"I thought about it properly" is only halfway there

When I have students write reflections at the end of class, I sometimes encounter students like this.

"I thought about it properly."

When I talk to them, they are indeed thinking about various things in their heads. However, almost nothing is written on the paper.

For the students, they have the feeling that they have "thought it through," so that is where they consider it finished.

But can that really be called "thinking"?

The same thing is happening with teachers in the field

Recently, I have come to feel that this is not just a story about students.

In schools, there are many opportunities to observe classes.

However, when it comes to the subsequent class review meetings, sometimes they end with just impressions like "I learned a lot today" or "Teacher so-and-so was amazing."

Furthermore, after the review meeting is over, surprisingly few teachers leave their insights behind in writing.

Even looking at Facebook after a study group,

"It was great!"
"It was so exciting!"
"I was inspired!"

There are many posts like these.

Of course, that emotion is genuine.

However, there are not that many posts that go as far as writing "What did I notice?" "Why did I feel that way?" or "How does this connect to my own practice?"

I think this is a great waste.

Language has an "inward" and an "outward" side

Please let me talk a little bit about language here.

We also use language in our heads to think. It is language for ourselves that we do not speak aloud. In psychology, this is called "inner speech."

On the other hand, language that we speak aloud or write down, in other words, language that we put out toward others, is called "outer speech."

Inward-facing words and outward-facing words.

Using this distinction, we can see that reflection has at least three stages.

1. Thinking only within one's head (inner speech)

2. Speaking to bring it out (outer speech through spoken language)

3. Writing to bring it out (outer speech through written language)

Stage 1 is the phase of thinking within oneself.

By stage 2, because you are trying to convey your realizations to others, your thoughts become slightly more organized. Through dialogue with others, you can also gain new perspectives.

However, spoken language has the characteristic of being easily swayed by the momentum or impressions of the moment.

On the other hand, when it comes to stage 3, written language, the situation changes.

When you try to put things into writing,

"What did I realize?" (Realization)
"Why did I think that?" (Process)
"What is the background to this?" (Background)

you are forced to ask yourself these questions.

In other words, the act of writing itself deepens your thinking further.

So, why does this happen?

There is someone who clearly demonstrated the background to these three stages.

What Vygotsky taught us

The psychologist Vygotsky, in "Thought and Language," says something to this effect:

A thought is not expressed in words; it is completed in words.

This means that a thought is not already fully formed and then copied into words. The very process of putting it into words is what finishes the thought.

Then, what about inner speech?

According to Vygotsky, inner speech is extremely compressed language. The subject is dropped, and only the predicate remains. Since you already know the topic, there is no need to go out of your way to state the subject.

In other words, inner speech is language that only you can understand.

That is why students get the feeling that they have "thought about it properly." Within themselves, it certainly makes sense.

The interesting part starts here.

Vygotsky placed written language at the opposite pole of this inner speech. If inner speech is the most compressed form of language, written language is the most expanded. There is no listener in front of you. There is no help from the situation. Therefore, you have no choice but to put everything into words.

Spoken language lies in between. Because there is a listener and a context, it can be understood to some extent even while remaining compressed.

The three stages I was feeling were lined up exactly along this axis of "from compression to expansion."

If that is the case, what are we doing when we write a reflection?

We are fully expanding language that only we understand into language that anyone can understand. It is in the middle of that expansion that our thoughts are finally completed.

I believe that is what it means for "external speech through written language" to reconstruct our thinking.

The meaning of writing a reflection

That is why I tell my students, "If you have thought about it properly, let's try writing it down."

And I think the same can be said for teachers in the field.

I observed the class.

We discussed it.

It was lively.

It is a bit of a shame to end it there.

That is because your thoughts are still compressed.

Even if it is just for a few minutes at the end,

"What was it that I truly realized today?"

Try writing it down.

With those few lines, your thoughts are finally complete.
That might become the power to change the next class.

Reflection is not about leaving a "record".

I believe it is an activity of nurturing your own thinking once more by writing.

(Reference: Vygotsky, "Thinking and Speech," new translation, translated by Yoshimatsu Shibata, Shindokusho-sha, 2001)