Chulapol Thanomsing
EDTL 606 Unit 2
Threaded Discussion

1.  Discuss an example of reflective action that you have taken that required knowledge of different methods and the reasons why you chose the method that you did.

I am not quite sure that my reflective action would be a good example.  My reflective action that I had used while I was working in the Field Training position in Michelin Siam Marketing & Sales Co., LTD. required me to use different methods. My duty was to train not only about technical truck tires to both retailers and end-users (transportation company management team and drivers) but also about truck tires market to wholesalers, I had to prepare and analyze my training (teaching) style to fit many types of audiences.  I usually use the reflective in action and the reflective on action to evaluate and develop my training style to fit in the same situational context and type of audiences.  I also believe that there is no best training style for all of audiences.

2.  Explain the three discourses of reflection presented in the second article.  Which model does the author appear to embrace?  Referring to the last subtitle of the second article, "Is change possible?" ~ What do you think?

Cruikshank’s reflective teaching is intended to develop their skills by indicating the results of their teaching.  The purpose of reflective teaching is to enable pre-service and in-service teachers to become the reflective teacher.  The reflective teacher is someone who is a deliberative thinker and can teach with careful thought and judgment.

Schon’s reflective in action is to enable pre-service and in-service teachers to perceive their daily practice through a continuing education activity in which they experience in and on action (learning by doing.)  This reflection is intended to provide an opportunity to evaluate the gap between current practice and experts’ recommendations.  Pre-service and in-service teachers will be able to utilize the information evaluated to close or bridge this gap.

Reflection as critical inquiry is personal understanding of pre-service and in-service teachers in three levels.  They are the technical level, situational contexts level, and moral and ethical issues level.  Understanding in the technical level is to be able to reflect upon the effectiveness of strategies. Being able to reflect what is going to be taught is to understand teaching with situational contexts.  Justice and equity of pre-service and in-service teachers is reflected and asked within the moral and ethical issues level.

It seem to me that the author embraces the reflection as critical inquiry because the other two discourses do not talk about reflection in terms of moral, ethical, political, and social issues.  Pre-service and in-service teachers will not be able to be the reflective teacher if they do not think about teaching and learning in terms of justice and equity.

I do believe that change is possible. As times change, many things in educational issues are changing gradually too.  For instance, developing of technologies and sciences, pre-service and in-service teachers will have to reflect about what, when, how, and why they should deal with those new things; and what, when, how, and why they need to change.