John Quirk

May 1, 2008

I. "MY SYNTHESIS PRODUCT SHOWS THAT..."

A. I can convey who I want to influence/affect concerning what (Subject, Audience, Purpose).

a. I have worked hard this semester to pull together a fairly wide-ranging topic into a synthetically sensible product that is useful for teachers and students. My premise – that metaphoric thinking can be helpful in understanding complex abstraction – has elements that are psychological, philosophical, creative and dialogic, and is a little abstract in its own right. Still, I believe there is useful and practical merit in the work I’ve done, and that it has a purpose as a component of teaching better thinking skills and promoting better thinking dispositions.

b. Throughout my work I have struggled with the extreme abstraction inherent in my topic. As a result, I had to aim consistently for tangible examples and references within my paper. In the end, my struggle in this area was probably the most salient feature of the work, and also the feature that most helped me to progress. Recognizing early on in my writing process that I needed to give readers (and myself) something to hold onto in exploring my topic forced me to deal with the abstraction and to be sure that my process/product was able to do the same.




B. I know what others have done before, either in the form of writing or action, that informs and connects with my project, and I know what others are doing now.

a. I have engaged deeply in areas related to metaphor theory, and especially in the works of Lakoff and Johnson. It is their embodiment theory of metaphor that most intrigued me, and atop which much of my synthesis was built. At the same time, I think I may have added, in some way, to their work, by addressing some practical problems with it (i.e. does it have a use?) and by proposing some practical solutions.

b. I came to recognize too late in my writing the importance of the threads of creativity on the one hand, and of cognitive linguistics on the other. Of the latter, I can fairly say that getting too deeply into it would have been difficult given the breadth of the topic. Of the former, I would like to have done a better job in integrating the role of creativity into my synthesis, and feel that I under-achieved a bit in not fully doing so; this was within my abilities, but my process did not evolve quickly enough to allow satisfactory entry into this. While I worked at a steady pace throughout the semester, I see, now, that I could probably have spent an entire year on the synthesis, and to better effect.



C. I have teased out my vision, so as to expand my view of issues associated with the project, expose possible new directions, clarify direction/scope within the larger set of issues, and decide the most important direction.

a. As I have said, this topic was broad, and I am probably guilty of taking on too much with it. That said, I do think I pared down to a workable topic, and that I managed to pull together lots of disparate parts into a sensible whole. Near the end of the work, and especially during my presentation, I was gratified (and a little surprised, honestly) to see that it all fit together pretty well. During the process, it was not always clear to me that it would come together.

b. For me, the biggest struggle in this area was in recognizing that I had probably bitten off more than I could chew well, and deciding what could stay and what had to go. Part of this was admitting to myself that this work, which I had sort of envisioned as a complete expression of my thoughts on the topic, would likely be an important step along the way to other better, and more well-developed efforts. In this regard, envisioning this synthesis not just as a capstone to this program, but also a way station to other work, was crucially important to helping me move through the process.



D. I have identified the premises and propositions that my project depends on, and can state counter-propositions. I have taken stock of the thinking and research I need to do to counter those counter-propositions or to revise my own propositions.

a. I believe I have done a fairly good job of building a strong foundation for the arguments in my synthesis, though I do have a sense that in some areas my research could have expanded dramatically. In a number of areas, I do address counter-propositions or ambiguities in the material. Dealing with what I perceive to be the most significant counter-proposal – that dialogue is too open ended and struggles to serve practical concerns – elevated and forwarded my thinking in a number of ways. I do not think I completely answered the challenge, but I do think I suggest sensible possibilities for taking the challenge into consideration.

b. A struggle I had with this was in feeling that there are likely areas of cognitive linguistics that are well beyond my level of expertise. In the end, my paper was more philosophic than psychological, but I still would like to have been able to nail down the science component more effectively. At the same time, my worry about this revealed to me the many layers of the issue I had taken on, and the need to think more carefully about which layers I was most interested in and able to pursue.



