Strand 3 Deciding whom to reflect with Strand 4 Becoming a reflective practitioner
An explanation of how I carried out my literature review has been offered to indicate my thinking around the sources used, and the decisions taken during the process of identifying relevant literature.
Sue McKeogh PI R1391833 Doctorate in Education
Each strand has then been taken in turn to show how the literature has informed both the background to my research and the analysis of my findings. The rationale for each strand has been discussed in an initial paragraph at the beginning of the appropriate section.
RATIONALE FOR LITERATURE AND THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THE LITERATURE
The flowchart in Figure 1 illustrates the process of how literature was sought and identified and how the themes and structure of the literature were generated. Figure 1 outlines not only the sources used, but also the factors impacting on the choice of material used and the location of that material.
As my knowledge of the literature expanded I was able to widen my search to broaden the themes within each strand. This knowledge of the literature came not only from my own reading, but also from the opportunities I was afforded by way of a move to a central academic role within The Open University part way through my Doctorate. This role gave me access to research meetings only open to internal members of staff, as well as ‘knowledgeable others’ (Vygotsky, 1978). I was prompted to investigate different sources of material, and identify new avenues to explore as a result of my own thinking around what I was learning from
engagement with other researchers, in parallel with the data analysis.
There has been a growth in published literature in two areas pertinent to my thesis - early years and reflective practice, and social networking - in the last few years, This posed a potential problem in that the research, and the bulk of the literature review, were carried out before taking a break in my studies. To avoid the
literature review chapter growing to unmanageable proportions in the latter stages of the write-up of the thesis a decision was taken not to add to the literature review
unless there were gaps to fill as data were analysed.
Figure 1 How literature was sought and identified
Books from OU library and other university libraries Local county libraries
Search terms were used, such as: reflection, childminders, community of practice as well as theorists' names to expand literature_____________
I frill: 11 . v s u r t
f>l V m n r m : r i surt
/ -Databases available on the OU Library website, such as JSTOR, ERIC ^ and IngentaConnect
•Google Scholar
•Search terms focused on strands 1 and 2 initially - these underpin
research j
Starting points identified key theories and theorists but as much of this was cited material I initially tried to source original material/books
Books were good for background information and to identify research themes but limited recently published material - search expanded to include online materials
MA module E845 reading around reflection with others; following up referenced material within module text and Readers
FDEY module material - material sourced that had been written by, or about, the researchers discussed within the teaching materials around reflection and reflective tools
Limited success in locating relevant material by starting with databases A ‘lucky find’ identified relevant journals on lifelong learning and reflective practice
" N
•Systematic searching through recently published relevant journals •identification of other potentially relevant material from the reference lists
of relevant articles
•Searching for articles on issues coming through analysis of data
Journal articles were very successful in identifying relevant and current literature to inform data analysis and vice versa
•Strands identified at the start of the study remained largely unchanged due to the exploratory nature of the research / lack of existing research - thesis lays the foundation of knowledge to inform future research
•key themes emerged particularly in Strands 3 and 4. These strands followed a reactive path, developing alongside the data analysis
Sue McKeogh PI R1391833 Doctorate in Education
Initial starting points for researching literature stemmed from my reading
undertaken for the MA module E845 Supporting lifelong learning. This reading allowed identification of relevant material relating to reflecting with others,
including the issue of whether or not others needed to be involved in the reflective process. Another starting point stemmed from researchers, such as Schon and Kolb, identified within the FDEY module material discussing reflection on practice. I quickly found that the research focused on reflection with others. My attempts to find research around childminders drew a blank and I found that I had identified a gap in the research leading to a lack of knowledge around how childminders can be supported to reflect on their practice. This did, however, cause problems when it came to identifying appropriately targeted research involving childminders, and, therefore, much of my research has involved other client-centred practice, such as nursing where there is some similarity within some job roles and what is being reflected on within practice.
My pilot research in Year 1 demonstrated to me how essential it was that we had agreement over what reflection is. Equally, when analyzing the research data I found there were differences in what constituted reflection. This led me to research a definition and my thinking developed from thinking of reflection as having one definition with the finding of Van Manen’s (1977, cited in Rosenstein, 2002) and Bain et al’s (1999) definitions of reflection having several levels.
