Using Learning Journals in Continuing and Higher Education, Article Critique Example

Introduction

The search for an alternative method to traditional classroom learning is the subject of Langer’s (2002) article, Reflecting on practice: Using learning journals in higher and continuing education. Inspired by polemics on alternative pedagogies dating to Dewey’s early twentieth century philosophies of learning directed at the application of practice based, education methodologies, the Langer proposes a nuance to this approach through journal writing models of facilitation, as both a process of self-reflection, and tool for communicative praxis as understood by Jurgen Habermas. Philosophical articulations promoting the autobiographical independence that such a learning method provides, the journal as repository of thought, and vehicle for the development and demonstration of critical thought might be considered in its flexible repose as an experiential learning device.

The study was implemented with a convenience sample comprised of classes of over one hundred students each, over three consecutive semesters. Interview research was conducted in follow-up to the application of the journal assignment. The purpose of the study was to assess the extent by journals influence the evolution of critical thinking amongst adult students. Findings to the investigation revealed that pedagogical assumptions, and theoretical frameworks responsive to this approach in learning varied in their efficacy, and that ‘reflection’ proved to be instrumental toward a range of learning constraints that might otherwise be ignored or not met entirely.

Research Question

Impetus for the study on learning journal facilitation is based on the null hypothesis that there is little evidence of the claim for knowledge development due to lack of demonstrable proof.  Existing discussions on the employment of the learning journal in certain fields where it is already deemed essential, as in the Sciences, shows that students benefit from the replication of

ideas and facts specific to the ontology of practice (Langer, 2002).  Experts in the field of mathematics offer suggestion that journal keeping encourages students to make record of technical definitions for recall of mathematical concepts that in turn reinforces abstract thinking.

Literature review

Theoretical considerations in the study focus on the dual emphases on theory or practice, as scholarly queries on educational pedagogies find philosophical articulation in formulations derived from practice-based perspectives, as in the works of John Dewey and Jurgen Habermas, and also research-in-action constructs instigated by thinkers such as Schon and Kohl for the use of reflection in the experiential learning cycle. Instructional training models also incorporate the concept within the practical application of curricula, in that it allows for both process and representation of learning outcomes.

The uniqueness of the reflection school of thought points to the ability and process aligned in each individual. The learning journal is a highly personalized inculcation of attendant standardized systems of thought. A tableau for rendering impressions, and replicating information over time, the process by which the student fosters internal dialogue with the outside world, can be then captured for iterative dialogue in the classroom. Other scholars vested in process oriented learning technologies note that the journal is timeless in approach, yet with concrete outcomes. The utilitarian aspect of such a deployment of intellectual growth and individual consciousness is of course highly subjective in terms of ‘accurate’ or ‘objective’ content, and for this reason the tool should be interpreted merely as a mitigation of the conditions in the learning environment rather than a locus of ‘fact’ or ‘truth.’ Ultimately, the learning journal stands to engender the appropriate learning environment for student, which is always the core competency to be realized in pedagogical tasks.

The proposition of ‘meta-cognition’ within journal writing as a formal path to self-enquiry and critical thought in contemporary educational philosophies parallels Dewey’s earlier work. Langer discusses the importance of active learning as the primary modus operandi amidst the field of theoretical potentialities and mentions the student-to-instructor communication dynamic.  Finally, applied research on the aforementioned theories tests the expansion of learning strategies and argued findings in reflective thinking as verifiable outcomes and criteria for recommendation.

Data collection and analysis

Data collection on the Langer (2002) study sought measured findings accorded to application theoretical propositions indicating advancement of student performance in correlation to use of learning journals. The study is reliant upon a grounded theory approach to data collection, in that interpretations drawn from review of student’s thought processes over time allowed researchers to generate more precise questions in the design of the interview instrument. The two principle methodologies deployed in the study are as follows: 1) Evaluative review of the learning journals submitted by students; and 2) Interview of selected students who completed the course.

The study replicates prior studies on the topic, and posits its original hypothesis in this sphere of query with the assumption that students involved in the investigation would be able to perform better by linking theory to practice in the journal process.

Results

The results of the study revealed that most students have difficulty in design of presentation formats for their own work. The journal offered a challenge in the sense that less than 5% had previous experience in crafting such a piece of work. The respondents tended to use the journals to list and summarize course material, rather than as a mode of communication for eliciting instructor dialogue. A mere 50% of the journals were submitted on a regular weekly basis, and Langer (2002) cites that this suggests that adult students are constrained by time obligations outside of the course. Other information offered in process, was the limitations of journaling in certain courses, and especially the hands-on laboratory setting. Most importantly, the implied epistemology of learning journal theory in the study’s hypothesis as a ‘critical reflection’ process, often eluded students as they mistook the value of the application to their own educational outcomes.

