Developing the ability of proactive reflection.

Abstract

in this article, I will describe the classroom environment that I attempt to create in my Leadership and Organizational Development course. Then I will outline the process through which I assist cadets in developing their proactive reflection skills that will allow them to become leaders of character who are life-long learners. Although leadership and organizational development theory is taught throughout the course, the major focus of the course is developing the cadets' ability to engage in proactive reflection.

Introduction

   "Today's highly successful manager or administrator is distinguished
   not so much by any single set of knowledge or skills but by his
   ability to adapt to and master the changing demands of his job and
   career--by his ability to learn (Kolb, 1976, 21)."

This article only addresses how to develop students' ability to proactively reflect on experience. It is important that the reader be reminded that there are variables in addition to the ability to engage in proactive reflection that are not discussed in this paper that will determine whether experiential learning is effective. For example, the attitude of the learner will be a major determinant of the success of experiential learning.

Taking into consideration the increasing rate of technological change and globalization, I believe this statement is more salient today than in 1976. Normative education that focuses on memorization of fact and ideas is so bound up in the past as to give little help in dealing with the issues of the present and the future (Dewey, 1938). It is clear that such education leaves leaders unprepared for dealing with the complexity and contingency of their work environments (Schon, 1994). This normative approach to education, "by advocating the systematic application of theory and techniques to every situation, ... fails to consider that practitioners deal with ill-defined, unique, emotive, and complex issues (Cunliffe, 2002, 35)."

There are no natural laws or final, completely adequate understandings of leadership. Rather a leader develops more and more adequate instrumentalities for dealing with always changing and growing leadership situations. In practice, leadership deals with individualized and unique situations that are never exactly duplicable and about which, accordingly, no complete understanding is possible. Thus, blindly replicating leadership actions that were successful in past experiences, or prescribed in the leadership literature, in present or future leadership situations with all their uniqueness and contingency is no guarantee that they will be effective.

   In today's military and workplace, "[t]he only constant is change,
   and responding effectively to change almost always requires
   learning (Seibert & Daudelin, 1999)." To allow leaders to
   develop the ability to navigate the uniqueness and contingency of
   their future leadership experiences, we must help them develop
   their ability to learn from experience. In this paper, learning
   is conceived as "ultimately about creating meaning that is intended
   to impact future behavior (Seibert & Daudelin, 1999, xvii)."

As does Seibert and Daudelin (1999) reflection here is defined as the mental activity managers engage in to try to make sense of experience. Two types of reflection have been identified as essential to experiential learning: active reflection or reflection-inaction and proactive reflection or reflection-on-action (Schon, 1983, 1987, Seibert & Daudelin, 1999). Active reflection is thinking about what one is experiencing when one is experiencing it and allows on-the-spot experimenting. This has been the focus in the management literature. On the other hand, proactive reflection is an intentional contemplation of a past experience that is deliberate and temporally and spatially removed from the experience to create knowledge for future action (Seibert & Daudelin, 1999). The education literature has focused on this type of reflection. Proactive reflection allows the learner to interpret and develop generalizations about her experience that may be utilized in negotiating future experiences (Fenwick, 2000). While active reflection is important to leadership learning and it is addressed in the course, teaching proactive reflection is the keystone of the Leadership and Organizational Development course. There are two primary reasons for this: the lack of existing knowledge of how to actually develop the skill of active reflection; and the classroom provides an ideal environment in which to practice and learn proactive reflection.

Based on my experience of teaching at three other universities, in contrast to normative, non-military undergraduate classrooms in which many students lack salient leadership experience and, outside of the classroom, almost no shared experience, Coast Guard cadets share a number of leadership experiences. Because of this, it provides an ideal environment for teaching leadership through experiential learning. In other words, cadets share many leadership experiences on which they may collectively proactively reflect. Rather than acquiring a theoretical understanding of course material, experiential learning facilitates the creation of personal meaning (Dewey, 1928; Rodgers, 1969; Schon, 1983, Seibert & Daudelin, 1999; Torbert 1973, 1976, 1991). In contrast to normative management education that is tantamount to "giving the students a fish," Experiential learning "teaches students how to fish" by providing the ability to become life-long learners. Next, I will describe the learning environment that I attempt to create for my Leadership and Organizational Development course to facilitate proactive reflection. Then I will outline skills that students must acquire to be able to engage in proactive reflection and activities in which the cadets engage to acquire these skills.

