Reflecting to Enhance Theory-Practice Bridges & Reduce Custom-Based Practices

Reflection entails several things, including thinking about something, asking oneself questions regarding the way things are, and learning from experience. Some of the significant sources of reflection include unique events, daily events, learning experiences, work experiences, negative, and positive experiences. Reflection is essential as it assists in bridging the gap in theory-practice, reducing custom based practice, and developing and understanding one's practice. The different models include Gibbs, Driscoll, and Kolb.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Although the three models are essential, the assignment will mainly reflect on the Gibbs model. According to Wain (2017), Gibbs established a reflective cycle idea in encouraging learners to think concerning different activities or experiences phases systematically (662-662). Six different elements are incorporated in the model, including description, feelings, evaluation, analysis, conclusion, and action plan. Concerning description, a learner can recall events by observation powers in remembering impartiality and accuracy while with feelings, a learner recognizes events reactions. On the evaluation element, a learner weights negative and positive experience aspects, and analysis, a learner compares personal interactions with research and published literature (Husebo, O'Regan, and Nestel, 2015). Moreover, the conclusion enables a learner to summarizes events responses while an action plan helps in formulating a learner's reflection outcome.

Jayatilleke and Mackie (2013) argue that the model is good since it encourages a strong situational description of the analysis, experiences evaluation, feelings analysis, and the situation in making sense concerning an experience. They are then followed by conclusions when other actions are regarded and reflected in examining what an individual can do if the situation comes up again.

According to Gibbs (1988), the first step of descriptions entails what happened. Some potential prompts under the phase include when, where, and what happened, what did one did, what order did the activities take place, the results, and what one is responsible for. The second step of feelings entails inquiring about what one was thinking, and the potential prompts include one's initial reaction, what the person is thinking (Gibbs, 1988), what one felt after the situation, what one thinks about the situation now and what other people think concerning the situation. The third step of evaluation entails discussing the things that worked and the ones that did not work during the situation. The Week 2 Session 1 lecture says that evaluation entails asking what was good concerning the experience for an individual and others and what bad the experience was for one and others. The fourth step, analysis, entails breaking it down. The step entails asking about the sense an individual can make from a situation (Week 2 Session 1). Some of the potential prompts regarding the step include the similarities and even differences associated with the current experience and other experiences, the choices that were made and their impacts, the things other individuals did well, and what might have gone wrong or turned in an unexpected way.

The fifth step in the Gibbs Reflective cycle is the conclusion that entails the other things that one could do differently (Gibbs, 1988). It also incorporates the key things that one has learned in the incident, such as about oneself, one's performance, and other people plus their performance. The other potential prompts entail the things that might have been done differently, and if negative events can be avoided. The last step is an action plan, which involves what will be done next time. In case a similar situation arises, what will be done differently if a similar incidence arises (Gibbs, 1988). Also, it involves what can be done in the future in increasing positive outcomes and minimizing the chances of getting the same negative outcomes.

Essentially, the Gibbs knowledge helps individuals to learn from experience. Learning from experience assisting individuals in dealing with such experiences better in the future. However, another model, such as Kolb Reflective Cycle. It mainly involves experimental learning in which an individual's experience is reviewed, analyzed, then evaluated. The main stages include concrete experience, reflective experience that involves reflection, abstract conceptualization on learning experience, and active experimentation in trying out what one has learned. Therefore, as compared to Gibbs, it mainly entails learning from experience as Gibbs entails learning mainly through repetition (Week 2 Session 1). On the other hand, Driscoll's reflective cycle entails matching so what, now what, and what questions in promoting learning and reflecting on the things that were learned. Both Driscoll and Gibbs's reflective cycle models need action in the last stages. Therefore, all three models are essential in enhancing learning in institutions.

How I felt Writing this Patch

While writing this patch, I felt that I had used the Gibbs Reflective Cycle Model in one way or the other. I have encountered several situations from different life experiences, and after writing the patch, I believe that Gibbs is one of the best reflective cycle models that can be used in enhancing learning. Furthermore, I felt that the model is important as it made me think concerning the different phases of an activity or experience.

Through writing the patch, I also learned that if things do not go well as I had planned, I should not be hard on myself. The evaluation phase made me know that I am supposed to be positive and improve in some areas. Through these improvements, I will be able to do the right thing next time.

