I have reflected on and responded to Finlay's (2008) article on Reflective Practice from the point of view of the teacher and in my role as a principal who strives to develop , equip and support reflective teaching practitioners.
Reflective practice is understood as the process of learning through and from experience towards gaining new insights of self and/or practice (Boud et al 1985; Boyd and Fales, 1983; Mezirow, 1981, Jarvis, 1992). This often involves examining assumptions of everyday practice. It also tends to involve the individual practitioner in being self-aware and critically evaluating their own responses to practice situations. The point is to recapture practice experiences and mull them over critically in order to gain new understandings and so improve future practice. This is understood as part of the process of life-long learning (page 1).
Done well and effectively, reflective practice can be an enormously powerful tool to examine and transform practice. Hobbs (2007) recommends that this self-development process be encouraged in any field whose members work with people (page 10).
"Reflective practice is both complex and situated and that it cannot work if applied mechanically or simplistically (page 2)."
Reflecting on this, I share my expectations with our whole staff at the start of every year.
One of the keys to growing a reflective culture is to achieve buy-in. This is a long process and walking the talk is a vital component. I model everything that I expect from my staff - and more.
I make no apologies for high standards because what we do is a profession and a calling.
I believe and constantly reiterate, we are the best chance some of our children ever have - so we must never give less than we would for our own flesh and blood.
We reflect on the difference between Compliance and Caring Professionalism.
Compliance is meeting the standard because you are required to.
Caring professionalism - in loco parentis - is setting an exceptional standard because you care.
As the professional and pedagogical leader my job is
To Be Present by regularly visit every classroom, sitting in on learning conferences.
To hold high expectations for all teachers at all times
To ensure all staff are all appraised every year.
To be transparent - no secrets, no hidden agendas, no *gossip.
To be accountable - the buck stops with me; all issues addressed
To set the Culture and Communicate It Constantly - Whanau Time talks, newsletter, Facebook posts, blog, Personal Professional Portfolio, web site, google sites, iPhone App.
*We addressed gossip as a staff as this is an issue in almost every work-place (due to the inherent foibles of human nature). As a staff we came up with the following response - “I’ll have to stop you right there. I think that is something you should take up with the person concerned.”
“Unless teachers develop the practice of critical reflection, they stay trapped in unexamined judgments, interpretations, assumptions, and expectations. Approaching teaching as a reflective practitioner involves fusing personal beliefs and values into a professional identity” (Larrivee, 2000, p.293) (page 2).
Dewey (1933) was among the first to identify reflection as a specialised form of thinking. He considered reflection to stem from doubt, hesitation or perplexity related to a directly experienced situation. For him, this prompted purposeful inquiry and problem resolution (Sinclair, 1998) (page 3).
Schon’s (1983) ‘The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action’. His main concern was to facilitate the development of reflective practitioners rather than describe the process of reflection per se. However, one of his most important and enduring contributions was to identify two types of reflection: reflection-on-action(after-the-event thinking) and reflection-in-action (thinking while doing).
In the case of reflection-on-action, professionals are understood consciously to review, describe, analyse and evaluate their past practice with a view to gaining insight to improve future practice. With reflection-in-action, professionals are seen as examining their experiences and responses as they occur (page 3).
This latter point is exemplified by the flexible teacher who is constantly reflecting on the learning and adjusting accordingly. It is also exemplified by the teacher who is constantly aware of the "teachable moment", who is able to change course (lesson/topic/curriculum focus) as the needs, interests arise.
Zeichner and Liston (1996) differentiate between five different levels at which reflection can take place during teaching:
Rapid reflection - immediate, ongoing and automatic action by the teacher.
Repair – in which a thoughtful teacher makes decisions to alter their behaviour in response to students’ cues.
Review – when a teacher thinks about, discusses or writes about some element of their teaching.
Research – when a teacher engages in more systematic and sustained thinking over time, perhaps by collecting data or reading research.
Retheorizing and reformulating – the process by which a teacher critically examines their own practice and theories in the light of academic theories (page 4).
The first two are examples of teaching in action. From my perspective and experience, when I am teaching, I am pumped. I feel adrenalin, I feel the challenge of engaging my learners, challenging them, achieving the learning purposes and drawing the best out of my learners.
Once the "contest" is over (in sporting parlance), the challenge is to turn back and reflect critically rather than emotionally. Critical reflection focuses on the elements three and five. Emotional reflection focuses on the 'buy-in' from learners, the success or otherwise of the learning outcomes focus.
Elements three through five are harder to achieve. They are not necessary after every lesson, but rather at regular points throughout each semester for example.
Ekebergh (2006) draws on phenomenological philosophy to argue that it is not possible to distance oneself from the lived situation to reflect in the moment. To achieve real self-reflection, she asserts, one needs to step out of the situation and reflect retrospectively (van Manen, 1990) (page 5).
I disagree, from recent experience leading learning with my staff, I am constantly reflecting "on the move", adjusting my approach, delivery, pacing, energy levels, voice and pitch to suit the situation at that specific moment in time. I am seeking cues - visual, physical, ephemeral, body language, facial expression and more - and mentally reflecting on what adjustments need to be made on the fly. Sometimes those cues tell me to stop and question my learners about the bigger picture rather than the specific one. Sometimes they lead to a decision to bring in movement, discussion, reflection, action, or a change of topic or approach.
Reflective practice is seen as a synthesis of reflection, self-awareness and critical thinking (Eby, 2000).