Discussion or Implications

Through the literature review, the research showed that college professors believe in utilizing student journals as an effective reflective tool for critical learning and contemplation.  However, the results of the study contradict the literature review by expressing a new concept that inadequate declaration of project goals or student requirements will alter the students’ responses.  Instead of applying critical thinking skills to journal responses, students are concentrating more on the fulfilling a specific amount of written pages.  Reflective learning is not achieved through student journal assignments based on the results of this study.
These results should coerce professors to continue to use student journals but to specify objectives and potential outcomes or achievement.  Journals are meant to express critical thinking concepts as well as show the professor that each student has a clear understanding of the topic.  However, this goal is diminished by unclear expectations and unclassified statements that leave the assignment vague for the students.  When this error occurs, the journals are no longer a viable reflective learning tool but instead they are more of an opportunity for students to practice writing skills to fill a required number of pages.
This section clearly reviews the author’s original problem question draw appropriate conclusions and justifications for the research conducted.  Furthermore, the author explains how these results should be used to change educational and pedagogical thought and concepts in actual practice.  Mainstream thought supports the use of journals for students.  For this reason, the author’s research is meant to change mainstream thought and actual educational practice to avoid making inappropriate conclusions and assumptions for the quality of learning journals as a reflective learning tool.  This article does not refute that learning journals should be used in the classroom; however, the results and author’s conclusions clearly state that journals will only achieve their desired goals if the teacher uses clear statements of expectations and learning outcomes.  Finally, the author eliminates many potential study errors by clearly stating conclusions and the application of this research for professional use in the field.

Conclusion

Initiation of the study showed that student participants had initial concerns about the process; with over half of the sample to expressing anxiety. This was especially the case for adult students returning to school after a long absence. Some respondents did not find significant pedagogical value in the exercise, and indicated that it was either a waste of time, or that it only served to infantilize them, rather than instruct them in independent learning strategies. At the end of the study, quite a few of the students indicated that the biases or discomfort with the experiment had assuaged, and confirmation of value in the application was reported.

Langer (2002) also shows that previous studies have used ‘double entry’ journals for application of facts, and subsequent reflection. It would be of interest to further this topic in fields such as law where such a precise process already exists in the traditional learning field, and especially the testing in U.S. based Juris Doctorate programs.

The convenience sample was large enough to draw substantive conclusions. A qualitative research study of this kind offers keen insights in the average pedagogical experience afforded to students in a particular setting. It may or may indicate ‘universal’ findings. Replication of such a study requires adequate research design, and especially implementation planning, as well as sufficient measurement of longitudinal findings. Aggregate considerations are of key importance, yet personalized vignettes offered in both the journals and interviews may indicate converse factors not considered – even in the context of a grounded theory experiment. Mention of a micro convenience sample in the article points to the complications in delimiting the sample size too small, and designation of 20 student learning journals, according to a three (3) component selection based on: 1) equal representation of gender; 2) ten students from each of the two course sessions in the study; and 3) equal distribution from each of the three departments involved in the study showed that the process of determination then followed by last name sequencing until 300 journals were read allowed for sample allocation and coding for statistical narrative, yet skews data according to multi-scaled classification.

Aside from the data biases mentioned above, pedagogical assumptions underlying the framework for the investigation (i.e. reflective) do not offer direct correlation between heuristic effect and subsequent critical thought. While reflection is indeed the first step in incorporation of information into the learner process, generation of ‘knowledge’ toward application of critical thinking is not necessarily enjoined in self-reflective reasoning. The study does not allow for measurement of variance in direct correlation to performance from a testing perspective. Therefore, it is impossible to discern if the qualitative approach offers students in disciplines heavily skewed toward memorization testing, as in mathematics or medicine, much more than a template for reflection and general knowledge building. Capacity in the sense of critical analysis is a step beyond this type of memorization, and the application of fact to processes, systems, and philosophical dialectics may be only partially met.

References

Langer, A. M. (2002). Reflecting on practice: Using learning journals in higher and continuing education. Teaching in Higher Education, 3 (7), 307–351. Retrieved from:  EBSCO database.