Community of Inquiry: The Learning Environment

Leadership and Organizational Development is conceived as a community of inquiry (Dewey, 1938; Torbert, 1976) into leadership. Leadership is conceived of as an experience that unfolds as the leader moves through it, as she moves through time and space. It is a space in which we share our experiences and attempt to create meaning from them. Inquiry as conceived in this paper is based on the John Dewey's pragmatic philosophy of instrumentalism. Instrumentalism is based on the assumption that all knowledge is practical. Rather than focusing on independently and objectively existing "reals," he was disposed to start with experience. The environment in which we live is highly complex and is in a constant state of flux. In such an environment, Dewey conceptualizes intelligence as being created through reflection on experience (Jones & Fogelin, 1997).

Dewey believed that there are no natural laws or final, completely adequate understandings of what happens in life, but rather, merely more and more adequate instrumentalities for dealing with always changing and growing human situations. In other words, every solution to a problem is tentative, experimental and hypothetical, capable of being modified in light of new data that the preliminary solution generates.

Our assumptions, beliefs, premises and other mental frameworks are solutions for dealing with our human experiences such as leadership. Thus, our community is a space in which double-loop learning (Argyris, 1982, 1991) takes place. Double-loop surfaces our fundamental assumptions, premises, and beliefs and then challenges them to determine their applicability. In contrast, single-loop learning simply involves changes within the context of existing assumptions and premises. A major barrier to double-loop learning is defensive reasoning (Argyris, 1991). Defensive reasoning occurs when individuals try to avoid feeling embarrassed, vulnerable, or incompetent. Because our world-views (i.e., our beliefs, assumptions, and premises) are a major part of our self, we do not like to have them questioned for fear that they might be deemed inadequate and in turn, we will be deemed inadequate. Because of this, many of us remain closed to the inquiry that results in double-loop learning, to examining our assumptions, beliefs, and other mental frameworks.

Experiential learning requires suffering (Torbert, 1991) and is immensely challenging and disorienting (Senge, 1994). Because of this, it is important to create an environment in which students feel safe to inquire. Beyond this, we have to deal with our society's inclination for action over thoughtful reflection. The class is conceived as a safe space. A "safe space" is a space in which people feel that they are able to express their thoughts, feelings, and opinions without fear of penalty, humiliation, or retribution. It is explicitly stated that experience is neither right nor wrong; it just is. Students are asked to be empathic, to suspend their assumptions and try to understand others' experience.

During class discussion no one should be challenged to defend interpretation of an experience. Students are encouraged to listen with empathy and ask each other questions to clarify understanding. The purpose of class discussion is to produce greater understanding of experience. Not a space of getting it right. During the class discussion there is no requirement to participate in any particular way. The course utilizes the following technologies: dialogue, cooperative learning (Goldschmid, 1970, 1971), electronic fishbowl (Eriksen, 2001), and an exercise entitled Understanding and Transcending Team Member Differences: A Felt-Experience Exercise (Dugal & Eriksen, 2004). As the teacher/facilitator, my role is to listen, support, provide feedback, and challenge the students (Justice & Marienau, 1988). A learner is challenged when she is stretched beyond the limits of her current knowledge and skills. Next, I will describe the skills I am attempting to develop in cadets so they may develop the ability to engage in proactive reflection and the methodologies through which I develop these skills.

