1 / 18

Dialogic evaluation and feedback

Dialogic evaluation and feedback. by Helena Aarnio, Principal Lecturer, PhD Häme Polytechnic helena.aarnio@hamk.fi (Inofficial translation). Dialogue non-evaluative exploring win-win coherent inquiry learning multi-way creative trust. Discussion, debate evaluative juxtaposition

madelia
Download Presentation

Dialogic evaluation and feedback

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Dialogic evaluation and feedback by Helena Aarnio, Principal Lecturer, PhD Häme Polytechnic helena.aarnio@hamk.fi (Inofficial translation)

  2. Dialogue non-evaluative exploring win-win coherent inquiry learning multi-way creative trust Discussion, debate evaluative juxtaposition win-lose incoherent defence persuasion, selling one-way destructive cynical

  3. Dialogue as discussion form • a critical step for a dialogue is creation of a ”container” (Isaacs, 1999) • Dialogue means prolonged conscious exploration, the target of which are the processes under the surface of human thinking and activity, things and structures which are taken for sure (Bohm)

  4. Definition of dialogue • Dialogue is equal construction of understanding together. It is shared thinking and familiarizing onself with some thing or activity. (Aarnio & Enqvist, 2003)

  5. Dialogue as a discussion form • Dialogue does not require a long and close relationship • Three basic features of a dialogue: • Prolonging the expression of own assumptions • The participants consider each other equal. • A facilitator is needed at the beginning of the discussion.

  6. Dialogue thinking together multi-way short expressions unfinished thinking process asking if something is not clear Topics ”are kept open” as long as necessary Monologue thinking alone one-way long expressions ready thoughts staying quiet if something is not clear efforts are made to make quick solutions. (Aarnio & Enqvist, 2001)

  7. Ethical basis of dialogue • Active participation • Commitment to discussion • Reciprocal attitude and reaction • Open and honest expression • Respecting attitude • From egocentrism to free dialogue and respectful listening (Burbules, 1993)

  8. Dialogic evaluation • Evaluation is a natural part of a dialogue. It takes an exploring approach. • Thoughts and activity are exposed to the examination and questioning of other people. • Direct feedback comprises an element of a dialogue. The partipants express their thoughts openly and directly.

  9. Incorrect ways of acting own thoughts own experiences instructions support simultaneous talking guessing, assuming, imaging generalisation Correct ways of acting + listening + picking up ”hot words” + inquiries, questions + binding + checking of imaginations (Aarno, 1999) Method of cognitive empathy

  10. Inquiring in evaluation situations means... • asking pure, open questions • opening of thinking paths and ways of acting • reaction to ”hot words” • leading to new paths

  11. Examples of questions which open thinking paths • What do you think...? • How would you explain...? • What are you going to do? • What does it mean to...? • How does it affect...? • How would you...?

  12. Inquiring is difficult! • In a dialogue it is difficult to receive an other person’s speech accurately and precisely and to be exploring and curious about it. • Inquiring during a dialogue has proved to be one of the most difficult ways of acting (Aarnio & Enqvist 2001).

  13. The most difficult things in dialogic evaluation • giving up on ecocentrism and swaggering • silencing one’s own internal speech when receiving the other person’s speech • avoidance of different kinds of imaginations, suppositions and pre-assumptions

  14. How can I contribute to a successful dialogue?

  15. Self-assessment objects for a successful dialogue 1/2 • How do I participate in a dialogue? • How shall I receive the other person’s inputs? • How do I understand and know what kind of questions to ask? • How can I react to the key expressions (hot words) while the other person is talking?

  16. Self-assessment objects for a successful dialogue 2/2 • How can I combine my involvement into the other person’s speech in the right way? • How can I stick to the point? • How shall I take my turn and give it to the other? (Aarnio & Enqvist, 2003)

  17. Evaluation/direct feedback/dialogue? • right timing • objectivity (towards the topic, not towards the person) • acceptability (the person first, the topic after that) • understandability (not a general description) • basic things first, after that details • constructivity and encouragement

  18. Feedback, pitfalls, vicius circle • pleasing • irreplaceablement • inviolability • avoidance • resulting in a vicious circle of protecting, hostility and denial of need

More Related