E. I have clear objectives with respect to product, both written and practice, and process, including personal development as a reflective practitioner. I have arranged my work in a sequence (with realistic deadlines) to realize these objectives.

a. I have done pretty well, I think, in meeting personal and professional deadlines on this synthesis. I do think my work could have extended to more like a year, and I have wished a number of times that I had engaged in this during practicum. But given the time I had and various life demands I was able to remain pretty well on course throughout the spring. The “product” I have proposed, too, has clear objectives, ones I will hope to meet in various ways in my work and teaching. I expect, as well, to have occasion to continue with the research part of this synthesis at some point, closing some of the gaps and fleshing out what I believe to be some fairly interesting ideas.

b. Again, I wish I had gotten into this specific work during practicum. Some of what I did in that course translated well to this work, but I could have had a better timeframe had I been better prepared for practicum and made better choices. At the same time, I do think some of my work in practicum and other classes had some of my synthesis sort of “simmering” away beneath the surface. Maybe I was not ready to take on this project earlier?





F. I have gained direct information, models, and experience not readily available from other sources.

a. I am not sure that I can fairly say I have done so in my synthesis, though I did spend a good deal of time trying to find the merit in my ideas by practicing visual dialogue with students. Because I was trying something fairly new, I felt this to be the best way to proceed, and the information I gathered in this way – information not readily available through my research – was crucial to my progress. It also infused me with optimism for my work, making me feel that I was on to something worthwhile.

b. It was a struggle for me to decide to try to apply my thinking to some actual group work, because I was quite unsure how it would go. One tenth grader actually asked, at one point, “What the heck are you talking about?” Once engaged in this way, however, I was sorry that I had not started earlier. One could do worse than have to explain to a tenth grader, and in fact I ended up deeply appreciative that I had to do so. I made some progress within that one, critical moment of query, and my work would not have been the same without the time I spent working at this level, with real students, and in real dialogues.



G. I have clarified the overall progression or argument underlying my research and the written reports.

a. I believe I have been able to clarify a sensible progression in my report, though there is an area in it that I have struggled to place appropriately. I have gone back and forth many times on what this means: Does it not fit, or is it too peripheral or under-developed? Have I not explicitly clarified how it fits and what the connections are? As I enter into my last round of editing and proof-reading, I am still working on this particular section, and trying to figure out what my “confusion” is about. That it is not fitting easily clearly tells me something, but I sense that working to make it fit is both right and central to the work overall. Generally, these kind of struggles yield important connections or moments of discovery for me. It would be great to be enlightened…and to get this piece sensibly squared away.

b. Struggling with this sort of thing can be frustrating, but it is actually the part of the work I enjoy most. Trying to validate my feeling that there is a connection takes time and reflection, and there is of course the risk that the assumption it fits will cloud judgment, but to me handling these moments of ambiguity or shadow are at the heart of real intellectual work. I am not really interested in re-framing already made arguments, though I know that doing so (changing the view) can be helpful and revealing. Still, I most like to clarify those, and then build on top of them. I do see that the struggle to connect is sometimes the result of not having a good grasp of the aforementioned previously framed arguments. At such times, the answer may be in a different quality of engagement with the foundation and in a willingness to work backwards through the chain of thinking. When busy, I am not as attentive at this level as I should be.



H. My writing and other products Grab the attention of the readers/audience, Orient them, move them along in Steps, so they appreciate the Position I've led them to.

a. I have worked hard to make my difficult topic accessible to my readers, recognizing that failing to do so means the failing of my idea.

b. Perhaps the biggest struggle for me in this area was in checking my own writing style. As a classicist, I tend to write…like a classicist. This is great for Cicero class, but not so great for the typical reader. It is especially not great when the topic itself is complicated. Often, I found myself having to consciously decide to let the reader “off the hook” from the structure of my writing, so that the structure of my idea would not be lost in the reading struggle. I enjoy writing this way, because I admire the writing of the authors I teach, and I do think of it as a sort of craftsmanship. It was too much, however, at certain times in my paper. I cannot claim to have been completely successful in my quest to simplify, but I did make an honest effort to do so on behalf of my audience.



I. I have facilitated new avenues of classroom, workplace, and public participation.

a. I think my product – visual dialogue – may be thought of exactly as a new avenue for participation in a different sort of learning. It is my hope, at any rate, that it will be seen and applied as such.

b. I did worry at times that there would be no demonstrable practical application to what I believed to be some pretty good ideas. Happily, as I noted above, being challenged to make “real” the abstract concept I was working with pushed me to find real uses for it. I acknowledge in my paper that I was able only to begin pondering practical uses, but also that I see a number of possibilities for future exploration.




