Description
Discussion 1
Write a response to the following:
Reflect on how your writing may be biased toward your own ideas and your own situatedness. Use these questions as a guide:
How has your writing changed since beginning the doctoral program?
How may your writing be out of alignment to the elements of the SPL model?
What are some areas still needing improvement?
- Discussion 2
Write a response to the following: - What are the components of the three-stage model?
- What are the different types of thinking associated with AES?
- What might the challenges be to reach synthesis?
- Review your classmates’ posts and respond:
post1
How has your writing changed since beginning the doctoral program?
To apply critical thinking. Critical thinking is taking an analytical approach to the challenges we face applying critical thinking is a central tenet to the research work of the doctoral practitioner. In a world of information overload, it’s easy to fall into the pattern of taking things we read and hear at face value: The doctoral scholar on the other hand is trained to pose thought provoking questions and to challenge conventional thinking to get at the heart of the truth before they act. As a society, we could increasingly benefit from applying critical thinking methodologies to help us make the right decisions.
How may your writing be out of alignment to the elements of the SPL model?
- Focus primarily on cognitive learning (knowledge)
- Ignore learner’s experiences, values, and individual’s core identity
- High priority is placed on scholarship not application
- High standard of rigor
- Fosters a culture of inquiring
- Focuses on contributions from both the academic and the practitioner communities
- Conscious of both cognitive and effective domains of learning (knowledge and internalization)
What are some areas still needing improvement?
- Researching peer-reviewed sources
- Integrating application-based knowledge
- Cannot know sometimes in an exclusively cognitive or exclusively affective way.
- Discovery, integration, application and teaching/learning
- Deep understanding of concepts, theories, and practice
- Enriched with metacognitive introspection
- Often think about problems without a solution in mind
- Depending on results to be effective day-to-day
- The scholarship of integration that involves synthesis of information across disciplines, across topics within a discipline, or across time.
Reference
Cunliffe, A. L. (2002). Reflexive dialogical practice in management learning. Management Learning, 33(1), 35–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507602331002
Assignment
This assignment will challenge you to identify the assumptions, context, situatedness, and embedded logic of an argument through the close reading of a non-scholarly text. This is not an exercise in determining whether the author is right or wrong in their position, as these value judgments are typically irrelevant to the purpose of scholarship. Instead, unearthing these components through an analytical process allows you to discover evidence of (conscious or unconscious) “decisions” made by the author in their writing. This evidence will (in turn) assist you in making valid, empirically driven claims regarding the text.
Complete the attched worksheet using your selected text.
