the use of critical incidents to foster reflection and learning in hrd

A R T I C L E S

The Use of Critical Incidents to Foster Reflection and Learning in HRD

Hallie Preskill

In my role as a human resource development @lRD)faculty member, I often feel that students perceive my teaching of instructional systems design and program evaluation much like a play within a play In other words, as I teach about teaching others, my students silently critique and sometimes assimilate what I do. For this reason, I have become keenly sensitive to the importance of modeling effective teaching and learning practices in the classroom. In a continuous effort tofind ways to enhance my teaching and my students’ critical reflection and learning, I decided to undertake a research study to exam- ine the ways in which critical incidents afect learning experiences Brookfield, 1995). The critical incident method asks students to respond to a set of eval- uative questions each week of the course. The instructor then reads and sum- marizes the responses and returns the summaries to the students during the following class period. At that time they are discussed and possible changes in the course are negotiated.

Theoretical Background The adult learning literature is replete with theories, models, and instructional strategies intended to guide the teaching of adults. Collaboration, praxis, and critical reflection have been core concepts in much of this research (Brookfield, 1986). At the same time, the role of experiential learning, which suggests that individuals learn the most when they are actively engaged with the learning material, has also been a theme in the learning style literature. Kolb (1984) views experiential learning as a €our-cycle process that includes experience, observation and reflection, abstract reconceptualization, and active experi- mentation. His model emphasizes that, although experience forms the foun- dation for learning, reflection is critical to its application.

HUMAN WURCE DEVELOPMENT QUARTERLY, vol. 1, no. 4, Winter 1996 0 Jossey-Bass Publishers 335

336 Preskill

The role of reflection has attracted much attention in the educational literature as well. Much of the interest is attributable to the work of Donald Schon (1983, 1987), who challenged scholars and practitioners to ask, “What is the kind of knowing in which competent practitioners engage?” (1983, p. viii). Reflection is described as the “practice of analyzing one’s own actions, decisions, or products by focusing on the processes involved (Wlon and Tod- nem, 1991) and is defined as “a means by which practitioners can develop a greater level of self-awareness about the nature and impact of their perfor- mance, an awareness that creates opportunities for professional growth and development” (Osterman and Kottkamp, 1993, p. 19).

Saban, Killion, and Green (1994) described three types of reflection. The first, rejlection-in-action, occurs when we watch ourselves act out certain thoughts and actions. The authors likened this to an out-of-body experience. It happens most when we try to take ourselves outside to see what we are doing from a different perspective. An example is the trainer who constantly assesses how well her program is going and makes adjustments as necessary- the focus is on the present. The second type of reflection is refection-on-action. This is the most common type of reflection. It occurs when we replay a situation in our minds. This process allows us to review, critique, and relive the experience and to form opinions and judgmenwto focus on the past. Reflec- tion-for-action is the third type. The focus of this activity is to predict how we will use what we have learned from an experience. We use our increased knowledge to plan €or the application of our leaming-we focus on the future. The argument is made that when reflective practice is interwoven through experiential learning activities, higher levels of knowledge and professional competence will be attained.

There have been a number of suggestions recently for how one might facil- itate the development of reflective practice. Some writers have suggested using guided book reviews (Schmale, 1994), program evaluation methods and processes (Preshll, 1994), and task forces or study groups (McCarthy and Still, 1993) as the means by which a group of individuals may reflect in, on, or for practice. One strategy that is receiving increased attention is the use of critical incidents. This method involves askmg participants to write brief descriptions of experiences they considered to be significant or memorable (Brookfield, 1995; Tripp, 1993; Woods, 1993). The usefulness of this approach has been most recently documented by Brookfield (1995), who maintains that using critical incidents (1) alerts instructors to problems before they become problem, ( 2 ) encourages students to be reflective learners, (3) encourages diversity in teaching, (4) builds trust between the instructor and student, and (5 ) suggests possibilities for the instructor’s development. The use of critical incidents may be a particularly appropriate method for instructors who wish to model experiential learning and encourage reflective practice in their courses, seminars, or workshops.

