Assignment 01

Name
Muhammad Shan Ramzan

Roll No
CE610220
Course
Critical Thinking and reflective practices

Level B.ed (1.5 Years)

Tutor Name
Abdul Rehman
Allama Iqbal Open University Islamabad
Q.1 Take an article of your interest and critically analyze that how
social, economical and ethical aspects of that topic has been
considered?
Introduction
All contemporary political communication is in a specific way critical because
it consists of speech acts that normally question political opinions and
practices of certain actors. Modern politics is a highly competitive system, in
which elections and warfare are ways of distributing and redistributing
power.
In contrast to Kant’s general understanding of critique, Karl Marx and the
Marxian tradition understands the categorical imperative as the need to
overcome all forms of slavery and degradation and to unmask alienation. Tis
school of thought points out a more specific understanding of being critical,
namely the questioning of power, domination, and exploitation, the political
demand and struggle for a just society. Critical theory is understood as a
critique of society. Scholars in the Marxian inspired tradition employ the
term “critical” to stress that not all science is critical, but that a lot of it has a
more administrative character that takes power structures for granted, does
not question them, or helps to legitimate them.
Jürgen Huberman (1984, 1987) built his approach on the classical Frankfurt
School and at the same time worked out the concept of communicative
rationality, by which he went beyond the classical tradition. He distinguishes
between instrumental (nonsocial, success-oriented), strategic (social,
success-oriented), and communicative action (social, oriented on
understanding). For Huberman (1987, p. 375), critical theory questions that
 so-called steering media (money, power) attack “the communicative
infrastructure of largely rationalized life worlds.” (Huberman speaks of
money and power as “steering media” because he argues that these are
structures that elites use for trying to control and dominate society.) He
conceives instrumental action and communicative action as the two
fundamental aspects of social praxis. What he wants to express is that the
human being is both a laboring and a communicating being. In a way,
Huberman retains the classical Marxist distinction between base and
superstructure, but inverts it by putting the stress on communication. Doubts
arise if labor can be so strictly separated from communication in a dualistic
way.
The 20th and 21st centuries have seen a rising importance of communicative
and cultural work in the economy. But if such activity takes on value-
generating form, then culture and communication must be part of the
economy themselves, base and superstructure become integrated, and labor
and communication cannot be separated. Communication is one of the
crucial foundations of the economy: The latter is not just a system of the
production of use-values, and in class societies of exchange values. It is also a
social system because production in any society takes on complex forms
beyond individual self-sustenance. The only way for organizing the economy
is via communication, in the form of symbolic interaction and/or anonymous
forms of indirect communication (as for example via money, markets, the
price system, etc.). Human thought is a precondition for human
communication and existence. When humans produce in the economy, they
do so with a purpose in mind, which means that they anticipate the form of
the object and how it will be put to use. Te economic existence of man
requires anticipative thinking just like it requires communication. It is in
these two specifc senses the importance of communication and thought that
the economy is always and fundamentally cultural. Capitalism has had a
history of the commodification of culture and communication, especially
since the 20th century. Tis is not to say that culture and communication
necessarily take on the form of a commodity, but that in capitalism they
frequently do so in the form of content commodities, audience commodities,
and cultural labor power as commodity. In this sense culture has been
economized, or, to be more precise commoditized, that is, put under the
influence of the commodity logic. Communication is certainly an important
aspect of a domination-free society. Under capitalism, it is however also a
form of interaction, in which ideology is with the help of the mass media
made available to the dominated groups.
Communication is not automatically progressive. For Huberman, the
differentiation is between instrumental/strategic reason and communicative
reason, whereas for Horkheimer the distinction is between instrumental
reason and critical reason and, based on that, between traditional and
critical theory. Huberman splits of communication from instrumentality and
thereby neglects to understand that in capitalism the dominant system uses
communication just like technology, the media, ideology, or labor as an
instrument to defend its rule. Structures of domination do not leave
communication untouched and pure, they are rather antagonistically
entangled with communication. Hagerman’s stress on communication is not
immune against misuse for instrumental purposes. The concept of
communication can be critical, but is not necessarily critical, whereas the
concept of a critique of domination is necessarily critical.
Te six dimensions of a critical theory of society can also be found in Karl
Marx’s works. Tis circumstance shows the importance of his thought for any
critical theory. Critical theory uses dialectical reasoning as method of
analysis: The dialectical method identifies contradictions. Contradictions are
the basic building blocks of all dialectics. Dialectics tries to show that and
how contemporary society and its moments are shaped by contradictions.
Contradictions result in the circumstance that society is dynamic and that
capitalism assures the continuity of domination and exploitation by changing
the way these phenomena are organized. In a contradiction, one pole of the
dialectic can only exist by the way of the opposed pole, they require and
exclude each other at the same time. In a dominative society (such as
capitalism), contradictions cause problems and are to a certain extent also
the seeds for overcoming these problems. They have positive potentials and