Learning Leaders--learning to learn

Below I identify the skills that are necessary to effectively engage in proactive reflection. The development of these steps was influenced by Kolb's (1976) Experiential Learning Model and developed through my dissertation and experience in the classroom. In addition, for each skill I will identify the activities that were employed to facilitate student acquisition.

Articulation of experience--experience can be articulated in two ways: from outside the experience or within the experience (Cunliffe, 2002). By outside the experience, I mean describing one's experience as would a scientist observing you, as a detached "objective" observer. It treats experience as a disembodied activity. This is a skill that most college students possess. It is based on the assumptions positivism of the scientific method, and is taught and reinforced throughout one's primary and secondary education and in most college courses. Students with situational awareness are most effective in describing their experience from outside the experience. In general, if students are asked to describe their experience, they students will do so from outside the experience. In contrast, articulating one's experience from within is a skill that most students do not possess. They probably possessed this skill as a child but a lifetime of formal and informal education destroyed this ability. Most education is about the right and wrong of things; it is not about how you feel about things. Articulation from within experience recognizes that experience is inherently embodied. Experience involves feelings and emotions and is subjective. Students who are self-aware have an advantage in describing their experience from within. In Leadership and Organizational Development this skill is developed through engaging in formal writing assignments and an exercise entitled Understanding and Transcending Team Member Differences: A Felt-Experience Exercise (Dugal & Eriksen, 2004). An example of one of the writing assignments, adapted from Stephen Fineman's and Yiannis Gabriel's book Experiencing Organizations (1996), that facilitates students articulation of experience from within is as follows: "Please think of the Coast Guard Academy. What is it like? Try to recall an incident or conversation that captures or symbolizes what being a cadet at the Coast Guard Academy is all about. Describe and discuss the incident, something that taught you a lot about the organization, its structure, its members and its culture. Discuss your emotions and feelings at the time of the incident and now, as you look back on it." As well as number of other valuable outcomes for facilitating experiential learning, the Felt-Experience Exercise provides a structure and detailed instructions to assist students' in articulating their experience from within.

Tentative interpretation(s) of experience--at this stage, students, alone or together, should develop a tentative understanding of their experience. What happened? What is the meaning of the experience? Multiple understandings should be explored. Formulation of tentative interpretations is facilitated through students engaging in the Felt-Experience Exercise and class discussion. As part of the Felt-Experience Exercise, the learner and his partner interpret his and his partner's experience. When discussing an experience shared by all cadets, cadets offer their interpretations of the experience that invariably differ. Before engaging in this processes, it must be made clear to the students that we are not getting into the "right and wrong" of others" interpretation. Rather, we seek understanding. It is only when we understand others' interpretation of a shared experience that we can learn from it together.

Asking questions about the experience--asking questions allows students to extract meaning from their experience (Dewey, 1910 Seibert & Daudelin, 1999). Students should begin with questions that challenge them to critically examine their interpretation(s) of their experience. Then questions should be posed that create a general understanding(s) of the experience that may be applied in future experience. Questions should move from those that allow an understanding of the concrete to those that facilitate abstract understanding. In class discussion, I ask cadets questions about their experience in the above manner. Individually the cadets are required to ask such questions in their individual semester project called a Leadership Exploration. The Leadership Exploration is a self-directed exploration of a leadership conundrum. It is a conundrum that they experienced in the past or that they will encounter upon entering the Coast Guard. To successfully complete the assignment, they are required to engage in the four steps outlined in this paper for engaging in proactive reflection. This is when the training wheels are taken off and they must engage in the life-long learning process of reflecting on experience.

Formation of abstract concepts and generalizations (Kolb, 1976)--they are the understandings that are used as guides to future action. They may be developed alone or with others. These understanding may come in the form of formal theories or may be the reformulation of informal theories of action or formal theories. As John Dewey noted, theories, formal or informal, are conceived as instruments that allow us to negotiate our way through experience (Jones & Fogelin, 1997). They are not universal truths and their value lies in their instrumentality. These conceptualization and generalizations are the guides to actions that are to be tested in future experience. When we are proactively reflecting as a class, I facilitate the development of abstracts concepts and generalization. As part of their Leadership Exploration, based on their reflection on their experience, interviews with Coast Guard officers and enlisted personnel with insights into their conundrum, and formal theory, cadets must develop these concepts and generalizations that will act as guides to their future leadership experience.