The Use of Critical Incidents 33 7

Problem Statement

Interest in conducting this research was motivated by several observations during my fifteen years of teaching program evaluation. First, I’ve noticed that students often view the evaluation process as negative and threatening. Many perceive it to be subjective (or lacking criteria), summative in nature, and often unexpected. Second, graduate students in program evaluation courses rarely see how evaluation improves practice. Although most students are familiar with midterm and end-of-course evaluations of their instructors or summative evaluations of their work as indicated by letter grades, they do not get much exposure to formative, developmental forms of evaluation that make immediate, instrumental differences in the teaching and learning environment. Finally, few of our students take the time to reflect critically on their own learning, both in and out of the classroom. In the rush of life today, reflection is often seen as a luxury rather than a necessity.

As a means to address these issues, I decided to impIement the critical incident method in two of my HRD evaluation courses. The expectation was that students who reflected on their learning and were more involved in the content and direction of the course would learn how evaluation can be con- ducted in nonthreatening ways, gain a better understanding of formative evaluation, and become more satisfied with their learning experience overall. These expectations led to the development of the following research questions:

1. In what ways is students’ learning about evaluation affected by the critical

2. In what ways is students’ learning about themselves as learners affected by

3. What impact does using the critical incident method have on teaching

4. What other unanticipated outcomes might result from using the critical

incident method?

the critical incident method?

practice?

incident method?

Research Design

The study reported in this article can best be described as an exploratory qualitative case study. Although quantitativdpositivist studies focus on determin- ing the relationships between prespecified variables, qualitative research is concerned with seeking patterns of anticipated and unanticipated relationships (Stake, 1995). The primary goal of qualitative case studies is to represent the multiple realities that exist within a case so that greater understanding of the outcomes can be interpreted within a particular context. Individual or group interviews, observation, and document review are typical methods of case study research.

338 Pres kill

Research Setting. Graduate students in two courses on HRD program evaluation were involved in this study The courses were taught as core require- ments in training and development programs in two different universities. One course met once a week for fifteen weeks; the other every Wednesday evening and three Saturdays for eight weeks. (The total number of contact hours were the same for both courses.) The thirty-five students in these two courses worked in a variety of settings, including schools, businesses, nonprofit organizations, health care, and the military. The primary responsibility for most of them was to educate and train adults in their organizations. Those who were not currently in HRD positions were attending graduate school to qualify for future employment in the profession.

Research Procedures and Methods. The data for t h ~ s research study were collected at two points in time. The first set was collected during each class period, where students were provided with the critical incident forms. The forms posed the following open-ended questions:

1. At what point during the class tonight did you feel most engaged with

2. At what time tonight did you feel most distanced from what was happen-

3. What action did someone take in class that you found most affirming or

4. What action did you find most puzzling or confusing? 5. What surprised you the most in class tonight?

what was happening?

ing?

helpful?

These questions are very similar to those used by Brookfield (1995) in his work on teaching with critical incidents.

Students were told to write down things they thought of in response to these questions during the class or during the last ten minutes of class, which was allocated for this activity They could then submit their forms anony- mously or identify themselves on the paper, as they wished. When I worked on the summaries, I always included my own reactions at the end because it was important that I too explained how I had experienced the class.

At the beginning of class each week, the students read these summaries (which were approximately one to two pages). When they were finished, we discussed their reactions and addressed questions or concerns they had had about concepts or material covered the week before.

The second method of data collection involved the students’ evaluation of the critical incident method. Students in both courses were asked to complete one last set of questions:

1. What have you learned about yourself as a learner in responding to these

2. What have you learned about course design and delivery from the class’s questions each week?

involvement with writing critical incidents?

Tne Use of Critical Incidents 339

3.

4.

5.

6. 7.

In what ways has this activity contributed to your learning about evaluation? What do you hnk I have learned from reading your critical incidents each week? In what ways did writing critical incidents each week negatively affect the course? What surprised you the most about writing critical incidents each week? Would you recommend I ask students in my other classes to write critical incidents each week?

The data for this research resulted in 218 critical incident forms, 17 class summaries, and 24 critical incident evaluations.

Data Analysis Both the weekly critical incident forms and the student evaluations of the critical incident method were analyzed using the qualitative analysis procedure called content analysis. A search for meaning is accomplished through the search for patterns, consistency, and correspondence (Stake, 1995). Although the goal for case study research is not generalization-as it is in positivist forms of inquiry-much can still be learned from a case. Readers of case study research will find areas or findings that are congruent with their own life experiences (Anderson, Herr, and Nihlen, 1994; Denzig and Lincoln, 1994; Lin- coln and Guba, 1985). Issues of validity are addressed through triangulation, multiple methods, data sources, theories, and investigators (Denzin, 1978). In this particular study, member checking (where participants’ review the findings for accuracy) and methodological triangulation (using more than one method to collect data) enhanced the quality of the data and confidence in the findings.

