The work-reflection-learning cycle - Department of Computer and ...

A Model of Retrospective Reflection in Project Based Learning 429
The model in Fig. 3 illustrates retrospective reflection incorporating the main elements
elaborated in Section 4, and serves as a generic description of retrospective
reflection utilizing individual and shared timeline representations as well as historical
data in various collaborative tools used in the project. The rectangles in the diagram
are representations (internal or external), the ovals are processes in which the representations
are transformed. These processes can be seen as learning processes in the
sense that new knowledge is constructed. A representation having an outgoing arrow
pointing to a process is a cognitive tool in that process. Where arrows point in both
directions between a representation and a learning process, the representation used in
the process is itself changed through the process. The finer, dashed arrows show the
use of historical data to identify events and sub-trajectories.
In more detail, process (1) is the daily project work. Collaborative tools are used as
cognitive tools, resulting in data remaining in the tools as historical data. The tools in
daily work can be seen as continuously updated ‘representations’ of the project by
containing data reflecting aspects of the project work. Internal representations of the
project in participants’ heads also impact on, and result from, the work.
Turning to the retrospective reflection, there is an individual step (2) in which individuals
make an external representation of the project process in the form of a timeline.
We have indicated the possibility to represent sub-trajectories (e.g. a satisfaction
curve). In this, the collaborative tools with their historical data potentially serve as
cognitive tools, as illustrated in Fig.2. In making sense of the historical data, the
learner recognizes them as associated with project events and sub-trajectories.
Participants’ individual timelines are cognitive tools for collaborative reflection (3)
in which a shared timeline is created (Fig. 1), mediated also by the individual, internal
representations. Elements from the individual timelines are included and may be
transformed (see Fig.1, the emphasized event). Again, the collaborative tools with
their historical data may be used as cognitive tools. In addition to the shared timeline,
the team may create other representations (e.g. textual reflection notes). Some of the
resulting representations may serve as cognitive tools in further project work, closing
the cycle of project based learning.
The model is a simplification with respect to the number of representations and
transformations. For instance, the step of orally presenting the contents of individual
timelines to the team and the transformation of historical data that happens through
retrospective use of the tool has been only indirectly assumed.
The model outlines main elements in the distributed cognition of retrospective reflection
and the dynamics among these elements. It can be used to guide the organization
of retrospective reflection in project-based learning. While our analysis addressed
the benefit of various representations and transformative processes, retrospective
reflection may be arranged without the inclusion of all the elements. Depending on
constraints and objectives, a specific organization of the process may leave out the
individual or the collective step of creating external timeline representations. Also, the
use of collaborative tool history can be omitted. To decide whether a specific collaborative
tool should be used in retrospective reflection, a team should take into account
the tool features for data navigation and retrieval, tool usage in daily work, and issues
seen as important to the team and thus worth reflecting on.
184