negative realities at the same time. Marx analyzed capitalism’s
contradictions, for example: the contradictions between no owners/owners,
the poor/the rich, misery/wealth, workers/capitalists, use value/exchange
value, concrete labor/abstract labor, the simple form of value/the relative
and expanded form of value, social relations of humans/relations of things,
the fetish of commodities and money/fetishistic thinking, the circulation of
commodities/the circulation of money, commodities/money, labor
power/wages, subject/object, labour process/valorization process, subject of
labor (labor power, worker)/the means of production (object), variable
capital/constant capital, surplus labor/surplus product, necessary labor
time/surplus labor time single worker/cooperation, single company/industry
sector, single capital/competing capitals, production/consumption,
productive forces/relations of production.
Critical theory is connected to struggles for a just and fair society, it is an
intellectual dimension of struggles: Critical theory provides a self-
understanding of a society’s self-understanding, struggles, and wishes. It can
“show the world why it actually struggles” and is “taking sides […] with actual
struggles” (Marx, 1997, p. 214). Tis means that critical theory can help to
explain the causes, conditions, potentials, and limits of struggles. Critical
theory rejects the argument that academia and science should and can be
value-free. It rather argues that all thought and theories are shaped by
political worldviews. Te reasons why a person is interested in a certain topic,
aligns himself/herself with a certain school of thought, develops a particular
theory and not another one, refers to certain authors and not others, are
deeply political because modern society is shaped by conficts of interests and
therefore, for surviving and asserting themselves, scholars have to make
choices, enter strategic alliances, and defend their positions against others.
In confict-based and antagonistic societies, academic writing and speaking,
scholarship and science are therefore always forms of political
communication: Tey are not just discovery, knowledge construction, or
invention, but besides knowledge creation also a production and
communication of knowledge about knowledge the political standpoints of
the scholars themselves. Critical theory holds not only that theory is always
political, but also that it should develop analyses of society and concepts that
assist struggle against interests and ideas that justify domination and
exploitation.
Our discussion of ethics centres on two main considerations: justice and
value. Justice requires that people and nations should receive what they are
due, or have a right to. For some, an outcome is just if the process that
generated it is just. Others view justice in terms of the actual outcomes
enjoyed by different people and groups and the values they place on those
outcomes. Outcome-based justice can range from maximizing economic
measures of aggregate welfare to rights-based views of justice, for example,
believing that all countries have a right to clean air. Different views have
been expressed about what is valuable. All values may be anthropocentric or
there may be non-human values. Economic analysis can help to guide policy
action, provided that appropriate, adequate, and transparent ethical
assumptions are built into the economic methods.
Ethical and socio-economic concepts and principles
When a country emits GHGs, its emissions cause harm around the globe. The
country itself suffers only a part of the harm it causes. It is therefore rarely in
the interests of a single country to reduce its own emissions, even though a
reduction in global emissions could benefit every country. That is to say, the
problem of climate change is a “tragedy of the commons” (Hardin, 1968).
Effective mitigation of climate change will not be achieved if each person or
country acts independently in its own interest.
Burden-sharing is only one of the ethical questions that climate change
raises.1 Another is the question of how much overall mitigation should take
place. UNFCCC sets the aim of “avoiding dangerous anthropogenic
interference with the climate system”, and judging what is dangerous is
partly a task for ethics. Besides justice, fairness, and rights, a central concern
of ethics is value. Judgments of value underlie the question of what
interference with the climate system would be dangerous.
Indeed, ethical judgements of value underlie almost every decision that is
connected with climate change, including decisions made by individuals,
public and private organizations, governments, and groupings of
governments. Some of these decisions are deliberately aimed at mitigating
climate change or adapting to it. Many others influence the progress of
climate change or its impacts, so they need to take climate change into
account.
Ethics may be broadly divided into two branches: justice and value. Justice is
concerned with ensuring that people get what is due to them. If justice
requires that a person should not be treated in a particular way uprooted
from her home by climate change, for example then the person has a right
not to be treated that way. Justice and rights are correlative concepts. On
the other hand, criteria of value are concerned with improving the world:
making it a better place. Synonyms for ‘value’ in this context are ‘good’,
‘goodness’ and ‘benefit’. Antonyms are ‘bad’, ‘harm’ and ‘cost’.
This chapter does not attempt to answer ethical questions, but rather
provides policymakers with the tools (concepts, principles, arguments, and
methods) to make decisions. Summarizing the role of economics and ethics
in climate change in a single chapter necessitates several caveats. While
recognizing the importance of certain non-economic social dimensions of the
climate change problem and solutions to it, space limitations and our
mandate necessitated focusing primarily on ethics and economics.
Furthermore, many of the issues raised have already been addressed in
previous IPCC assessments, particularly AR2 (published in 1995). In the past,
ethics has received less attention than economics, although aspects of both
subjects are covered in AR2. The literature reviewed here includes pre-AR4
literature in order to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the
 concepts and methods. We highlight ‘new’ developments in the field since
the last IPCC assessment in 2007.