The first phase of the analysis process involved reading all of the students’ critical incident responses to the first question. When the words or general sen- timent of the students were similar, a code was developed for the category that best described their response. If more than one thought was represented, this too would be coded according to a category name. For example, students often reported that they were most engaged during the group activity “Group activity” then became a category with the code “A.” Every time group activity was mentioned on the students’ critical incident forms in response to the first question, it was coded with the letter “A.” After all the students’ comments were coded for the first question, the responses for the second question were read and coded accordingly This constant comparative process continued until the responses to all five questions were coded (Glaser and Strauss, 1967).

When writing the weekly summaries, the students’ reactions were described by category of response, often with a number indicating how many students identified the same theme. All of the students’ responses were pro-

340 Preskill

vided either verbatim or in carefully paraphrased form. The following is a sum- mary from one of the class meetings.

Critical Incident Summury, Class #11. Most Engaging. Six of the eight responding students said they were most engaged during the small group discussions of their projects. One person wrote, “When we broke into our project discussion group we got really involved and were very helpful to each other.” Two people felt most engaged during the survey redesign work, and one person liked the information and role-play on interviewing.

Most Distancing. Of the four responses to this question, three people felt distanced during the survey editing activity One person said there was lots of confusion in hLs or her group, one person felt distanced when I told the groups that they only had seven minutes left, and one person “felt that we didn’t get very much done because our group was not connecting.” The fourth person felt most distanced during the break.

Most Affirming or Helpful. Five people found the time they spent in groups working on the evaluation plan projects most useful. One person specifically mentioned her group members as being helpful. The sixth person responding was appreciative of my suggestion that this person’s group move on from the section on which they were working because of the limited time.

Most Puzzling or Confusing. Only one person responded to this question, making a comment related to the survey editing activity

Most Surprising. Six people mentioned how enjoyable and helpful the group discussions were on the evaluation plan, projects. Their comments included the following:

How useful others’ ideas are to my project.

I actually enjoyed getting into groups to discuss the projects.

Overall I felt very good about today’s class. We had lots of class interactions.

The diversity and quality of the proposed evaluation plans and the intended applications.

How very helpful the project discussion group was.

In addition, one person thought focused questions for the groups would

My reactions were as follows: have helped guide the discussions.

I am very pleased that you found the small group discussions on your projects so helpful. We will try to include a bit more time before the end of the semester to do another check-in with each other. It is interesting for me to read the comments on the survey work. Though your discussions were prob-

The Use of Critical Incidents 341

ably made more difficult by trying to reach consensus on how to improve the survey with only forty-five minutes, I do think the activity demonstrated the complex nature of developing a useful survey that will result in quality data. I do appreciate the efforts you made to work together.

As I thmk about what is workmg and what needs to be changed the next time I teach this course, I wonder what we could leave out given the fact that most, if not all of you, will be taking one of the college research courses. Any feedback you have about replication would be greatly appreciated. I hope that within the next couple of weeks you will have made good progress on your projects.

Findings

Analysis of the critical incident data reveals several implications for HRD practice. Critical incidents were seen to (1) increase students’ understanding about evaluation, (2) stimulate insights into the instructional design process, (3) con- tribute to increased consciousness about their own assumptions and beliefs, and (4) highlight communication issues that affected their individual learning styles. The findings will be reported by each theme.

Increased Understanding About Evaluation. From the data provided by the students it is clear that they saw the critical incident activity as an effective evaluation tool for providing instant feedback to me about how they thought the class was proceeding. By modeling the use of evaluation as formative feedback, students learned that constructive information can be used in nonthreatening, productive ways and that evaluation can be a positive endeavor rather than something to be feared or dreaded. It also illustrated how qualitative data can be analyzed collaboratively. On the final evaluation survey one student said, “It helped me see how narrative can be gathered and compiled in a way that allows the readers to draw conclusions (rather than the researcher making firm conclusions from the data).” For one student the key was learning that evaluation is a process: “Now I see more clearly that evaluation is a continuous activity that we have to conduct throughout our entire lives.”