Other authors argue for the concept of critical reflection, which is seen as offering a more thorough-going form of reflection through the use of critical theory (Brookfield, 1995). For adherents of critical reflection, reflection on its own tends to “remain at the level of relatively undisruptive changes in techniques or superficial thinking” (Fook, White and Gardner, 2006, p.9) (pages 5 and 6).
Brookfield (1995) characterises critical reflection as ‘stance and dance’. The critically reflective teacher’s stance toward teaching is one of inquiry and being open to further investigation. The dance involves experimentation and risk towards modifying practice while moving to fluctuating, and possibly contradictory, rhythms (Larrivee, 2000) (page 6).
Of all the theories on reflective practice that I have seen, this "stance and dance" model is one that I identify with most closely. My teaching process is inquiry in action. For learning to be owned the learner must be engaged, must see purpose and possibility, must face questions and challenges, but be able to do so from a (reasonably) secure base or foundation of some knowledge, understanding and/or experience (making a personal connection).
Finlay and Gough (2003, p. ix) find it helpful to think of these concepts forming a continuum. At one end stands reflection, defined simply as ‘thinking about’ something after the event. At the other end stands reflexivity: a more immediate and dynamic process which involves continuing self-awareness. Critical reflection lies somewhere in between (page 6).
Finlay refers to Introspective reflection being the dominant model. From personal experience, I agree that this has often been the dominant model in use where reflection was planned for or a focus in the education setting.
Introspective reflection requires one to mentally step back from the situation, to see it objectively. I have often found myself spending long periods of time grinding through a problem, striving over and over to find the solution, and then being forced to step away to do something else and the solution suddenly "appearing" in my mind. That stepping away, that allowing of the subconscious to process and work its magic is so important.
My concern with Introspection as a model is the old saw of, "how do you know what you don't know, if you don't know what you don't know."
This is where adding an element of objectivity from a trusted outside source is valuable - a fresh pair of eyes, a sounding board and a prompt.
I developed a Reflective practice model while at Pomaria school back in 1999. Teachers paired up with a trusted colleague.
Teacher A observed Teacher B and videoed 15 minutes of the model lesson.
Both teachers watched their videos and agreed upon an aspect of the teaching and learning process for each to focus on
Goals were set in relation to the focus
Two or three weeks later they observed and videod lessons again
Both teachers again watched the videos and identified progress made and Next Learning Steps
A one paragraph summary of this was then sent to me as principal.
I then had a focal point when I undertook a classroom observation - and I could make suggestions for future focus points if necessary
This process was then extended to teachers sharing their video clips with their teaching team colleagues and providing context, explanations and answering (often challenging - but positively couched) questions from their colleagues.
This ties in well with Finlay's point where she refers to the work of Jay and Johnson (2002).
Jay and Johnson (2002). developed a typology of reflection involving three intertwined dimensions: descriptive, comparative and critical reflection. In the descriptive dimension, the practitioner describes the matter for reflection, e.g. “What is happening?” “Is this working, and for whom?” “How am I feeling?” “What do I not understand?”. In the comparative dimension, the practitioner reframes the matter for reflection in the light of alternative views, perspectives and research: “How do other people who are directly or indirectly involved describe and explain what is happening?” “What does research contribute to an understanding of this matter?” “How can I improve what is not working?”. Then in the critical dimension a new perspective is established: “What are the implications of the matter when viewed from these alternative perspectives? Given these various alternatives, their implications, and my own morals and ethics, which is best for this particular matter?” “What does this matter reveal about the moral and political dimension of schooling?” “How does this reflective process inform and renew my perspective?” (page 8)
Finlay's concern with the above model is the lack of reflective dialogue. My model introduced and addressed that.
A further problem to do with the impact on the individual reflector is the way reflection can involve constant striving for self-improvement. It can lead to feelings of self- disapproval and self-rejection (Quinn, 1988/2000). And if an individual understands the word ‘critical’ to mean ‘negative’, they can end up in an unduly negative frame of mind (page 11)...
... a greater problem is posed by the way practitioners appropriate and embrace them in uncritical, piecemeal and reductionist ways (page 14).
Once students have begun to engage reflection and can see a positive value in it, structured models could be offered to help them deepen their thinking (page 15).
My response to these valid concerns is that Reflective practice is a process that must be taught, modelled, reflected on, and be couched within a comprehensive Learning programme that contextualises it and ensures all involved :
see the big picture
have a growth mindset
feel supported
see themselves as learners
speak "learnish" as their lingua franca on a daily basis
Conclusion
“We have to see ourselves less as transmitters of expert knowledge and more as facilitators of critical learning and perspective transformation. As Boud et al. (1993, p.9) state, ‘while we commonly assume that teaching leads to learning, it is the experiences which teaching helps create that prompt learning, not primarily the acts of the teacher’.” (Redmond, 2006, p.226) (page 15).
An honest self-appraisal conducted in conjunction with peers is one of the hallmarks of an effective promoter of reflection (page 20).
Finlay concludes... The key is how well - how effectively - reflective practice is done (or taught). Does it embody professional artistry, encourage critical self-aware evaluation and embrace transformation and change? Or is reflective practice bland and mechanical with practitioners disinclined to ask awkward questions? How should models of reflection be used and in what context? We need to continue to reflect critically on these questions. Then, reflective practice will fulfill its potential to help us “make sense of the uncertainty in our workplaces” and offer us the “courage to work competently and ethically at the edge of order and chaos” (Ghaye, 2000, p.7) (page 20).