Q.2 While you were at school/college; were you conscious of

social class conflict? How will you narrate it with reference to
your schooling?
Two German theorists, Karl Marx (1818–83) and Max Weber (1864–1920),
influenced the field of sociology, particularly in terms of theories of social
class. Both of these theorists wrote extensively on issues of social class and
social inequality, or the unequal status and access to opportunities that
different groups have within a society. Sociologists continue to use and
respond to ideas that Marx and Weber developed.
Marxism, Conflict Theory, and Social Class
Marx defined class as a group of people who have the same relationship to
the means of production—the facilities and resources for producing goods—
such as tools, machines, and factories. Marx wrote extensively of the
relationship between the privileged classes the “haves,” or the bourgeoisie
and the oppressed classes the “have nots,” or the proletariat. The
bourgeoisie is a class that owns property, including owning and controlling
the means of production. The proletariat is the working class, who own only
their own labor. Members of the proletariat are forced to sell their labor
because they have no control over the means of production. Marx argued
that this relationship is exploitive of the working class because the surplus
value derived from work is unfairly appropriated by the bourgeoisie. In
Marx’s view, the economic system of capitalism automatically creates social
stratification, or class differences, in which members of different classes are
in an adversarial relationship. Sociologists incorporate Marx’s ideas in an
approach known as conflict theory. Conflict theorists suggest that social
inequality creates intergroup conflict such as the rich versus the poor and
that the different interests will cause them to be at odds as they attempt to
secure their interests.
Social conflict is the struggle for agency or power in society. Social conflict
occurs when two or more people oppose each other in social interaction,
each exerts social power with reciprocity in an effort to achieve incompatible
goals whilst preventing the other from attaining their own. Class conflict, also
referred to as class struggle and class warfare, is the political tension and
economic antagonism that exists in society consequent to socio-economic
competition among the social classes or between rich and poor.
Weber and Social class
Weber agreed with Marx that economic markers are important, but he
advanced the idea that other factors, such as education and occupational
prestige, determine class hierarchies. Weber described class structure as
being based on three major factors: wealth (income and assets), prestige
(status position), and power (ability to achieve goals). Weber saw ownership
of the means of production, including companies, as important, but he also
noted that holding a high position within a company or profession is also a
means to acquire social and economic power. For example, a high-level
manager in a corporation does not own the business but does benefit from
the profits that the business generates. Owning property grants economic
power, but it also grants higher levels of prestige. Someone who owns land,
for example, has social prestige. Weber pointed out that prestige can also be
gained in other ways that do not involve ownership of property or the means
 of production. Gifted athletes or intellectuals can acquire prestige without
owning the sports teams or universities that frame their work. Both wealth
and prestige can give individuals greater power in society. Weber saw
wealth, power, and prestige as intertwined elements of social class. Weber’s
multidimensional work led sociologists to use socioeconomic status to
understand class.
School conflicts
School conflict is defined as the disagreement between individuals or groups
regarding ideas, interests, principles, and values within the school
community, perceiving the parties their interests as excluded, although they
may not be, being that the most frequent school conflicts occur in the
relations between student–student and between student-teacher.
conflicts between students can arise due to misunderstandings, fights, the
rivalry between groups, discrimination, bullying, use of spaces and assets,
dating, sexual harassment, loss or damage of school assets, diverse elections,
travel, and parties. Conflicts between parents, teachers, and administrators
can arise due to aggressions that occurred between students and between
teachers, due to the loss of work material, problems in the school canteen or
similar, lack of teachers, lack of pedagogical assistance by teachers,
evaluation, approval and disapproval criteria, failure to meet bureaucratic
and administrative requirements of management.
Functionalist and symbolic interactionist theories of social class
Functionalist and symbolic interactions theories of social class focus on the
social functions of class and stratification, or on class as a factor in social
identity.
In addition to conflict theory, two other influential schools of thought in
sociology are functionalism and symbolic interactionism. Functionalists think
of society as composed of many parts that work together as a whole to
maintain stability. A functionalist approach to social class might analyze the
roles that class structure and social stratification play in society as a whole.
From a functionalist viewpoint, stratification works to ensure productivity
and efficiency, and to ensure that all types of necessary work get done. Thus
a functionalist argument is that social stratification is both necessary and
inevitable. Functionalists point out that some jobs require more skill or
training or are more important. Few people have the ability to become highly
skilled and do these important jobs. Furthermore, people have to make
sacrifices, in terms of time, effort, and money, to obtain the education,