Several students mentioned that the critical incident activity was an effective method “for both the students and instructor to really know what is going on in class.” Students were also able to see the application of evaluation to training. They learned that trainers must often adapt their methods or approaches to meet the needs of different groups. For example, one student wrote, “It provided good feedback to help the students understand what was happening in the course as a whole, and it was good for you to understand where students were coming from. I noticed you modified things every so often to accommodate our needs. This was very positive.”

All of the students responding to the final evaluation of the critical incident activity recommended not only that I continue using the process in my other courses but also that critical incidents be used in all of the courses in the

342 Preskill

program. As one student explained, “I would have liked to have them in all my previous classes. 1 thmk they also gve you (the instructor) important feedback during the course of the class that normally you might not get until the end.”

Increased Learning About Instructional Systems Design. The most often mentioned learnings were related to issues concerning the design and imple- mentation of instructional programs. The themes that emerged were (1) understanding the value of experiential learning and group activities, ( 2 ) valuing individual differences, (3) appreciating handouts (transfer tools), (4) understanding the importance of maintaining an effective pace for the course, and (5 ) understanding the value of a positive relationshp between the students and the instructor.

Learning from Hands-on Activities. Nearly every weekly critical incident form contained comments on the positive aspects of the experiential learning exercises and activities that were used in class. Whether it was designing a survey in small groups, addressing the politics of evaluation through a small group case study exercise, or sharing their own work in small groups, the students always wrote about the value and amount of learning that took place through group interactions. As one student explained, “I think you have learned some things about us as learners. For example, I think these sheets gave you insights into the relative lack of research background we have. I think you learned that we like to have an activity in each class.”

After a small group activity where students read excerpts from Margaret Wheatley’s book, Leadership and the New Science (19941, one student wrote, “Our group had a very stimulating discussion. It brought out some excellent and diverse insights. Some really interesting thoughts to chew on.” Comments such as these reinforced the importance of designing instruction that is situated in the context in which learning takes place and is based on the interactions between individuals and groups (Wilson, 1993).

Benejtingfrom Group Activities. In addition to the students enjoylng the experiential learning activities, they also frequently mentioned the value of working together and obtaining feedback from one another. After one small group discussion, one student wrote on her critical incident form, “It really helped to get together in groups to clear things up.” Another said that he liked hearing normally silent people speak up in small groups. In one of the courses, a student thought the group was “bonding” particularly.wel1 because of the critical incident activity. After one student’s personal story about a situation at home, she mused, “We’re getting to be a real cozy group.”

Valuing Individual Differences. Nearly every week students expressed sur- prise and interest in the variety of perspectives their peers had on issues discussed in class. Students began to appreciate the need to design instruction that allows for differences in work experience, ethnicity, gender, and other variables that affect how people view the world. Three students described the experience as follows:


I was surprised at times by the vaned reactions of other students. The van- ety of answers to some of the questions were sometimes poles apart. It surprised me how people interpreted some of the things discussed in class. It was a positive experience because it gave me a little more tolerance for other peoples’ opinions.

It was interesting to hear others’ reactions and why they thought the way they did. They often surprised me, but they made me more aware that others have a different perspective.

You can’t please all the people all the time. Every activity seems to have some supporters and some dissenters. Often what was someone else’s favorite activity bored me. Therefore, a variety of activities is important to engage all-at some point!

Even though most of the students had already taken an adult learning course, the critical incident activity further reinforced the need to design instruction for individuals with different learning styles. As one student explained, “I learned how varied learners are and how important a variety of approaches are so that everyone can benefit or learn.” In spite of differences in perception, students would often express gratitude to other students for helping clarify a point, providing an example, or agreeing with them on some point of confusion. Several students wrote that they were impressed with other students’ “wealth of knowledge.”

Appreciating Handouts. The use of job aids is often recommended to help trainees remember and use important material from the training experience. I make it a point in my classes to provide many handouts on different colored paper. Although I have been accused of killing trees, the students’ critical incident comments often referred to the usefulness of the handouts and that they would be able to use them later on at work.

