Critical Reflective Dialogue
The learning dyad created by Ofer and myself in order to investigate our practice used critical reflective dialogue as the most intensive technique of knowledge exploration. The contribution of reflexive practice in human science's research has been previously stated in many publications and will be reviewed in the chapter. The specific contribution to our research will be explored. The significance of a student reflection on the teacher has not been investigated enough before, looking at both teacher and the student developed by it, and will be emphasised in this study.
Using reflective dialogue in an apprenticeship framework, we extracted tacit knowledge from Ofer's professional practice, made it explicit, and enhanced, producing improved professional knowledge to be utilised practice.
We devoted long periods of time, to our, extensive, reflective discussions about our cases and our insights resulting from our professional theoretical reading. In this process of professional peer critical reflection, and review, I presented vignettes from my case and explained my therapeutic decision-making processes, to Anat. This was the first time in my career that I attempted to articulate and elevate my practical work in professional academic terms. As a less experienced practitioner, the main part of Anat's learning process was based on exploring and analysing the therapeutic vignettes which I described and reflecting upon them. Anat provided vital theoretical feedback, derived from her theoretical knowledge and her evolving psychotherapeutic capabilities.
Anat and I understood that these reflective discussions would contribute to the general goal of the Ed.D. process which is to extract the tacit knowledge within the work of the practitioner-researcher and make it explicit so that it can be transferable and utilise by another practitioner. We understood that although a practitioner has theoretical knowledge and professional experience, which he utilise in his cases, his decision-making process in real time is intuitive, and is derived from unconscious tacit and embedded knowledge. Transformation of tacit and embedded practitioner knowledge into explicit knowledge becomes a possibility when a colleague reflects upon the other’s work. When a practitioner discusses his intervention with a colleague, he becomes aware of these subconscious elements of his decisions for intervention, in a similar manner to a process of psychoanalysis. These elements can then be elaborated, expanded, logically conceptualised, analysed, and improved.
Through reflective dialogue, Anat participated in the process of extraction of the tacit knowledge from within my practice. The knowledge became explicit, was developed and enhanced. Together we developed and expanded our understandings in a democratic setting used for the production and transformation of professional practitioner knowledge.