I found that researching literature alongside carrying out my research and data analysis meant that each informed the other and I was both proactive, and reactive in searching out relevant research, particularly in relation to the importance of
others to the reflective process and the factors impacting on whom childminders decide to reflect with.
Initially my literature search focused on finding relevant printed material using the library database. However, I found that this was relatively unproductive, primarily for reasons of currency and context for reflection. As my skills in using e-
resources developed, journals and on-line databases have successfully enabled me to broaden out my search to include material from cultures such as Australia where distance-learning is more established and to access current material around the early years and reflection, in particular.
STRAND 1 CONCEPT OF REFLECTION
THE CONCEPT OF REFLECTION
The concept of reflection is more complicated than at first appears and, as such it was important to establish a definition of reflective practice to be used when conducting the research with childminders. The participants in the research needed to be clear what is being discussed, and the reader needs to understand how the term has been interpreted. An understanding of the different kinds, and levels, of reflection was also important at the analysis stage.
Dewey's (1997:6) definition of reflective thought as involving 'active, persistent, and careful consideration’ of beliefs and the evaluation of any evidence to support these beliefs, is evident in the reflective practice cycle used within the FDEY
Sue McKeogh PI R1391833 Doctorate in Education
module materials (see Appendix 4) to help students to systematically identify what they think about a particular area of their practice.
Kolb’s experiential learning cycle (see Figure 2) considers ‘immediate or concrete experiences to be the basis for observations and reflections’. As this same expectation is a key aspect of the FDEY modules this seems a logical place to start in attempting a definition on which to base discussion.
Figure 2 Kolb’s experiential learning cycle (Adapted from Kolb and Kolb, 2005:195)
cf Kurt Lewin
White’s (2002) definition relates to all Kolb’s stages of the learning cycle (plan, do, observe and reflect), defining reflection as:
• Thinking carefully about the way you work (plan)
• Thinking about what you do and why you do it (do, observe) • Thinking about what you would do differently in the future (reflect)
Concrete experience Active testing Abstract hypothesis Reflective observation
In determining the purpose of reflection, by basing the reflection on own practice (use of ‘you’). White’s definition fits with the ‘personalist’ or ‘narrative’ approach identified by Sparks-Langer (1992) where reflection is geared to constructing personal practice-based knowledge and developing awareness of one’s own identity, beliefs and development. Equally, in placing an emphasis on ‘thinking’, it matches Evans’ (1999:57) definition of reflection as ‘a deliberate attempt to
broaden understanding [...] and develop professional practice by devoting some time and attention to the process’.
As with Kolb (1984), White’s (2002) definition does not specifically include theoretical knowledge and understanding. Korthagen (2001), in considering reflection in relation to teachers’ professional learning, has developed the ALACT spiral model of reflection (see Figure 3), as a framework to enable students to learn to reflect and become self-directed learners.
Sue McKeogh PI R1391833 Doctorate in Education
Figure 3 Korthagen’s ALACT spiral model
Creating alternative methods of action Awareness of essential aspects Looking back on the action
The ALACT model consists of five phases 1) Action 2) Looking back on the action 3) Awareness of the essential aspects 4) Creating alternative methods of action 5) Trial. It is a spiral model starting
and ending to an action, and basically the first and the fifth phase are same.
Whilst acknowledging experience, his model focuses on the need for learners to understand themselves as teachers, rather than merely knowing a lot about teaching. As such, his model adds an extra stage - an awareness of essential aspects of the action - to Kolb’s (1984) reflective cycle. However, neither Kolb (1984) nor Korthagen’s (2001) models address levels of reflection.
Rather than one definition, Rosenstein (2002) notes there are many different kinds of reflection and asks how students can ‘train themselves to recognise and change the levels of their own reflection’. This is outside the scope of White’s (2003)
definition but was drawn out within the interviews (see chapter 5). van Manen (1977,defines four levels of reflection:
1. everyday thinking;
2. incidental and limited reflection on our practical experience;
3. systematic reflection with the aim of theoretical understandings and critical insights; and
4. reflection on reflection that examines how knowledge functions and how knowledge can be applied to active understanding.