Maintaining an Effective Course Pace. I often asked my students to decide how much time they needed for a particular activity, or if they wanted to do an exercise to further reinforce a concept or go on to the next topic. Their written comments confirmed that they liked having these choices. In addition, their feedback provided information for making course adjustments. For example, by identifymg what they found to be confusing or puzzling, they were able to communicate the need to spend more time on a particular concept in a future class. These mini needs assessments enabled me to change the speed of the course’s delivery

Enhancing Relationship Between Students and Teacher A theme throughout the critical incidents-and one emphasized in the final evaluations-was the students’ appreciation of how the activity allowed me to “listen” to students’ needs and to respond to their concerns in a “forthright manner.” One student explained, “I felt I had a vehicle to let you know my likes and dislikes about

344 Preskill

class. I felt you were listening to what we said.” Another student wrote, “1 was so impressed with how well you ‘listened’ to us via this vehicle. The form helped to focus on items that I normally would not have written about (and thus not thought of or maybe not recognized).” My willingness to listen and respond to students’ issues, concerns, confusion, and positive comments contributed to a collegal working relationship that reflected a true adult learning experience.

Increased Awareness of Own Learning Style. Students not only saw the value in the critical incident activity for instructional design and evaluation but also seemed to develop a better sense of their own learning styles. The activity became a catalyst for them to reflect critically on themselves as learners. For some this was a relatively new experience. The following comments describe this effect:

For me it helped analyze my “learning” in each class and helped bring the class to a close.

I have learned that over the years I have become increasingly self-conscious about my classroom behavior to the point that I often overreflect after class about something I said or did in class and how it was received by other people. I liked the critical incidents because it allowed me to reflect before I left the class.

I’ve learned that sometimes I’m quite a unique individual while at other times I’m right in line with other students. The main thing that has helped is that it has given me a chance at the close of each class session to reflect on the activities of that class. That immediate reaction really helped me to retain more information each session.

I am more similar to my cohorts than I might have thought! I am human and it’s great to know that!

So often we go through our days . . . and we never think back about what we did, why we did it, and how we could improve. The critical incidents helped to focus.

Conclusions The research reported in this article confirms the importance of the reflection and critical thinking processes that are emphasized in many theories of adult learning (Boud, Cohen, and Walker, 1993; Brookfield, 1987; Cross, 1981; Dewey, 1933; Knowles, 1975; Kolb, 1984; Mezirow, 1991; Tough, 1979).This study found that using critical incidents facilitated students’ active engagement in their own learning. For many faculty of graduate education, helping students learn how to learn is a primary goal.


This concept has been best articulated by Argyns and Schbn (19781, who describe three ways in which individuals learn. The first, single-loop learning, occurs when individuals focus on the symptom of the problem and end up addressing the symptom without questioning or altering their underlylng values. As a result, the problem remains unresolved and it is questionable whether any learning has really taken place. Double-loop learning, in contrast, occurs when individuals ask questions around their assumptions of the problem and discover solutions during the process. They reflect on and question their affec- tive responses to the problem and they use cogmtive rules or reasoning to eval- uate the design and implement their actions. The third type of learning, according to Argyns and Schbn, is Deutero learning.This h n d of learning goes beyond questioning assumptions and values, by aslung individuals to question their own learning.

The results of this research indicate that several students reached this third level of learning through the use of the critical incident technique. Students often commented that the critical incident method not only forced them to slow down and consider their own learning processes but also provided them with the means for experiencing their learning in a more personal way.

Each of the research questions posed in this study resulted in findings that supported the use of the critical incident method. Specifically, this technique was found to reinforce the value of evaluation, the importance of designing active instruction for a variety of learners, and the role of critical self-reflection in learning. The critical incident method also contributed to the group’s development as a cohort of learners. Students often expressed feeling closer to one another as a result of learning the others’ thoughts and reactions.

Because students were not required to hand in the critical incident forms each week (it was strongly recommended but voluntary), I often did not receive one from every student. Some explained that they either had nothing to say or were too tired on these nights. Although these were legitimate expla- nations, I plan to make some changes in the process for future courses. In an effort to deepen further and expand the students’ reflection process, I have had the critical incident forms copied on carbonless paper so that students will be able to turn in one copy to me and keep one copy for themselves. At the end of the semester I will ask them to write a two-or three-page reflection paper using what they have written on the weekly forms. I hope this assignment will spur increased participation and thoughtfulness in their responses and, most important, provide them with a method to pull together significant learning experiences they have in the course.

