Small Group Feedback
Discover: How does this plan use the experiential cycle effectively?
Dream: How could it use the cycle more effectively?
Design: What concrete edits can you suggest?
(Love Appreciative Inquiry)
• Previous steps worked
• Small success/do-able
• Useful: relevant/real-world/will be used
• Trying takes trust
• Can be another experience for cycle
• Belief in process
• Making changes takes loops
• Hard to make real
• Role play resistance
• Applying too strictly/far in future
• Unrealistic expectations (ex: action plan)
• Needs a chance to readjust
• Is application individual or group -> how does group agree?
• Can feel corny/simple
• Horrible cycle of doom and never endingness
• Role plays
• Action plans
• Assigned roles
• Having enough info for holistic analysis
• Allowing space for diverse perspectives
• Don’t stress
• Establish trust for greater transparency (Even the ones you don’t agree with!)
• Analysis prematurely
• Staying more emotional than analytical
• Be sure not to over process
• Imbalance – focusing on negative or positive
• Allow yourself enough time to each aspect of the process
• Pairs -> small group -> large = Trust
• Open questions
• Safe environment
• Having sufficient time (to reflect)
• Providing a variety of formats to reflect
• Setting up the “experience” format (people being self-aware) so that reflection is “on point”
• Clear framework for reflection
• People reflect in different ways
• “Results” can vary based on group dynamics
• May not work with new groups or group that lack trust
• Vocal people might dominate (certain formats)
• Reflections may not be “on topic” (this may provide feedback to facilitator)
• Sometimes confusing between reflect and analyze/generalize
• Scream out loud! (self-release)
• “Think, pair (reflect), share”
• Small groups
• Big group discussion
• Popcorn style
• “Snowball” (use of sticky notes)
• Drawing picture
• Statues other movements
• Everyone has it (shared), relatable
• Engaging and inclusive
• Multiple ways to engage
• Engage different learning styles
• Validate and accommodate
• Motivate and willingness
• Reduce vulnerability, create space where vulnerability can be (respect)
• Accessible information
• No one participates
• Stuck when people don’t have experiences
• Hard to apply experiences to all you want to teach, especially technical
• Takes time, especially to include
• Can be new or past
• Movement, surveying
• Problem solving
• Role plays – tension line
• Field trip
• Poetry and art
• Face to face with experience
• Use own experiences or draw knowledge
• Allows for corrective action in process
• Same experience can highlight different things
• Hard to make application real
• Resistance to role-plays
How does the E.C. help?
• Drawing on experiences
• Allows for reflection
• Generating knowledge
• Takes time
• Challenges people
• Can be frustrating
• People come from different places
• Harder for technical content
• Can get stuck between phases
Experience – See/feel/hear
Reflect – What happened?
• Action learning
Generalize – So what?
Apply – Now what?
1. Share your experience!
2. How did it make you feel then? Now?
3. What lessons can you draw? What makes learning or problem solving work for you?
4. Pick one of your situations and role-play how it could have been handled better.
Think back to a time when you were looking to learn something or solve a problem and the person you to (teacher, advisor, facilitator, etc) approached it in a way that made it difficult for you…
II. Experience the cycle
III. Reflect – how did it go?
IV. Analyze – making it work
V. Apply – small groups practice and feedback