Levels 1 and 2 are implicit within White’s (2002) definition, and Schon’s (1983) reflection-in-action, in that they relate directly to practice. Levels 3 and 4, involving structured reflection with an emphasis on theoretical knowledge, are less evident within White’s (2002) definition, which does not specifically mention using theory within reflection, although maybe ‘thinking carefully’ implies some structure.
Whilst van Manen’s (1977) levels do not necessarily involve noting down
reflections, Bain et al. (1999), focus on written reflection, identifying different levels of reflection from their study of the reflective journals of 35 Australian student teachers, studying on a 1 year graduate Diploma of Education:
Level 1, reporting the event as it occurred;
Level 2, responding to the event in a spontaneous and emotional manner; Level 3, relating to the event in terms of past experience and knowledge; Level 4, reasoning about the event in terms of alternatives, examining
assumptions, and conceptualizing characteristics of the occurrence; and Level 5, reconstructing the event in terms of theories that can be applied to a
Sue McKeogh PI R1391833 Doctorate in Education
These two definitions will be useful in analyzing the data emerging from my research, and when considering how to develop childminders’ reflective skills and what it means to be a reflective practitioner.
Whilst White’s (2002) definition does not, specifically, address issues such as levels of reflection (van Manen, 1977; Bain et al, 1999) or how reflection might take place (Rosenstein, 2002), and is therefore limited, it seems to cover the essential points of the process of reflection with a focus on practical experience. It has the added advantage of being familiar and easy to understand and is,
therefore, a useful definition for use as a basis for discussion with childminders (see Appendix 8), but insufficiently detailed for the data analysis.
IS REFLECTION A GOOD THING?
In thinking about whether reflection is always a good thing, Claxton (2003) offers the argument that constantly stopping to reflect on practice ‘can interfere with the skilled performance that stems from underlying expertise’. Instead, Claxton (2003) puts forward intuition as a ‘different way of knowing’ - knowledge in use, as
opposed to a more articulated response. This concept has concordance with Schon’s (1987) ‘knowledge-in-action’ or Eraut’s (1994) ‘skilled behaviour’ where the practitioner responds to a situation without deliberating based on their
knowledge and experience. In contrast it seems that Claxton assumes reflection results in a halt in practice. Claxton offers no discussion on whether reflection has a place outside the immediacy of daily practice. Miller et al (2005:69) however, argue that ‘we have to move from intuitive knowledge to a conscious awareness of why we do what we do’, and that practitioners need to become more conscious of
underlying expertise. Osgood (2006), too, in looking at the construction of professionalism discusses how opportunities for critical reflection enable practitioners to challenge policy directives and raise awareness of their own agency.
Whilst there are critiques of Schon and his conceptualization of reflection and the reflective practitioner (Newman, 1999; Procee, 2006) the empowering impact of reflection on actual practice (Osterman and Kottkamp, 1993) is largely
unquestioned by contemporary research, making it difficult to argue reflection is not a good thing. It could, however, be argued that childminders may be
discouraged from critically reflecting on their practice (Sparks-Langer, 1992; Grimmett, 1988, cited in Desiree et al, 2007) where it causes conflict, for example, between their values and beliefs and the scope/limitations of their practice.
However, becoming critically conscious of their provision is not something negative, but rather is conscientization (conscientizagao), as defined by Freire (1993), and can be an agent for change and empowerment; once practitioners become aware of any inadequacies in practice, they are morally bound to instigate change to provide a better service to the families with whom they work.
In a competitive market, providing good quality childcare, and being able to ‘sell’ their service, is in a childminder’s best interests. It is, therefore, important that childminders are up-to-date and are aware of ‘best practice’, and can strive to provide it. Childminder perspective on the value of reflection in this process, in the light of a current expectation of reflection, could provide useful material to consider the question of whether or not reflection is a good thing. Equally, exploring why childminders reflect on their practice is likely to impact on those with whom they
Sue McKeogh PI R1391833 Doctorate in Education
reflect. If they are happy to maintain the status quo, for example, they are less likely to seek out someone who will challenge their thinking.
The next strand considered in this literature review focuses on how important others are to the reflective process.