training, and experience to do these jobs. The functionalist view is that
society attaches significant rewards in the form of prestige and income to
ensure that these important jobs are filled. Doctors, for example, fulfill an
important role in society. To become a doctor, a person must invest a great
deal of time, effort, and money in education and training. Society rewards
this by bestowing high levels of prestige to doctors, as well as high incomes.
However, class inequality is only functional as long as it is sustainable. When
the working classes decide that society is not functioning well for them, they
might seek social change through actions such as protests and strikes.
Functionalists look at how these acts contribute to balance in a society.
Symbolic interactionism strives to understand macro-level patterns (patterns
found in a whole society) by examining microinteractions (interactions
between individuals). An approach using symbolic interactionism tries to
make connections between micro-level interactions and how they can help
 explain macro-level patterns. Using this lens, social class and social inequality
are seen as factors in how people understand themselves and present
themselves to others. For example, sociologists using symbolic
interactionism note how individual social interactions, such as those
between supervisors and employees, are shaped by people’s understanding
of social class in their society. A symbolic interactionist approach might
consider how body language, greetings, personal space, use of slang, and eye
contact are connected to class. Consider the social behavior of workers in a
high-end restaurant. They may use more formal patterns of speech with
customers and restaurant managers than with other workers. This behavior
can be understood as a reflection of how the restaurant workers understand
their social position as well as an indication of class divisions of the overall
society.
Q.3 Critically analyze that how teaching and learning process of
21st century different from other centuries. Also discuss the
impact of technology on the teaching and learning process.
Cooperative teaching and learning has been a popular area in educational
circles for more Than a decade. This area gained its strength with the
emergence of two major schools of thought one is “Constructivism and the
other is “Connectivism”. Researchers and practitioners have found that
students working in small cooperative groups can develop the type of
intellectual exchange that fosters critical and creative thinking, and
productive problem solving. Cooperative teaching is a successful strated in
which small teams, each Students have always congregated together to
perform and learn. Rat there is a growing recognition that combined with
whole group instruction and individual learning, cooperative learning should
be a customary part of the classroom instruction. Student communication
makes cooperative learning meaningful. To accomplish their group’s task,
students must exchange ideas, make plans, and propose solutions. Thinking
through an idea and presenting it collectively can be very helpful and
understood by others in a better way. Such interaction promotes intellectual
growth.
The exchange of different ideas and viewpoints can enhance the growth and
inspire broader thinking. It is the teacher’s job to persuade such exchanges
and organize the students’ work so their communication is on-task and
creative. In addition to academic growth, cooperative learning helps in
students’ social development. Student’s lives are full of interactions with
friends and family members and their futures will find them in jobs that
require cooperation. The skills that are essential for productive group work in
the classroom are relevant for today and the future. Cooperative learning is a
successful teaching strategy in which small groups, with students of different
ability levels, use a variety of learning activities to improve their
understanding. Each member of a team feels responsible for learning what is
being taught and also for helping group fellows thus creating an atmosphere
of achievement. Teaching and learning practices aim to develop in learner’s
capabilities such as life-long learning, critical thinking, creative and design
thinking, systems thinking, communication particularly in cross-disciplinary
and cross cultural contexts. The education system of the 21st century has
changed radically with the integration of the technology in every sector. At
the same time, the students are more matured than the previous time. Now,
in the twenty-first-century education depends on Thinking Skills,
Interpersonal Skills, Information Media, Technological Skills as well as Life
Skills. Especially, the education of the present time emphasis on life and
career skills. Now there has no value for rote learning. In general, it needs to
meet the industry need. To clarify, the teaching will be effective when a
student can use the lesson outside of the classroom.
Difference between 21st century and 20th century
For changing the globalizing world, the role of the teachers is essential to
improve the sustainable education. At the same time, inspiring and guiding
the students in increasing employability skills with the digital tools is the
prerequisite for a teacher. Thus a teacher in the twenty-first century will be a
digital teacher. Teachers are not the facilitator for learning of the students
only, and now they are responsible for training the students for increasing
employability skills, expanding the mind, growing digital citizenships, critical
thinking, and creativity as well as sustainable learning. Thus, the winning of
the students is the win of the teachers.
The present review focuses on the relationship between teachers’ classroom
questioning behaviors and a variety of student outcomes, including
achievement, retention, and level of student participation.