J. To feed into my future learning and other work, I have taken stock of what has been working well and what needs changing.

a. This, to me, is the toughest question of the assessment. I think I have started to take stock of my tendency to choose big, sweeping themes or problems, and I am more certain now of what the implications are of doing so. At the same time, though, I find myself more and more interested in tackling these big items, in choosing the right threads to pull together, and in seeking higher understanding by taking command of what appear to be disparate parts. I have not been hand-cuffed by big thinking – generally, I am though of as one who gets things done despite being concerned with umbrella issues. However, I see that I may not always have the time to earn a command of the pieces that is truly satisfying to me (cognitive linguistics or creativity, for examples in my synthesis) in terms of connection making. Rethinking the themes I choose, or rethinking the timeframes I have for dealing with these, are both things to be considered further in moving forward.

II. DEVELOPING AS A REFLECTIVE PRACTITIONER, INCLUDING TAKING INITIATIVE IN AND THROUGH RELATIONSHIPS

1. I have integrated knowledge and perspectives from CCT and other courses into my own inquiry and engagement in social and/or educational change.

a. I think have done this well. Looking back at papers and notes from earlier classes, I see threads of my synthesis work throughout my years in the CCT Program. I perceive, too, an accumulation of tools and perspectives that have been invaluable in developing my work specifically and my approach generally. I entered the program hoping to better prepare myself for school leadership (which remains an interest), but I have been gratified to find that the program has re-focused and re-centered my classroom teaching. While there is plenty of work still to do in evolving strategies as a change-agent, I do believe that I find myself with broader and better perspectives, and with a significantly enhanced view of how to bring about change in a school environment.



2. I have also integrated into my own inquiry and engagement the processes, experiences, and struggles of previous courses.

a. I think my answer here is similar to the one immediately above. My thinking “tool box” has been quite expanded via my CCT experience, and I find myself using, referring to, suggesting, etc. newly found skills or processes frequently. In particular, I think that I have a better understanding of the places and ways I struggle, and I believe I have evolved somewhat in understanding how better to make use of my struggles as tools, rather than as impediments. There is no doubt in my mind, that this last point is among the most important of ways my CCT experience has advanced me: I now see struggle as a central part of good thinking. I always thought this is some way, but it is clearer to me now, and in such a way that my struggles are welcome parts of my work.




3. I have developed efficient ways to organize my time, research materials, computer access, bibliographies, etc.

a. I am pretty well-organized generally, but I certainly have learned some new strategies. I have not really had to use such things as flash drives or RefWorks before, but there is great appeal in doing so and in building a personal archive of research this way. I feel, too, that my command of research materials, notes, articles, etc. has advanced, because I expect that I will be revisiting many of these items in the future and want to have ready and sensible access to them.

4. I have experimented with new tools and experiences, even if not every one became part of my toolkit as a learner, teacher/facilitator of others, and reflective practitioner.

a. I have made an honest effort to try new tools, and have judged some to be keepers and others not as much my style. At the same time, I have a sense that some of the tools I have not fully committed to may have uses later on or on other projects. For this reason, I have taken great care to archive my CCT work. I know I will return to it – both in terms of what has been comfortable and with things that have thus far been less useful. I think I have done a good job, too, in trying out some of these tools outside the program. I have integrated a number of these into my teaching, and this has been one of the ways I’ve been able to understand the things that work well for me. Doing this – trying tools out with students – has been fun and very productive, and it has also re-focused my teaching. It has also added a different type of relevance to my efforts.


5. I have paid attention to the emotional dimensions of undertaking my own project but have found ways to clear away distractions from other sources (present & past) and not get blocked, turning apparent obstacles into opportunities to move into unfamiliar or uncomfortable territory.

a. There is no doubt that I entered into some of my work in CCT thinking I had a handle of the issue, problem or solution at hand. I offer as an explanation only that years of observation in some cases gave me a mistaken sense that I was thinking effectively in my work environment. A number of times, however, I have entered a project with an answer in mind and found out that I was either off-track or struggling with misperception, assumption, etc. This is perhaps the great lesson of my CCT experience – deep engagement is both desirous and worrisome in a thinking sense, and seeking the right proportion of it is the highest calling of the really visionary thinker. Clearing the way to better thinking is uncomfortable, but it is also crucial to “really” better thinking.




