{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02103491796381994, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0008413967185527977, 'mean_word_length': 5.7175141242937855, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Designing reflective dialogue to support learning from experience

This paper discusses the design and use of a web-based application-"virtual dialectic"-created to facilitate learning from experience among distributed participants who are also engaged in work. The approach taken in developing this application embraces the observation that language is a form of action and the importance of technological design in helping people manage "break down" in ongoing activities [1]. The virtual dialectic, unlike many CSCW systems, is not designed to directly support the conduct of some particular work practice. Instead, the application addresses how people make sense of communication at work and in professional life with the goal of helping individuals develop their self-understanding and identity as professionals. The application draws users attention to aspects of organizational action they might otherwise take for granted by providing "micro" and "macro" tools for participants to orchestrate their distant interaction as a type of reflective dialogue.The virtual dialectic application is an interesting case for those interested in the language action perspective on communication modeling because this application explores, essentially, how to articulate cooperation at conflict. Such a design goal may, on its face, seem odd since many CSCW systems are geared toward the achievement of consensus and intersubjectivity among users. Alterity, disagreement, and conflict, however, are important collaborative achievements that contribute to learning, decision-making, and innovation processes.This paper has two parts. First, the key aspects of the virtual dialectic application are described relative to the background assumptions, and the context of development, that inform its design. This section outlines the rationale for framing design as the management of disagreement rather than the management of consensus. The broader design assumptions, requirements, and procedures of the virtual dialectic are described in derail elsewhere [2]. Second, an example of online interaction using the virtual dialectic is discussed to illustrate the complex ways in which participants avoid and express opposition. The main purpose is to explore the important puzzle managing disagreement presents for designing systems to support processes such as learning and deliberation.