This means that certain other subtopics within the general area of
questioning are excluded from the present analysis. It does not deal, for
example, with the effects of textual questions or test questions, and it is only
incidentally concerned with methods used to impart study skills, including
questioning strategies, to students. Questioning plays a critical role in the
way instructors structure the class environment, organize the content of the
course and has deep implications in the way that students assimilate the
information that is presented and discussed in class. Given that questioning
 can be a tremendously effective way to teach, and recognizing that teachers
are willing to engage in the process of asking questions while instructing.
Numerous researches indicate that teachers largely have been asking the
wrong questions.
The focus has been primarily on questions regarding the specific information
students
In such an investigation
1. one asks questions to identify the reason or reasons for the investigation
2. questions are asked to direct been discovered the search for information
and to synthesize what has
3. The conclusions resulting from investigations are evaluated vs questions.
Q.4 If you will have to make a dialogue with your principle, what
questioning strategy will you develop?
Definition of Dialogue
The dialogue in organizing, engagement, and equity work refers to intentional
forms of conversation that are used to improve mutual understanding,
appreciation, and respect among individuals and groups, often for the purpose
of facilitating a collaboration or decision-making process. While dialogue
techniques may be used in informal social interactions, the term is most
commonly applied to small-group or large-group conversations that are
purposefully designed and facilitated to achieve specific goals, such as helping
people work together to solve a problem, develop a plan, execute a project, or
resolve a conflict.
In practice, dialogue can take a wide variety of forms in schools and
communities. For example, dialogue may be used to solicit feedback on a
proposed school policy, involve the public in district decisions, initiate a
strategic-planning process, reflect on the progress or shortcomings of an
initiative, improve workplace relationships, establish a collaborative
partnership between two or more organizations, respond to a pressing crisis,
or reduce cross-cultural tensions and misunderstanding in a community.
Classroom assessment techniques (CAT) are relatively quick and easy
formative evaluation methods that help you check student understanding in
“real time”. These formative evaluations provide information that can be used
to modify/improve course content, adjust teaching methods, and, ultimately
improve student learning. Formative evaluations are most effective when they
are done frequently and the information is used to effect immediate
adjustments in the day-to-day operations of the course.
Provide day-to-day feedback that can be applied immediately;
Provide useful information about what students have learned without the
amount of time required for preparing tests, reading papers, etc.; allow you to
address student misconceptions or lack of understanding in a timely way;
Help to foster good working relationships with students and encourage them
to understand that teaching and learning are on-going processes that require
full participation.
 Help develop self-assessment and learning management skills;
 Reduce feelings of isolation, especially in large classes;
 Increase understanding and ability to think critically about the course
content;
 Foster an attitude that values understanding and long-term retention;
 Show your interest and support of their success in your classroom.
 Course-related knowledge and skills
 Student attitudes, values, and self-awareness
 Reactions to instruction methods
Storytelling:
In a dialogue, participants are often encouraged to talk about their personal
experiences and histories. When participants share personal stories, it helps
other participants develop a stronger understanding and appreciation of how
those experiences shaped their values, priorities, or perspectives, particularly
when participants come from different racial, cultural, or socioeconomic
backgrounds.
Discovery:
Dialogues allow participants to explore and discover new insights, ideas, or
perspectives. Rather than predetermining outcomes, a dialogue process
typically starts with unanswered questions, unresolved problems, or decisions
that need to be made. While a dialogue is typically designed to achieve
specific objectives such as the development of a plan or the resolution of a
conflict, for example a dialogue only provides the structure for participants to
discuss, deliberate, decide, or collaborate. Participants typically determine the
outcomes of a dialogue, not the organizers and facilitators.
Inquiry:
Dialogues help participants consider different viewpoints, weigh
competing options, examine unfamiliar information, understand complex
issues, and reflect on their own beliefs, opinions, values, or biases. In a
dialogue, participants develop new insights, perspectives, and knowledge that
they did not have at the outset of the process, which can generate better
ideas, proposals, or solutions, including surprising or counterintuitive ideas
that were not being considered before the dialogue occurred.
Civility:
In a dialogue, participants are generally required to speak and act in ways that
are respectful to other participants, and to listen and ask questions rather
than argue a particular point of view. Respectful discussions and interactions
can help participants dispel the misperceptions, assumptions, stereotypes, or
labeling that often make it difficult for diverse groups of people to converse or
collaborate productively. Dialogues allow participants to disagree in respectful
and constructive ways, which helps diverse groups avoid the contentiousness,