6. I have developed peer and other horizontal relationships. I have sought support and advice from peers, and have given support and advice to them when asked for.

a. I have very much valued working with my peers in various courses, and have found this to be an exceptional piece of the program. I do not think I have always been as involved in the larger CCT Community as I would like to have been, but I hope I have been able to offer perspective, advice, etc. in a way that has been helpful to some of my colleagues. In this regard, coming and participating in class has been great for me, and probably the element of the program I have most enjoyed. Being with other adult learners, in areas outside my expertise, with interested teachers – I’ve found this to be something of a thinking luxury.


7. I have taken the lead, not dragged my feet, in dialogue with my advisor and other readers. I didn't wait for the them to tell me how to solve an expository problem, what must be read and covered in a literature review, or what was meant by some comment I didn't understand. I didn't put off giving my writing to my advisor and other readers or avoid talking to them because I thought that they didn't see things the same way as I do.

a. I have tried to do well with this, but I admit to be being occasionally too independent in this regard. On the one hand, I am accustomed to working through problems and taking responsibility for outcomes on my own. I don’t think I have avoided divergent opinions in any way (I always try to avoid doing so), but I know that I can get going and a little out there on my own when time is tight. Ultimately, I think I have adopted some of that approach in trying to deal with having too much to do and not enough time to get to it, and with my own need to meet personal and professional deadlines. I am often uncomfortable with feeling that more time would yield better results, but in my work and life deadlines do matter.




8. I have revised seriously, which involved responding to the comments of others. I came to see this not as bowing down to the views of others, but taking them in and working them into my own reflective inquiry until I could convey more powerfully to others what I'm about (which may have changed as a result of the reflective inquiry).

I have tried to revise seriously, and have thought of peer and instructor feedback as being a valuable part of the evolution of my thinking. I do think the level of feedback from the instructors I’ve had has been exceptional, and that responding to the high-level of professional reflection has been helpful. I also have developed a keener sense for the role of different types of feedback, and of the importance of providing it to others. There is no doubt, to me, that meeting such challenges head on yields only positive outcomes: either a needed change in perspective; or a bolstered confidence in the position. Both are, in my opinion, fundamental to good thinking and good collaboration. I do recognize the tendency in all of us to get entrenched, but I have evolved a heightened sense of the importance of identifying such moments and working to get out of them quickly (and to better result).


9. I have inquired and negotiated about formal standards, but gone on to develop and internalize my own criteria for doing work—criteria other than jumping through hoops set by the professor so I get a good grade.

a. I am certain that my motivation to do well and to engage deeply has not been external or grade-oriented. Where I have been able to, I have made every attempt to meet all formal standards of expectation, but I have also had (at times) to negotiate between my CCT work, my professional obligations and my family. I am pretty detail oriented, and so it has not always been easy for me to recognize the trade-offs. Certainly, there are some things I missed as a result – my creative thinking and practicum courses were not as good for me as they might have been with better engagement. I have had the luxury of not worrying about the grades, as they are not really all that relevant to me in a larger sense. I entered the program to better myself, and see the grades only as an external measure. As a teacher, I would never mean this disrespectfully. As a reflection of expectations, grades matter. In marking my own progress, however, I have been able to set personal standards and I have met these more often than not.


10. I have approached the CCT synthesis course and the CCT program as works-in-progress, which means that, instead of harboring criticisms to submit after the fact, I have found opportunities to affirm what is working well and to suggest directions for further development.

a. I hope my engagement both in my synthesis and in the CCT program has been reciprocal in this way. I do not think such a program could be anything other than a work in progress, and I feel the same thing about my own learning. I believe, in fact, that the “work in progress” element is one of the most remarkable traits of the program. It is also highly reflective of the type of work and thinking the program promotes. I would say that there is a high level of programmatic meta-cognition, and I admire the faculty involved for embracing that sort of environment. It is, in my opinion, to the betterment of the program and to the students involved.

I am deeply thankful both for the time I have spent in the CCT program and of the time people (faculty, peers) have spent with and on me. I chose this program because I liked what appeared to be its novel approach. It has been everything I hoped it would be, and I could not be more pleased with the experience. Thank you!!