The patch was so informative to me, and I have learned that learning from experiences is very important in solving different matters. The description phased helped me to know that when I encounter an issue or event, I should know where and when it took place, the reason I was there, the people who have been in a similar problem, and what they did in overcoming the situations. Therefore, as compared to Kolb and Driscoll, I believe that Gibbs's reflective model is the best in solving most of the events that people encounter in life. However, in some way, I felt that the model does not possess probing depth questions as compared to the other models that are used for reflection. Also, it does not require a referral in critical thinking or even viewing events and experiences from a different perspective.

Persuasive Communication and Developing an Argument

In daily academic discourse or just daily life, it is inevitable to engage in some form of arguments and persuasion. Inherently, people have something they believe is right and always intend to advance it during interactions. The validity of the idea, stance, or claim notwithstanding, the clamor to get some form of buy-in from others is often compelling. Three forms of information interaction are common. These include discussion, argumentation, and persuasion. While the discussion is not the subject of this writing, it denotes a situation where individuals just openly talk out their ideas, reservations, and thoughts without necessarily intending to endear them to the others. Its aim is just to enrich perspectives and allow the parties to identify with whatever useful they pick from it. On the other hand, argumentation and persuasion are a high order form of information and knowledge exchange. The two have an underlying objective of selling a particular point of view to the recipient. How argumentation and persuasion accomplish the objective of endearing people to a particular point of view varies but involves the use of rhetorical appeals, facts, illustrations, logic, normative reasoning, and wit.

The Toulmin model and heuristic systematic model are two models that give a background understanding of the distinction between persuasion and argumentation. The Toulmin model provides a process that typical argumentation takes. It presents argumentation as being a process that goes beyond just making claims but pursues it further using logic to accentuate the point of view (Pedemonte and Balacheff, 2016, 108). Central to the Toulmin Model is the fundamental need to ensure that claims follow from a strong premise and supported with credible facts. Unique to an argument is the fact that it even anticipates possible opposing views as well as rebuttals and seeks to address them alongside the objective claims. An attack different between argument and persuasion is the fact that the former has the aim of advancing a particular point of view predicated on nothing else but logic and fact. According to the Toulmin model, argumentation shares the claim, provides verifiable evidence and examples, and wins both acceptance and legitimacy (Pedemonte. and Balacheff, 2016). On the other hand, the heuristic-systematic model shows how emotional and normative appeals can be integrated to sway a second party into buying into the claim or postulation being made. While the model acknowledges the sacrosanct of fact and logic, it tickles the subconscious part of people to make judgments based on extra components, including emotions and morals. According to the heuristic-systematic model, thinking and information processing takes two distinct paths (Lee, Lee, Lee, and DeFranco, 2019). The first part is what could be strictly considered as logic; the careful interrogation, evaluation, and weighting of available information before taking a stand. The other pathway of swaying attitudes and standpoints is using motives and information bias.

While argument and persuasion have a similar objective, to advance a particular point of view, the process used by the two to achieve this provides a basic distinction. An argument does not necessarily require the originator to have a physical or present receiver. In essence, there is no urgency or immediacy in making an argument. This issue means that one can make an argument in writing and just hope that it will someday make sense to a reader and influence their thinking in some way (Hillocks, 2010). Therefore, peer-reviewed journals, textbooks, authoritative journals, and other forms of non-print media are argumentations. There is not a singular entity in a person's mind making the argumentation for which the message is intended. Considerably, an argument does not set itself as the absolute benchmark for truth but rather an advancement of it. A striking element of the argument is the fact that it does not ignore possible divergent opinions but instead picks a few compelling ones and try to integrate them into the process of making a substantial conclusion. It strives to reduce sycophancy and encourages fair-mindedness. However, the fact base used in building an argumentation is always strong enough that one needs to be tactful when countering them. The arguments open a whole pandora's box of different viewpoints but try to use them to build upon just one. An argumentation is aimed at convincing the reader or listener that the idea at hand is worthy of their consideration.

Persuasion operates with a single end in mind. The goal is to ensure that the other party ultimately unequivocally buys into the idea being presented. It does not compromise or at least appreciate alternative points of view, which can sometimes be equally compelling. In persuasion, a claim is made, then the person making it proceeds to present and advance only that side. Sometimes the presenter can weakly point out a possible rebuttal but then nuances it quickly to render it unworthy of consideration (Hillocks, 2010). One characteristic of persuasion is that it already an...