conflicts, and biased outcomes that often result from argumentation and
debate. However, civility does not mean that free speech is suppressed or that
certain viewpoints are silenced participants are encouraged to express their
honest opinions, but to do so in ways that are not disrespectful, intimidating,
hostile, or shaming to other participants or groups. Facilitators generally help
dialogue groups to maintain civil conversations using shared agreements,
polite reminders, and other strategies. For example, facilitators may ask
participants to speak only for themselves and not for others.
Empathy:
Dialogues provide opportunities for participants to hear viewpoints that are
different from their own, ask questions, and reflect on their own experiences,
values, or opinions from a new perspective. The act of listening, questioning,
and reflecting can help build greater compassion, appreciation, and mutual
respect among participants, particularly between individuals and groups who
have different beliefs or come from different cultural backgrounds, which can
then increase trust and strengthen relationships.
Non-Consensus:
In a deliberative dialogue process, group consensus may not be achieved. In
fact, universal consensus is rarely attained at the end of a deliberative process
and it shouldn’t be the desired goal. Because group decisions typically require
some form of compromise or trade-off, it is more important that participants
understand why a decision was made, that they feel their viewpoints were
heard and considered, that they perceive the process to have been fair and
unbiased, and that they accept and support the outcome even if they still
disagree or feel disappointment.
Dialogue Strategies
1. Sharing essential information and context
2. Establishing rules and group agreements
3. Designing for inclusivity and safety
4. Ensuring equity of voice, participation, and power
5. Providing skilled facilitation
6. Listening intentionally to understand
7. Using open-ended questions
8. Co-creating agendas and solutions
9. Reflecting on the process and outcomes
1. Sharing essential information and context
In a dialogue, participants are often given explanations, data, or other
forms of information to contextualize an issue or problem, or to explain
the rationale behind the process.
 By providing essential information, dialogue organizers help participants
base their deliberations on statistics, evidence, and facts, rather than on
assumptions, hearsay, misinformation, and other potentially inaccurate
or misleading sources of information.
  In some cases, a steering committee, composed of a representative
cross-section of community members, will identify and select the
information provided to participants to ensure that it is objective, factual,
or represents a balance of different perspectives.
2. Establishing rules and group agreements
Dialogue organizers nearly always establish a set of guidelines,
agreements, rules, or “norms” at the outset of the conversation that
participants agree to follow.
 Ground rules articulate the kinds of behaviors that will not be allowed,
such as disrespectful or derogatory comments, and the kinds of
behaviors that are expected and encouraged, such as respectful
listening and questioning.
 Depending on the format or goals of a dialogue, ground rules may be
provided or recommended by organizers, or they are developed in
collaboration with participants. When organizers “co-develop” ground
rules with participants, the process serves to model how a diverse
group of people can engage in a productive discussion that results in a
decision everyone can understand, accept, and support.
3. Designing for inclusivity and safety
Dialogues create a forum in which each participant is welcome and
encouraged to participate, and in which diverse viewpoints can be
shared without fear of social intimidation or repercussions. In many
cases, dialogues are open to the public and any community member is
welcome to attend, particularly when the topics being discussed affect
a community or public institutions such as schools.
  Dialogue organizers will often break up participants into smaller
groups so that each person has an opportunity to speak up and be
heard in the time available, and ground rules may establish the
expectation that participants are expected to refrain from talking
too much so that others have the opportunity to speak.
 Organizers generally attempt to invite and recruit participants
who are culturally and demographically representative of the
larger community or school population to ensure that the
viewpoints, priorities, and concerns of different groups are
included and heard.
4. Ensuring equity of voice, participation, and power
Many forms for public discussion are “one-way” conversations in which
public officials, school administrators, experts, and others in positions
of power, authority, or influence dictate the terms, topics, and
outcomes of the conversation. Unlike these forms of public discussion
such as a school-board meeting in which public officials may do most of
the talking and a small number of residents are given only a few
minutes to speak dialogues are generally structured to encourage equal
or equitable participation.
 A variety of strategies will be used to ensure that all participants are
treated as fairly as possible. For example, ground rules will be applied
equally to everyone, public officials and administrators will participate
like any other community member, translators will be on hand for those
who cannot speak English, complimentary bus passes or ride-sharing will
be provided to those who don’t have a vehicle, or facilitators will ask
outspoken participants to talk less so that others who may be less
 accustomed to speaking in public or in large groups have an opportunity
to contribute and be heard.
5. Providing skilled facilitation
Skilled facilitation is essential to the success of a dialogue process.