Conclusion

This paper outlines the environment and process that has been effective in facilitating proactive reflection among cadets at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy. Since there exist no absolute or universal truths about leadership, reflection upon experience is a necessary component of any leadership development curriculum. It allows students to develop inferences about potential ways of working their way through their future leadership experiences. Teaching leadership through proactive reflection prepares future leaders to effectively negotiate the ambiguous, unique, contingent, complex, and emotive experiences they will encounter. The normative approach to education that advocates systematic application of leadership theories and techniques to every situation provides unrealistic expectations and may lead to dysfunctional behavior. Most often, it manifest itself in actions by leaders in which they attempt to force their experience to fit existing theories that do not, and cannot, take into account the complexity and flux that is life. Theories are generalizations of many unique and individual situations and, thus, can never be the operative tools of leadership. Only through reflecting on experience can leaders develop pragmatic knowledge to deal with the uniqueness of each leadership situation they will encounter.

References

Argyris, C. (1982). "The Executive Mind and Double-Loop Learning." Organizational Dynamics, Autumn, 5-22.

Argyris, C. (1991). "Teaching Smart People How to Learn." Harvard Business Review, May-June, 99-109.

Cunliffe, A.L. (2002). "Reflexive Dialogical Practice in Management Learning." Management Learning, 33(1), 35-61.

Dewey, J. (1910). How We Think. Boston: D.C. Heath and Co.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Touchstone.

Dugal, S. & Eriksen, M. (2004). "Understanding and Transcending Team Member Differences: A Felt-Experience Exercise." Journal of Management Education. Forthcoming.

Eriksen, M. (2001). The Electronic Fishbowl as a Community of Inquiry: Management Passion in the XXIst Century. Unpublished Dissertation, University of Rhode Island.

Fenwick, T.J. (2000). "Expanding Conceptions of Experiential Learning: A Review of the Five Contemporary Perspectives on Cognition." Adult Education Quarterly, 50, 243-273.

Fineman, S. & Gabriel, Y. (1996). Experiencing Organizations. London: Sage.

Goldschmid, M. (1970). "Instructional Options: Adapting the Large University Course to Individual Differences." Learning and Development, 1, 1-2.

Goldschmid, M. (1971). "The Learning Cell: An Instructional Innovation." Learning and Development, 2, 1-6.

Jones, W.T. & Fogelin, R.J. (1997). A History of Western Philosophy: The Twentieth Century to Quine and Derrida. Fort Worth, TX: Harcourt Brace College Publishers.

Justice D.O. & Marienau, C. (1988). "Self-Assessment: Essential Skills for Adult Learners." In Hutchings & A. Wutzdofff (Eds.), Knowing and Doing: Learning through Experience (pp. 42-62). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kolb, D.A. (1976). "Management and the Learning Process." California Management Review, 18, 21-31.

Kolb, D.A. (1984). Experiential Learning. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Rogers, C.R., (1969). Freedom to Learn. Columbus, OH: Charles M. Merrill.

Schon, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

Seibert, K.W. & Daudelin, M.W. (1999). The Role of Reflection in Managerial Learning: Theory, Research, and practice. Westport, CT: Quorom Books.

Senge, P. (1994). The Fifth Discipline. New York: Doubleday.

Torbert, W. (1973). Learning from Experience: Toward Consciousness. New York: Columbia University.

Torbert, W. (1976). Creating a community of inquiry: Conflict collaboration, transformation. New York: Wiley.

Torbert, W. (1991). The power of balance: Transforming self, society and scientific inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Matthew Eriksen, United States Coast Guard Academy

Eriksen, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor in the Department of Leadership and Management