsic Skill Atoms: A Method for Gameful Design. Human-Computer Interaction 30, 3-4 (2015), 294–335. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2014.993471
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • John Dewey. 1933. How we think: A restatement of the relatino of reflective thinking to the educative process. (1933).
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Joseph A Durlak, Roger P Weissberg, Allison B Dymnicki, Rebecca D Taylor, and Kriston B Schellinger. 2011. The impact of enhancing students’ social and emotional learning: a meta-analysis of school-based universal interventions. Child development 82, 1 (2011), 405–32. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2010.01564.x
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Rowanne Fleck and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2009. Teachers’ and tutors’ social reflection around SenseCam images. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 67, 12 (dec 2009), 1024–1036. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2009.09.004
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Rowanne Fleck and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2010. Reflecting on reflection: framing a design landscape. In OZCHI’10. 216–223. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1952222.1952269
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Mohammed (Ehsan) Hoque, Matthieu Courgeon, Jean-Claude Martin, Bilge Mutlu, and Rosalind W. Picard. 2013. MACH: My Automatic Conversation Coach. In UbiComp ’13. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 697. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2493432.2493502
    Findings
  • Katherine Isbister and Florian Floyd’ Mueller. 2015. Guidelines for the Design of Movement-Based Games and Their Relevance to HCI. HumanComputer Interaction July 2015 (2015). DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07370024.2014.996647
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Norman Kagan, Paul Schauble, Arthur Resnikoff, Steven J Danish, and David R Krathwohl. 1969. Interpersonal process recall. The Journal of nervous and mental disease 148, 4 (1969), 365–374.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Matthew Kay. 2014. Challenges in personal health tracking. XRDS: Crossroads, The ACM Magazine for Students 21, 2 (2014), 32–37. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2678024
    Findings
  • David A Kolb. 2014. Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Pearson Education.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Ian Li, Anind Dey, and Jodi Forlizzi. 2010. A stage-based model of personal informatics systems. In CHI ’10. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 557. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753409
    Findings
  • Lena Mamykina. 2009. Designing ubiquitous computing for reflection and learning in diabetes management. ProQuest.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Lena Mamykina, Elizabeth Mynatt, Patricia Davidson, and Daniel Greenblatt. 2008. MAHI: investigation of social scaffolding for reflective thinking in diabetes management. In CHI ’08. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 477. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357131
    Findings
  • Jennifer A Moon. 1999. Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory and practice. Psychology Press.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Jennifer a Moon. 2004. A Handbook of Reflective and Experiential Learning: Theory and Practice. 252 pages. DOI:http://dx.doi.org/ISBN-10:0415335167
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Robert R Morris, Stephen M Schueller, and Rosalind W Picard. 2015. Efficacy of a web-based, crowdsourced peer-to-peer cognitive reappraisal platform for depression: Randomized controlled trial. Journal of medical Internet research 17, 3 (2015), e72.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Eleanor O’Rourke, Kyla Haimovitz, Christy Ballweber, Carol Dweck, and Zoran Popovic. 2014. Brain points: a growth mindset incentive structure boosts persistence in an educational game. In CHI ’14, Vol. 33. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 3339–3348. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2556288.2557157
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Andrea Grimes Parker. 2014. Reflection through performance: personal implications of documenting health behaviors for the collective. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing (2014), 1737–1752. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00779-014-0780-5
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Laura Pina, Kael Rowan, Asta Roseway, Paul Johns, Gillian R Hayes, and Mary Czerwinski. 2014. In Situ Cues for ADHD Parenting Strategies Using Mobile Technology. In Pervasive Health ’14.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Bernd Ploderer, Wolfgang Reitberger, Harri Oinas-Kukkonen, and Julia van Gemert-Pijnen. 2014. Social interaction and reflection for behaviour change. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing (2014), 1667–1676. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00779-014-0779-y
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Arthur Robin, Marlene Schneider, and Michelle Dolnick. 1976. The turtle technique: An extended case study of self-control in the classroom. Psychology in the Schools 13, 4 (oct 1976), 449–453. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/1520-6807(197610)13:4<449::AID-PITS2310130420>3.0.CO;2-W
    Findings
  • Robin S. Rosenberg, Shawnee L. Baughman, and Jeremy N. Bailenson. 2013. Virtual Superheroes: Using Superpowers in Virtual Reality to Encourage Prosocial Behavior. PLoS ONE 8, 1 (jan 2013), e55003. http://dx.plos.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0055003
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Corina Sas and Alan Dix. 2011. Designing for reflection on personal experience. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 69, 5 (2011), 281–282. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Donald A Schon. 1983. The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Donald A Schon. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. (1987).
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Phoebe Sengers, Kirsten Boehner, Shay David, and Joseph ’Jofish’ Kaye. 2005. Reflective design. In CC ’05. ACM Press, New York, New York, USA, 49. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1094562.1094569
    Findings
  • Jorge Simoes, Rebeca Dıaz Redondo, and Ana Fernandez Vilas. 2013. A social gamification framework for a K-6 learning platform. Computers in Human Behavior 29, 2 (mar 2013), 345–353. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.007
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Petr Slovak and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2015. Teaching and developing social and emotional skills with technology. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 22, 4 (2015), 19.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Petr Slovak, Ran Gilad-Bachrach, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2015. Designing Social and Emotional Skills Training. In CHI ’15. ACM, 2797–2800. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2702123.2702385
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Petr Slovak, Kael Rowan, Chris Frauenberger, Ran Gilad-bachrach, Mia Doces, Brian Smith, Rachel Kamb, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2016. Scaffolding the scaffolding: Supporting children’s social-emotional learning at home. In CSCW’16. ACM, 1749-1763.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Petr Slovak, Anja Thieme, Paul Tennent, Patrick Olivier, and Geraldine Fitzpatrick. 2015. On Becoming a Counsellor: Challenges and Opportunities To Support Interpersonal Skills Training. In CSCW’15. 1336–1347.
    Google ScholarLocate open access versionFindings
  • Anja Thieme, Jayne Wallace, Paula Johnson, John Mccarthy, Sian Lindley, Peter Wright, Patrick Olivier, and Thomas D Meyer. 2013. Design to Promote Mindfulness Practice and Sense of Self for Vulnerable Women in Secure Hospital Services. In CHI’13. ACM 2647–2656.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Anja Thieme, Jayne Wallace, James Thomas, Ko Le Chen, Nicole Kramer, and Patrick Olivier. 2011. Lovers’ box: Designing for reflection within romantic relationships. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 69, 5 (may 2011), 283–297. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1959890.1960250
    Locate open access versionFindings
  • Lev S Vygotsky. 1987. The collected works of LS Vygotsky: Volume 1: Problems of general psychology, including the volume Thinking and Speech. Vol. 1. Springer.
    Google ScholarFindings
  • Gregory M Walton. 2014. The New Science of Wise Psychological Interventions. Current Directions in Psychological Science 23, 1 (2014), 73–82. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721413512856
    Locate open access versionFindings
Your rating :
0

 

Best Paper
Best Paper of CHI, 2017
Tags
Comments