Critical Moments Reflection Methodology
Center for Reflective Community Practice @ MIT
Over the past six years, the Center for Reflective Community Practice (CRCP) at MIT
has developed a methodology, called Critical Moments Reflection (CMR), to help people
reflect on their past experiences. This methodology is based on the idea that learning
begins with the examination of actual experiences and perspectives on those experiences.
The CMR methodology leads groups of people through a reflective process that helps
people step back from their experiences, review their understanding of those experiences,
and draw lessons that they can use to improve their future actions or work. The goal of
the CMR methodology is to enable individuals and groups to uncover or create
knowledge from their own experiences for improving their future actions.
How Does it Work?
The CMR process traditionally consists of four steps, though it is a flexible process that
can be adapted to meet the specific needs of a group.
1. Setting the frame and identifying inquiry questions for the reflection. The
methodology consists of a process that begins with the definition of the general purpose
for which the knowledge to be generated will be used. This general purpose or frame for
the reflection process is formulated as an overarching question, that has implications for
the subject of the learning and the time period that the reflection will cover. For example,
a framing question for a participatory evaluation could be: What can we learn about what
worked or did not work so well from the perspective of program beneficiaries during the
first year of the program’s operations that will help improve the program for future years?
This overarching question indicates that the subject of the reflection is the effectiveness
of program operations from the perspective of program beneficiaries, and the time frame
is the first year of program activities.
In function to this frame or overarching question, the participants of the reflection define
more concrete questions (referred to as “Inquiry Questions”) that reflect participants’
individual expectations about what they would like to be able to answer with the
reflective process. Once these questions have been formulated individually, the group
reviews each of the questions and engages in a process of reformulating and prioritizing
the questions until they are able to select one top inquiry question that reflects the shared
expectations of the group.
2. Generating critical moments. Participants then set aside their inquiry question and step
back into their past by reflecting on their experience and identifying important events that
represented critical shifts, either positive or negative, in this experience. These events are
referred to as “critical moments.” Participants share their critical moments and organize
them in a timeline that illustrates the evolution of the whole experience.
3. Selecting critical moments for further analysis. The facilitator then re-introduces to
the group the top inquiry question that the group identified in step 2 above, and asks the
participants to select the critical moments that, if they analyzed in greater detail, would
help them answer their top inquiry question. Because the critical moments timeline often
sheds new light on the experience, the group participants often slightly revise their
inquiry question at this point to reflect any new learnings or revelations that the group
may have experienced, and then select the critical moments that, upon further analysis,
would have implications on their revised inquiry question.
4. Storytelling, lessons and implications for inquiry question. Participants then describe
and analyze the selected moments in detail by telling the stories behind the moments and
responding to the probing questions asked by the facilitator. All this process enables the
participants to share, reflect on and analyze the experiences behind the critical moments
in order to identify lessons learned and the implications of these lessons for answering the
inquiry question and moving their work forward.
Conditions for its Successful Application
The CMR process is typically conducted in groups of 12 to 15 people who have some
sort of common experience and a shared vision for the future. For the application of the
methodology to be successful, there are five main conditions that are needed.
1. Time. It generally takes a small group of ten participants, two and a half days (or 20
hours) minimum to go through the entire process. If there are multiple small groups
participating in a reflection, a half day is required at the beginning for the full group to
come together, and then an additional full day at the end in order to create the space for
the groups to share and reflect with each other on the knowledge that they uncovered
during the individual group sessions. CRCP has learned through previous experiences
that anything less than two and a half days for one group, and three and half days for
multiple groups can severely compromise the process.
2. Voluntary participation. People’s participation in a reflection process must be
voluntary if the end goal of the reflection is to promote the participants’ individual and
collective learning. If people are not interested in learning, then the reflection becomes
an exercise of collecting information on people’s past experiences, and thus ceases to be
a learning event for the participants.
3. Continuity in participation. Since the various parts of the CMR process build on each
other, it is imperative that people be committed to engage in the entire learning process,
and not leave the process half way. As the reflection unfolds the participants generate
ideas and reflect upon elements that have emerged formerly and the common
understandings that have already been achieved. The departure of any participant from
the reflection process before it ends presents challenges for continuing the dialogue and
slows down the learning.
4. Trustworthy facilitators. To help people gain new perspectives on themselves and
their work, it is necessary for the facilitators to possess a specific skills set that is
obtained only through substantial practice. This skills set is necessary for facilitators to
lead these types of reflection processes. Similarly, the facilitators should be able to open
pathways to help the participants to reframe their ideas and engage in new levels of
understanding and dialogue. The facilitator also has to create an adequate level of trust
among the group and between her and the group. Without an adequate level of trust,
participants hold back knowledge that is key to advancing the reflection.
5. Participation of all regardless of power differentials. It is necessary to be sensible to
the power dynamics that inevitably arise in a group from status (leader/non-leader),
gender, class, age, education, race/ethnicity differentials in any group of diverse
individuals prior to the design and implementation of a reflection to ensure that any
power differentials are adequately managed to ensure equal participation of all in the
process. True knowledge building can only happen if dialogue between the participants
happens horizontally on the same level. This horizontal dialogue is a precondition for
everyone in a group to be willing and able to share, provide input, and together make
meaning of their experiences. If some people in a group impose their ideas on the group
without adequate reasoning, the dialogue shrinks and the learning during a reflection is
negatively impacted.
