Research in Organizational Development Banner

Date(s) - 02/11/2017 - 15/12/2017
All Day

Journal of Research in Organizational Development


Inform Your Practice, Inform Your Community – Reflections on Organizational and Role Development, A Call for Papers

Professional reflection’s purpose is two-fold (Sellars, 2012): 1) generate changes that improve practice (Calderhead, 1989; Gay & Kirkland, 2003; Kemmis, 2011; Rolfe, Freshwater, & Jasper, 2001; Scanlan & Chernomas, 1997; Schon, 1991; Schuck, Gordon, & Buchanan, 2008; Wildman & Niles, 1987) and 2) foster personal wisdom on one’s practice (Abell, Bryan, & Anderson, 1998; Akbari, 2007; Boud, et al., 1985; Gay & Kirkland, 2003).

The support of reflective practices denote several essential concepts, 1) practitioners have an equal part in creating knowledge (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993), 2) competent practitioners offer knowledge-in-action expertise (Schon, 1983), 3)  the sense-making process improving one’s practice initiates from self-reflection and experiential wisdom (Zeichner, 2008), 4) enables practitioners to internalize training and empowers their willingness and skills in gleaning from personal experience throughout their careers (Feiman- Nemser, 2001).

Zeichner (2008) offers several failures of current reflective educational practices that undermining genuine development: 1) a focus on research practice replication neglecting, rather than empowering, practitioners practical judgment (Schon, 1983, Valli, 1992, Zeichner, 1995, Boud & Walker, 1998), 2) a means to an end thinking rather than thinking about the ends toward which practitioners have directed their attention, thus limiting profound reflection and analysis to technical technique questions, 3) an emphasis on facilitating isolated reflections regarding personal practice and ignoring the social and institutional their practice’s context (Grossman, Wineburg, & Woolworth, 2001; Little, 2002; McLaughlin & Talbert, 2006.)

Call for Papers: Reflections on Organizational and Role Development

This Call for Reflections seeks to mitigate those failures by noting these errors and asking educators to critically reflect on and analyze a specific practice or experience through a founded model of reflection that is guided by the practitioners goal instead of being justified by the reflection’s completion and is in connection with other educators actively reflecting and sharing their experiences.

A variety of reflective models or frameworks for reflection exist (see Models of Reflection) encouraging a structured, guided reflection that draws the practitioner towards a more critical experience analysis. While no right model exists, the practitioner, we encourage practitioners to use the model with which they feel most comfortable to base their submission on. Additionally, we asked that practitioners offer a brief review of the literature to situate their contact, experience, and challenge aptly within the reflection.

The Journal of Research in Organizational Development (RiOD) invites organizational leaders, i.e., executive management, Board Members (individual submissions), Board of Director (organizational submissions), etc. to submit reflections on their current practices within your specific organizational setting. For example, an organization’s President may reflect on his/her role within the organization, and submit a reflection on his/her personal experience in that capacity.


Submission should contain the following descriptive information to aid the readers in your context:

  1. Brief Program/Course Description
  2. Brief Description of your role & responsibilities
  3. Discussion of your goals
  4. Discussion of your opportunities
  5. Discussions of issues / challenges / obstacles
  6. Discussion of strengths
  7. Reflection

Guiding Questions

Questions to consider for inclusion in your reflection.

  1. Discussion of actions taken (by whom)
    1. Causes – What initiated the action
    2. Literature Review – Action/intervention support
    3. Description of the Action/intervention
  2. Discussion of Effects (what worked or didn’t; why or why not)
  3. Discussion of Next Steps
    1. What do you need (Support or Resources)?
    2. What actions will you take (why)?
    3. What do you hope to achieve?
    4. What is your timetable?

Submissions will be double, blind peer-reviewed, should include an abstract up to 500 words, up to 10 references utilizing APA style formatting, and be between 1500-and 6000 words long.

Submit Now