The adult learning literature time and again tells us that for learning to occur, individuals must find ways to connect what they already know with what is new and to find meaning in the new. The critical incident technique is one method that HRD instructors can use to encourage this development and to model effective adult learning principles.

346 PreskilI

Recommendations for Future Research

The research discussed in this article was exploratory. There are several avenues HRD researchers might pursue to continue building on the knowledge base regarding critical reflection and, more specifically, the use of critical incidents to foster students’ learning.

One area of future study might be to determine the relationship between students’ level of satisfaction and learning from critical incidents with individual learning styles. Do people with different learning styles respond in different ways to the technique? For example, in every class there were two or three students who never liked completing the forms. Although they continued throughout the semester to participate, at times they would verbally express their dislike of the process. It is possible that these individuals represented a particular learning style for which the critical incident technique is not as useful. Studies on professional types (for example, business, education, human services) and personality types might also result in interesting and useful findings regarding the use of the critical incident method.

A second area of inquiry might focus on the differences in gender and cul- ture. Of particular interest might be the degree to which members of different cultures (particularly non-Western and Native American) react to and find meaning in the use of critical incidents.

The critical incident method has much to offer HRD instructors and trainers. It provides us with an approach that models what we teach-the need to build adult learning principles into our instructional designs. Although this research was exploratory, it lends promise and hope to enhancing effective teaching and training practice.

References

Anderson, G. L., Herr, K., & Nihlen, A.S. (1994). Studyingyour own school: An educator’s guide to

Argyns, C., & Schon, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Boud, D., Cohen, R. & Walker, D. (1993). Using experiencefor learning. Buckingham, England:

Brookfield, 5. D. (1986). Understanding andfacilitating adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Brookfield, 5. D. (1987). Developing critical thinkers: Challenging adults to explore alternative ways

Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming Q critic~lly reflective teacher. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Cross, K. P. (1981). Adults as learners: Increasing participation andjacilitaring learning. San Fran-

Denzin, N. K. (1978). The logic of naturalistic inquiry. In N. K. Denzin (Ed.), Sociological meth-

Denzin, N. K., & Lmcoln, Y. S. (Eds.). (1994). Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks,

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to educational

Glaser, B. G., Q Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovety ofgrounded theory: Strategiesfor qualitative

qualitative practitioner research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

The Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.

of thinking and acting. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

cisco: Jossey-Bass.

ods: A sourcebook. New York McGraw-Hill.

CA: Sage.

process. Chicago: University of Illinois Press.

research. Chicago: Aldine Publishing.


Killion, J. P., & Todnem, G. (1991). A process for personal theory building. Educational Leader-

Knowles, M. 5. (1975). Self-directed learning. New York Association Press. Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the sourcefor learning and development.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. McCarthy, J., & Still, 5. (1993). Hollibrook accelerated elementary school. In J. Murphy &

P. Hallinger (Eds.), Restructuring schooling: Learningfrom ongoing efforts (pp. 63-83). Newbury Park, CA: Convin Press.

ship, 48 (6), 14-16.

Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Mezirow, J. D. (199 1). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Osterman, K. F., & Kottkamp, R. B. (1993). Reflective practicefor educators. Newbury Park, CA:

Preskill, H. (1994). Evaluation’s role in enhancing organizational learning: A model for practice.

Saban,]. M., Killion, J. P., & Green, C, G. (1994). The centric reflection model: A kaleidoscope

Schmale. R. L. (1994). Promoting teacher reflection through guided book reviews. Journal oJStaff

Schon, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books. Schan, D. A. (1987). Educating the rejlective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art ofcase study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Tough, A (1979). The adult’s learning projects: Afresh approach in theory and practice in adult lenrn-

Tripp, D. (1993). Critical incidents in teaching: Developing projessional judgment. New York: Rout-

Wheatley, M. J. (1992). Leadership and the new science. San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler. Wilson, A. L. (1993). The promise of situated cognition. New Directionsfor Adult and Continuing

Woods, P. (1993). Critical events in teaching and learning. London: The Falmer Press.

Convin Press.

Evaluation and Program Planning, 17 (31,291-297.

for staff developers. Journal of Staff Development, 18 (31, 16-20.

Development, 15 (1). 30-33.

ing. Toronto: Institute for Studies in Education.

ledge.

Education, 57, 71-79.

Hallie Preskill is associate professor, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque.

the use of critical incidents to foster reflection and learning in hrd

Documents