Output
An important component of the reflection process relates to the documentation of the
stories, critical moments and lessons that emerge throughout the process so that it can be
given back to the participants for their own future use. CRCP documents the discussions
in a variety of ways, such as through charts (written form), video, sound files, drawings,
diagrams, pictures, etc. Other ways to document the process while interacting with
participants are: timelines with index cards, forms, diaries, and other supporting materials
that also capture emotions and thoughts, etc.
Through this documentation process, participants create a diversity of knowledge
materials that can be used in the future by themselves and by other groups of people.
These knowledge materials must be useful for the participants if they are to be valued by
them.
Its Principles
The methodology is based on six principles that CRCP considers are important for not
only uncovering knowledge that people generate from their experiences, but also for
promoting the value of experience-based knowledge and its use.
1. Participants have control of the learning process
This principle refers to the need of the organizers and facilitators of the reflective process
to create the enabling conditions for the participants to effectively maintain the ownership
of their own learning process. This ownership should be expressed in the participant’s
effective control over the purpose and outcomes of the learning process.
2. Authentic learning starts with collaborative design
This principle refers to the need for the participants to have decision-making power over
the process from the beginning. The participants should decide the purposes and main
characteristics of the learning process, and thus should participate actively in those design
processes in which these decisions are made.
3. Reflective learning originates in the questions of those doing the work
This principle states that the participants should generate the questions that will guide the
reflective learning. An important condition for this principle to be upheld is that the
participants should be working together, in some way, and that the improvement of this
work should be the main purpose of the learning activity.
4. Learning is driven by analysis of critical moments in the work of the participants
This principle states the importance of the retrieval of critical moments as the starting
point for the reviewing of the experience and the central role of the analysis of the critical
moments in driving the actual reflection activity. The critical moments should emerge
from the common experience of the participants.
5. A focus on learning supports effective cross-group dialogue
This principle refers to the important role that common learning interests have in create a
cross-group dialogue. Shared learning interests are required for overcoming any barriers
or social tensions between participants or groups. If this shared learning interests are
lacking or unclear the cross-group dialogue is not likely to happen.
6. Participants control the recording process and use of recorded materials
This principle is about the participants’ ownership of the knowledge and materials they
generate through the learning process and the need to ensure that any use of these
material be decided democratically by them. An important condition required to uphold
this principle is that the participants are willing and able manage and use the knowledge
materials.
The conditions that are necessary for the methodology to be used are:
1. Participants of the reflection must have a common experience in order for the
methodology to be able to help participants go from the experience of individuals
to the experience of the group. The participants must have been part of the same
experience, in some sense. The common experience, perceived differently by
each participant, is the main factor that connects the individuals, enriches the
perceptions of the individuals, and drives the shared reflection of the group. If the
experiences of the participants have no common elements, the critical moments of
one participant are not meaningful to the other participants, and the learning
driven by the reflection gets no synergy from the group.
2. A condition for participants to be able to generate powerful questions that will
drive the learning is that they, in some way, have a shared vision for the future of
their work or actions. This shared vision for the future includes, but is not limited
to, the overcoming of current common challenges. If the participants lack of a
shared interest for their future work it is very difficult for them to construct
questions that will guide the reflective and critical thinking of the different
participants as a group.
3. The participation in a reflective process needs to yield fruitful results for the
participants. For maintaining their participation, people need to perceive that the
results of the learning activity deserve the time and the effort they have invested.
This positive relationship between time and results should be made visible
throughout the process and not only at its end. The energy of the participants
needs to be constantly maintained by generating meaningful results for their work
and personal life. The relationship between the reflection and the improvement of
the work of the participants is highly relevant for the sustainability of the learning
dynamic of groups.
Its Development
During the past six years, CRCP has been developing the methodology and testing it for a
variety of purposes: (1) uncovering tacit knowledge; (2) generating lessons from past
group experiences; (3) re-constructing and learning from the historical processes of
neighborhoods; and (4) implementing participatory evaluations to improve programs or
other initiatives.
1. Uncovering tacit and dispersed knowledge
The methodology has been used to enable groups of experienced practitioners from a
specific field to reflect on their work and begin to articulate some of the tacit knowledge
that they have generated over the years from their practice.
2. Generating lessons from past group experiences
CRCP has also used the methodology to help people from a variety of positions in society
(such as public officials, residents and non-profit organization workers) who are working
together on a specific issue or project to come together and obtain a shared understanding
of their individual and collective experiences associated with that issue or project, and the
lessons that can be drawn from those experiences to improve their future work.
3. Re-constructing and learning from the historical processes of neighborhoods
In Boston, CRCP has used the methodology to help residents of Villa Victoria in the
South End reconstruct the history of community organizing in their neighborhood in
order to understand the impact that this work has had on their lives over the years and
identify lessons for orienting their future neighborhood engagement efforts.
4. Implementing participatory evaluations to improve programs or other initiatives
Lastly, CRCP has used the methodology to help organizations implement participatory
evaluations, whereby administrators, beneficiaries and other participants of programs
come together to reflect on certain experiences associated with the program that require
better understanding. Through this increased understanding of the individual and
collective experiences, lessons for improving future interventions of the program or
organization will.
People interested in applying the methodology should be aware that each kind of
application has its particular requirements, both at the level of the method and of the
participants.
The methodology has been validated in over 30 workshops or reflective seminars that
have been part of CRCP projects. These experiences have not only shown the
effectiveness of the methodology for enabling reflective processes of groups of people,
but have also made possible the development and strengthening of the methodology’s
main mechanisms, processes and tools.
However, the methodology is still in a developmental stage as its principles and the
conditions necessary to uphold these principles are still being refined. In addition, the
methodology still needs to be systematized and the tools necessary for training others to
apply the methodology are still in early stages of development.