3. Level 1: Basic academic level (1st cycle) module

3.3. Lesson 3 (4 hours): Conceptual clarifications 1: Reflectivity

Theme Topic Guiding questions
Psychological dimensions

Reflecting - awareness - thinking

Reflecting is an essential and very specifically human capacity. It is linked to the notion of awareness and indicates that human actions are distinguished by individual purpose-giving that is in turn embedded in social and cultural sets of meaning.

Research on reflectivity demonstrates the neuro- scientific and psychological necessity of acknowledging the constant influence of pre- conscious conceptual social categories and structures which guide orientation but need to be subjected to processes of awareness in order to make interaction productive and creative.

What circumstances stimulate my awareness? What is awareness then focused on?
How do I perceive that awareness turns into reflection?
In what circumstances did I “learn to reflect”?
Professional dimensions

The ability to reflecting systematically legitimates professional autonomy AND accountability.

  • Reflecting as necessity: professionals deal with such complex situations that regulations cannot capture in sufficient detail without becoming reductive

  • Therefore, reflective practice requires references to detailed scientific knowledge on the basis of
    which professional decisions in individual
    constellations of circumstances can be legitimately made

  • Personal factors (values, temperament, cultural background etc.) on the side of the professional not only cannot be excluded, but are an essential part of the professional “skills repertoire” if used from a critical, distanced position of “awareness”
    of their power implications

Think of any “social problem” you might have
encountered – what are the limitations of “simple
solutions” that might be suggested “without reflecting”?
What is the value and function of “professionalising examinations” and “accreditation” in
recognised professions? Should professionals appear “neutral”?

Political
dimensions

Reflection and democracy

Voting rights in a democracy are granted on the basis that mature citizens can make “rational
choices”.

Citizenship presupposes, but also stimulates, reflective abilities in organising one’s relationship with others.

Where these abilities are not (yet) fully developed, pedagogical assistance (not instruction!) is given,
e.g. in childhood, in rehabilitation, in therapy.

Proposal: “Democratic reflectivity” combines
critical aspects of participation and reflectivity in as much as it can guide “learning processes” in
interaction

- with professional colleagues (in teams, or through professional supervision)
- with service users individually or in organised group sessions or community settings

What kind of considerations guide you on political voting occasions?

How can you stimulate reflectivity in learning
situations?

How important are for you democratic features of team and group meetings?

Resources:

*Adams, M. (2003). The reflexive self and culture: A critique. British Journal of Sociology, 54(2), 221– 238. https://doi.org/10.1080/0007131032000080212

*Archer, M. (2012). The Reflexive Imperative in Late Modernity. New York: Cambridge University Press.

D’Cruz, H., Gillingham, P. a Melendez, S. (2005). Reflexivity, its Meanings and Relevance for Social Work: A Critical Review of the Literature. British Journal of Social Work, 37(1), 73–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjsw/bcl001

Dzur, A. W. (2019). Democratic Professionals as Agents of Change. In A.W.Dzur, Democracy Inside: Participatory Innovation in Unlikely Places (pp. 1–24). Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190658663.003.0001

Ferguson, H. (2018). How social workers reflect in action and when and why they don’t: the possibilities and limits to reflective practice in social work. Social Work Education, 37(4), 415–427. https://doi.org/10.1080/02615479.2017.1413083

*Lieberman MD, Gaunt R, Gilbert DT a Trope Y. (2002). Reflection and reflexion: a social cognitive neuroscience approach to attributional inference. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology. 34:199– 249.

*Phillips, L. (2000). Risk, Reflexivity and Democracy. Nordicom Review, 21(2), 115–136. https://doi.org/10.1515/nor-2017-0389.