RUNNING HEAD : Critical Reflection Supporting a Critical Reflection Process

The increasing focus of reflective practices within higher education settings has left many wondering what a successful process of reflection entails. Reflection based instructional strategies have been promoted as a way to support a transition of knowledge into implementalable skills with little evidence for the effectiveness (Cook, Young, Evensen, 2001). Instructors in higher education, continue to develop courses with strong focus on students’ engagement with reflective learning without having a clear idea of how to foster such practices for students. The purpose of the study was to determine the effectiveness of a framework for reflection and the use of feedback to increase students’ incorporation of the components of a critical reflection into their learning journal entries. A rating rubric to measure the change in students’ reflection process was also piloted during the study. Due to the limitations of the study and the lack of valid measurement instrument, the results of the study were unable to be analyzed to determine effectiveness of the intervention. The discussion section presents considerations and direction for future research within the area of critical reflection practices. Critical Reflection 3 Introduction Preservice teacher education programs aim to create supportive learning environments that allow students to take the information they learn and transfer to skills and knowledge that can be implemented within their future careers settings (McKeachie & Svinicki, 2006). While transfer of learning into application is a consistent goal across higher education programs, accomplishment of an application outcome is not always achieved or supported (Gustky, 1999). Teachers, as a result, continue to report in their first years as educators feeling unprepared to work with their students and meet the demands of their job(Hammond, 2000; Hammond, Chung, & Frelow, 2002; Lewis et al., 1998). Students at times are left to figure out a process on their own for how to transfer the information they acquired in their higher education program to use within their professional roles. With the continued problem of application of knowledge, preservice programs in higher education are often labeled as an unsuccessful professional development experience. In an effort to address national concerns about the quality of professional development, the higher education community continues to examine what must be done to ensure students can use the skills they have acquired within their training program (Loughran, Brown, & Doecke, 2001). One way instructors have began to address a more supportive transition process is through the use of reflective practices (Brookfield, 1995). Implementation of reflective-based activities has provided instructors with considerations for what students must know and be able to do to take what they have learned and be able to implement within their future careers. While the basis of reflective practices has been around for several years, the increase of use has lead many to question what is know about the instructional strategy and how it can be used effectively to support students’ learning. Critical Reflection 4 Review of the Literature Increased implementation of reflective practices with preservice teachers has lead to diverse descriptions of the practice throughout the literature. As instructors use the strategy within their classrooms, the practice continues to be redefined and interpreted differently by the instructors that utilize the approach and by the students that are expected to engage in the process. Some models of critical reflection presents a process encompassing stages that one must pass through to engage in a complete reflection cycle (e.g., Hoban, 2000; Kolb, 1985). Other models present a list of elements to be considered for successful reflective practices to occur (e.g., Basile, Olson, Nathenson-Mejia, 2003; Larrivee, 2000). As instructors incorporate reflection based learning into their course design, students are being asked to reflect on what they have learned or experienced with little guidance of how to approach such a process (Martin, 2005). Even when clear directions of what instructors expect are presented, every student may still approach the task with a unique perspective of the process. In a study conducted by Pedro (2005), students revealed that after engagement in required reflection activities, they did not have a clear understanding of what reflection entailed and were unable to define the meaning of the process. Students participating in the study demonstrated the ability to incorporate a reflective process into their writing; however, the results of the study did not reflect a clear understanding of what influenced the change in the reflective practices. Sustainability and use of a reflective process after training, was also identified as a concern by the researcher, due to the fact that students were unable to define the process after the study was complete. In part, miscommunication and different interpretations of reflection among instructors and students may be a result of non-agreement among professionals in the field of what reflection entails (SparksCritical Reflection 5 Langer, Simmons, Pasch, Colton, & Strako, 1990). For reflection to be meaningful for both instructors and students, a common vision of the process must be achieved. As students engage in classroom and practicum situations during their preservice training, they take away different views of benefit from their experiences. An effective framework for reflection supports and allows representation of the diverse perspectives of students, but also allow for a joint understanding between students and instructors of what the process will resemble. Hunt (2001) conducted a study in which the results revealed a very different understanding of the outcome of reflection between students and instructors. The instructors that participated in the study were more focused on the quality of the students writing products, while the students were more focused on the quality of the process. Lack of a clear and agreed upon purpose and definition of reflection presents many challenges when you consider how you might teach or guide students towards a critical reflection process. The goal of reflection continues to be defined as a means for supporting the development of metacognitive skills (Brookfield, 1995). Metacognitive skills, also referred to critical thinking skills, allow an individual to analyze what is known about a topic or experience and further their knowledge and skills. In a study conducted by Martin (2005) differences between a process of reflection and critical thinking were defined. Reflection was defined as taking a description of a situation and “demonstrating the ability to stand back from the experiences and see it from multiple perspectives” (Martin, pg. 528). In order for the process of reflection to support critical thinking, students must demonstrate an analysis that moves beyond just a description of the information or experience and allow an in-depth look at the benefit of what is known and understood. Linking reflection and critical thinking entails the development of framework with clear components of what the process requires; supporting a balance between Critical Reflection 6 an objective analysis and personal exploration that leads to a change in perspective and new understanding (Atkins & Murphy, 1993). McCrindle and Christensen (1995) found through an experimental group design study that students were able to demonstrate critical thinking and metacognitive skills more consistently than the control group that did not participate in written reflection activities. The replication of similar results have also been found in studies focusing on the use of reflective practices within problem based learning situations (e.g., Basile, Olson, & Nethenson-Mejia, 2003; Hoban, 2000). Initially, literature available on the topic of reflective practices primarily focused on what David Schon (1983) termed reflection in action and reflection on action. Schon’s theory outlines the use of reflection to support professionals’ ability to examine their practice. Schon (1987) identified that for reflection to lead to critical thinking individuals need to a) identify a focus, b) engage in problem solving, and c) identify a method of analysis. As a better understanding of reflective practices began to develop in the field, several contributors to the topic went beyond Schon’s original ideas and identified that reflection must also lead to analysis of personal beliefs and assumptions (Brookfield, 1995), support a conscious determination of the impact of one’s experiences (Colton & Sparks-Langer, 1993), be guided by personal motivation (Ashton & Webb, 1986), and take into consideration the perspective of others (Resnick & Klopfer, 1989). While Schon and subsequent contributors, present relevant considerations around reflective practices their ideas are still theories about what it takes to support a successful reflection process. In order for students and instructors to gain a common language about reflection, models of reflections needed to be further developed to support a common understanding of the