Facilitators provide the conversational structure, establish ground rules,
promote equitable participation, and ensure that the process and
discussions remain on topic and productive. Dialogue facilitators make
sure that participants follow the ground rules, behave respectfully
toward one another, and feel safe and welcomed.
6. Listening intentionally to understand
While all conversations require some form of listening, people are
generally asked to listen in very specific ways when they participate in a
dialogue process.
 Facilitators may also establish group agreements such as “listen to
understand, not to respond.” In this case, facilitators may use the
ground rule to point out that people often give more attention to
thinking up responses and counter-arguments in a casual conversation
than they do to making a sincere attempt to understand someone else’s
viewpoint.
7. Using open-ended questions
On many public issues, community members may base their viewpoints
on partial information, preexisting beliefs, unconscious bias, political
affiliations, and other factors that may obscure important
considerations. In a dialogue, participants are invited to explore and ask
questions.
  In many cases, dialogues will be framed around a question that is central
to a community problem or opportunity: How can we address bias and
discrimination in our school? How can we strengthen relationships
between teachers and parents? How do we want to work together in
this partnership? By posing and discussing open-ended questions rather
than arguing about competing proposals, for example participants in a
dialogue typically develop a more informed understanding of the
nuances and complexity of a given issue, problem, or opportunity.
8. Co-creating agendas and solutions
Dialogues create opportunities for participants to collaboratively
explore options, generate ideas, propose solutions, and importantly
own the outcomes and decisions that result from the process. When
stakeholders are left out of important school or community decisions
that affect them and their families, they are more likely to question the
decisions, be skeptical of motives, or resent being left out of the
process.
 A dialogue presents opportunities for community-involved problem
solving and decision making, which can not only produce better ideas,
proposals, and results, but it can also build support and enthusiasm for
the outcome, as well as greater trust and confidence in school and
community leaders.
10. Reflecting on the process and outcomes
In a dialogue, participants typically engage in multiple forms of
facilitated reflection: they reflect on the question, issue, problem, or
opportunity under discussion; they reflect on their own ideas,
 perspectives, opinions, and experiences, as well as those of others; and
they reflect on the conversation, process, and results.
 Because opportunities for focused and sustained reflection are
uncommon in everyday life, dialogues can help participants develop new
insights and understandings they might not have acquired otherwise, or
they may cause participants to reconsider previously held positions,
assumptions, or beliefs. During reflective debriefing at the conclusion of
the dialogue or a small-group discussion, participants also provide useful
feedback to organizers and facilitators that will help them improve the
dialogue process going forward.
Q. 5 Describe in detail the salient features of Rolfe’s model of professional
development.
A key finding of the report revealed that 30% of the technology budget
should be used for teacher training. The focus up to that point had been
mostly on purchasing hardware and software. This report helped bring the
importance of effective professional development for teachers to the
forefront. It is not surprising that during 1995, the Technology Innovation
Challenge Grant (TICG) program funded the first 19 grants, which set the
stage for the 91 that followed. From 1995-2000, 100 projects from 46 states
and a total of $609.9 million invested have produced some of the most
impressive, innovative education technology products, models and
curriculum.
This article will focus on the models of professional development used by a
variety of U.S. TICG programs. You will notice that a large number of 1998
projects are highlighted. This is because for that year’s competition, grant
guidelines specifically mandated professional development by providing
support to consortia that had developed programs, or were adapting or
expanding existing programs, for technology training. The models to be
explored are coaching and mentoring, face-to-face, train-the-trainer, and
Web-based training.
Coaching and mentoring is a research-based, highly effective professional
development model that has been used extensively by Project Venture in
Ph’enix, which is a diverse consortium consisting of urban, suburban and
rural school districts. At the heart of the districts’ professional development
model are 21 Technology Mentor Teachers (TMTs) who work with more than
330 teachers across the consortium.
Salient Features of Rolf’s Model: The Rolfe reflective cycle has the virtue of
simplicity and straightforwardness. The model is based on three key
questions, as the diagram below indicates:
 What
 So what
 Now What
The three stages of the model ask you to consider, in turn, what happened,
the implications of the occurrence, and the consequences for future conduct.
The model is cyclic, indicating continuity. The changes in behavior or
approach which is generated from the reflective thought can then be
analyzed, and either a further revision made, or else the changes made can
be found to have been appropriate.
Stainton Rogers identifies two major advantages in using a multi-media
package of materials:
The three stages of the model ask you to consider, in turn, what happened,
the implications of the occurrence, and the consequences for future
conduct.

