Upon reading “Reader 2”, I struggled to find any relevance
to myself as it seemed to relate to performers. As I got further into the
document, I found myself relating more and more to the way I identify my
experiences as it states in the reader.
I particularly found my experiences relating to “Donald
Schon’s” idea of “Reflection-in-action” and “Relection-on-action”. Both of
these ideas relate to many aspects of what I do within my profession, for
example, if I were filming something such a single camera drama, I would be
using “Reflection-on-action” because I would be able to plan the shoot using
current knowledge and past filming experiences. There is also the opportunity,
if cast members are available, to correct anything filmed that has gone wrong. In
addition, some mistakes may be rectified in the editing process.
An example relating to “Schon’s” idea of “Reflection-in-action”
is, if I were filming a live event, I would have to make sure that everything
was going well throughout the shoot and if anything were to go wrong, I would
have to “think on my feet” so to speak, and rectify the problem there and then.
When reading further
into the reader, I also found myself questioning what type of learner I was,
Visual, Auditory or Kinaesthetic. As part of my teacher training I had to
identify these learning styles using different methods, however I never thought
about what type of learner I was.
Thinking about it, If I am learning something technical I am
one hundred percent Visual, learning a lot quicker when being shown a new piece
of technology.
I found “David Kolb’s” idea of a “Learning Cycle”
interesting in this reader, and it was a particular point that got me thinking
for the future of my journals. It seems
to me that the four steps, “Concrete Experience”, “Reflective Observation”, “Abstract
Conceptualisation” and “Active Experiment” would be an extremely good technique
for breaking down my experiences and help myself learn from them. (The learning
cycle is on Page 6 of the reader).
Now that I have read “Reader 2”, I feel more confident about
the future of my journals and have also realised how much of the techniques and
ideas throughout I have used, even before doing Professional Practice.
Hi Danny, without professions such as yourself MGM would never have been able to produce the wonderful "Singing in the rain" movie, with Gene Kelly performing a flawless (title) routine, this also increased the popularity of dance by bringing it to a wider audience. without the camera, media equipment and talented technicians this would certainly not have been possible. Would this be reflection-in-action too?
ReplyDeleteI believe in some cases it would... it depends whether the routines were filmed multi camera, and in one take as they were to some sort of schedule, which in those days considering the amount of studio time they had they would rehearse for longer than they would film.
ReplyDeleteAlso they didn't have the digital editing that we have today so everything would have to be shot to perfection as the studio wouldn't be able to correct as easily as it can be done nowadays.
The pre-production that must have gone into films in those days would have been much more intricate than it is today... if you think about it films are generally released within a year of it being announced (depending on the technicality of the movie) for instance, there is a lot of CGI in movies today, so these types of films will also have a more intricate way of developing the pre-production.
You have got me intrigued by this movie now, I shall look into this more and hopefully have a definite answer.
Thank you for opening my eyes further into the connection between your profession and mine... this will definitely help with my reflection throughout this process :D
Hope this answers your question.