Premium
An Exploration of Differences in Content and Processes Underlying Reflection on Challenging Experiences at Work
Author(s) -
Maurer Todd J.,
Leheta Dina M.,
Conklin Thomas A.
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
human resource development quarterly
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.756
H-Index - 65
eISSN - 1532-1096
pISSN - 1044-8004
DOI - 10.1002/hrdq.21283
Subject(s) - reflection (computer programming) , meaning (existential) , psychology , value (mathematics) , exploratory research , process (computing) , space (punctuation) , content (measure theory) , work (physics) , content analysis , conversation , pedagogy , sociology , social science , computer science , mechanical engineering , mathematical analysis , mathematics , communication , machine learning , engineering , psychotherapist , programming language , operating system
While the use of structured reflection in some form is common in management, education, the military, and health care, little is known about existing differences in reflection. We collected exploratory data around the nature of differences in the content and process of reflection. By asking management students about their reflections on challenging work experiences, we focused this conversation at the intersection of workplace behavior and education, a high‐value space for discovery by scholars and educators in human resource development. Respondents participated in surveys and interviews that asked about the types of experiences at work they reflect upon and why; how they reflect including the mode, content, and process of their reflections; and the consequences or outcomes of their reflections. We present detailed data on the observed differences, which suggest that there may be multiple distinctions underlying the notion of reflection and that such differences are not systematically and meaningfully addressed in theory, research, or practice. We also offer a framework to help scholars, instructors, coaches, and students more readily explore variations in reflection tendencies and to pursue the possible meaning of these variations for research and practice.