Interpretation Phase—Parts I-III Reflection
For the first part of the interpretation phase, each of us shared a “story” of our findings from the expert interviews and surveys conducted. My portion of the story focused on what I learned about parental involvement and support from my interviews with experts and research on Diigo. As a group, we decided to use Mural.ly based on Sara Chai’s recommendation and reference to it in our Google Plus EDL655 community. This was our first experience using it, but it’s easy once you get the hang of it. I found a suitable template that could be modified for our purposes. To show the key facts, needs, and perspectives of our end users and experts, each of us used a different color post-it to represent the groups we interviewed or surveyed. This was completed in Q1 on Mural.ly. Mine post-its are in yellow. Our shared “stories” can be found on our Google Document.
Interpretation Part II-III—Find Meaning and Framing Opportunities
To make sense of our findings, we captured the learning from the stories and created categories for our findings. For example, what was the most memorable and surprising story? What did participants care about? What stood out? And what frustrated participants? From here, we looked for common themes and patterns and constructed new categories. We initially had six categories in the Q3 section but narrowed this to four and then to three. We found that many of the categories overlapped. Part of what made this possible was Sandra Leu’s suggestion to consolidate/summarize our post-it findings. This was particularly helpful, as I was able to clearly see where my findings best fit. I shared all of this with the rest of our group and they are in the process of consolidating their post-its as well, so that we can complete the Question Formulation Technique (QFT) process to frame opportunities and develop our plan.
There were several challenges during this process. Again, time was an issue. Our group is behind and playing catch-up is never easy. We tried to do a better job during this phase by dividing up tasks. For example, we each documented our “stories” and then shared what we had with the rest of the group. For Part II, we collaborated to make sense of our findings through a Mural.ly shared document and were able to construct six categories. Another challenge was we were not clear on all parts of the process for Parts II and III, which created delays. At this point, our group needed clarification, so I contacted Sandra. We narrowed are categories down to three. I suggested that we individually consolidate our post-its, as not everyone was able to meet online for this. The group agreed this was the best way to proceed. For Part III, I made a few suggestions for the QFT process for Q4 to get us started and also added a suggested revision for our DT Question to our shared Google Document. Overall, Sandra’s feedback was extremely helpful for Parts II and III. She provided the needed support for our group to move forward.
Changes to Improve the Process for Next Time
Some of our challenges stem from being behind and having to revisit PPTs, audio sessions, virtual sessions, and get extra help to make sense of everything. In my own case, I am not used to being behind schedule and it is frustrating. I feel like we are going to be one week behind the rest of the class until the end of the course unless something changes or we catch a break. Not sure I have a solution.
Application for Students or Colleagues
The Interpretation Phase of the DT process is applicable for students and colleagues. For students, it taps into several critical thinking skills and also meets many of the common core requirements, particularly for understanding point of view and for higher order thinking. For colleagues, the interpretation phase might even be useful in our WASC process that we are undergoing.
All 8 tenets of critical thinking were evident to this process?
- Discipline of Mind
- Open Mindedness (Deferred Judgment)
- Metacognitive Thinking
- Healthy Skepticism