The wider range of learning experiences which can be documented and

portrayed, and the creation of a basis of common experience through
course study which learners can use in their interactions with each other.

Group sessions are thus freed for the process of mutual interaction and
engagement with new ideas, rather than the communication of material by
a tutor in order to enable the process to begin. These issues have been
most consistently addressed in relation to teaching within compulsory
education. Stenhouse and his colleagues developed the model of teacher as
researcher during the 1970s, at a time when it might have seemed possible
that the profession would develop in a fashion which would allow time for
teachers to engage in problem definition, data collection and analysis as
well as teaching. Research, particularly the action research model, was
promoted as an informative and sensitizing process, aspects of which might
be undertaken by practitioners themselves as a means of refining their
awareness of interaction and outcomes in teaching. Others have also
focused on the interface between researcher and practitioner, and the
teacher as researcher model is still alive in the projects and networks
created by members of the British Educational Research Association, among
others.

The application of these issues to the field of post compulsory education

and training has been made more recently, especially in relation to the in-
service development of adult educators. The practical implications of this
debate however, could cover a very wide range of professions. All those
who now have some role in the preparation and continuing education of
adults- including therefore professionals in industrial training, management
education, nurse education, youth and community work and the social
services-have an interest in the facilitation of adult learning. This list draws
attention to problem areas particular to the post compulsory sector: the
heterogeneity of staff and the differences of culture and expectations over
what constitutes appropriate professional training. Add to this the much
less developed basis for practice, in the form of a theoretical and research
based literature, and the scope of the problem is daunting.

Notwithstanding the difficulties created by these factors, there has been a

noticeable growth during the eighties of postgraduate course provision in
the area of post-compulsory education and training, and a growth of staff
development opportunities in particular technologies for adult learning and
development – open learning, student-centred learning and guidance to
name some of the most popular. The Open University has also moved into
this area, with the presentation in the early eighties of courses in policy and
management for the post compulsory sector, and in adult education more
generally.3 In 1988 students could add to these courses by studying quarter
credit modules and by designing their own half credit project, to
accumulate two full credits of OU study and thus qualify for the Diploma in
Post Compulsory Education. There are now over 200 students studying for
the Diploma, and the first fifteen were awarded the qualification in 1989.
One of the modules in this diploma, Approaches to Adult Learning (AAL),
can be developed as a small case study illustrating the potential as well as
the constraints for distance learning in this context.

The AAL Module is about how adults learn, learning being seen as a social
process in which individuals demonstrate significant differences between
each other over a number of dimensions. The Module is process as well as
content oriented, and practitioners are asked to begin with reflection on
their own learning and development prior to the course, and to build on
this through activities and self review exercises. The focus for this student
initiated work is the assignment, where students are offered a choice
between a task exercising purely intellectual skills, and two where there is
an element of practical experimentation. The fourth option is to design
their own assignment and thus far none has chosen this, the most
challenging of all.

The second point to make concerns the difference between propositional

knowledge and active experimentation. Most students seemed to have
identified with the centrality of reflection as a key process in adult learning,
especially learning from experience. However not all were able to transfer
their comprehension of the idea directly to their own practice in using a
portfolio. Several needed more time to develop practical strategies for the
portfolio, in the context of discussion with their peers, and would have
valued peer feedback on their entries. This suggests that we cannot take for
granted the learning processes on which the reflective practitioner strategy
rests. Reflection is something we engage in every day, but it is being
proposed in this context as a means of achieving specific learning outcomes
staff development in particular. Its deliberate and strategic use in this way
is not an everyday phenomenon, and the experience reported suggests that
non-threatening experimentation and peer group support are required.

Apart from the underlying epistemological problems of the theory-practice

relation, there are also context specific factors which doubtless operate in
the ease of experience reported by Usher et al. Courses aimed (in part if not
completely) at goals of professional development have particular problems
arising from the university context. Active processing can take many forms,
but the key processes reported here are reflection and active
experimentation. Students need time within the allotted study hours of the
course to think through (reflect upon) the implications of their study, and to
learn from concrete experience in using new ideas, (preferably in their own
professional context) within the bounds of the course. The learning
processes that students need to develop to achieve the outcomes of
professional development however cannot be taken for granted and need
explicit discussion and facilitator and peer group support during the course
of learning itself.

Rolfe's Cycle

The core advantages of the Rolfe model relate to its simplicity and clarity.
Reflective tools need to be accessible and useful to the user, and to
produce meaningful results. A simple model such as this can support that.
Issues related with the model include the idea that if applied only at the
level of the three core questions, then a full inventory of the situation being
reflected upon may not take place, and the insight produced as a
consequence might tend to the simplistic or descriptive.
Rolfe's own writing indicates that is important not only to consider
reflection after the event, but reflection in the moment - as an event is
taking place - so that immediate corrective action may be considered. For
Rolfe, though, this model does not fully articulate the position due to its
simplicity, reflection is not only a summary practice, but to be engaged with
proactively.
References

 Action Research. (2015, November 24). Retrieved from Business

Dictionary Web site: http://www.businessdictionary.com
 Johnson, B. (1993, March 12). Action Research. Teacher Education
Journal, pp. 34-37.
 Rolfe, G. F. (2001). Critical Reflection for Nursing the Helping
Professions: A User's Guide. NY: Palgrave Macmillan
 Language and Learning Online. (2007, November 15). Retrieved from
Monash University Website: http://www.monash.edu.au
 Clements, M. (2009, Sep 10). Reflecting for Learning. Retrieved from
Becoming the Edunators: http://www.edunators.com