Tools and strategies for fostering reflection

In Richards’ (1995:60) words, ‘many different approaches can be employed if one wishes to become a critically reflective teacher, including observations of oneself and others, team teaching, and exploring one’s view of teaching through writing’. In the same vein, Xu (2009), Orlova (2009), Maarof (2007), Ward and McCotter (2004), and Bailey, Curtis and Nunan (2001), among others, mention that reflection can be done through different instruments and methods, such as journals, checklists, rubrics, portfolios, recordings, peer observations, and self-observation. Additionally, there is an emerging literature on means which can facilitate reflection

61

through, for example, the use of stimulated recall through videotaping and autobiography (Day 1985; Griffiths and Tann 1991), the use of metaphor (Mann 2008; Munby and Russell 1989, 1990; Tobin 1990), image (Clandinin 1989), photography (Griffiths and Tann 1991:73), and other techniques such as poetry, drawing, sculpting, narrative, role play simulations and drama (Moon 1999). According to Day (1993:84–85), all of this work is essentially concerned with the deconstruction and reconstruction of meaning; and its components recognise either implicitly or explicitly the existence of a ‘reflective spectrum’ through which theories may be examined and made public.

There are certainly a number of different tools and approaches that are being used to support reflective teaching practice, one of which is journal writing (Lee 2008; Moon 1999) that I used in my study. Richards and Farrell (2005) acknowledge that writing a journal helps teachers question and analyse consciously their practice. Farrell (2008:3) suggests that:

Writing regularly in a teaching journal can help teachers clarify their own thinking, explore their own beliefs and practices, become more aware of their teaching styles, and be better able to monitor their own practices.

Furthermore, Lee (2008) states that journals facilitate PSTs’ meaning-making along the process of learning to be teachers and serve as a means of enquiry about teaching and learning: journal writing increases PSTs’ awareness ‘about the way a teacher teaches and the way a student learns’ (Burton and Carroll 2001, cited in Lee 2008:26). Lee (2004:74) also states that writing journals can stimulate PSTs’ thinking that enables them to make connections between issues, generate new ideas, construct knowledge, and personalise their learning process. Journal writing is also seen as a tool that offers a place for the articulation and exploration of beliefs and practices, and as a means for providing a way for teachers to work

62

through the emotional part of the teaching: ‘we can even accept a journal as a place to vent our frustration and to work through our judgments’ (Gebhard and Oprandy 1999:24). What is more, Yost et al. (2000) indicate that, as teacher candidates engage in journal writing, they will be able to develop a habit of reflection. To cite more examples, Moon (1999:188–193) suggests a list of purposes for writing journals that go from a technical level (keeping records) to a higher level that helps promote reflection. Some of them are:

 To record experience

 To deepen the quality of learning, in the form of critical thinking or developing a questioning attitude

 To enable the learner to understand their own learning process

 To facilitate learning from experience

 To increase active involvement in learning and personal ownership of learning

 To increase the ability to reflect and improve the quality of learning

 To enhance problem-solving skills

 To enhance professional practice or the professional self in practice

 To enhance the personal valuing of the self towards self-empowerment

 To foster reflective and creative interaction in a group.

Interestingly, Moon (1999) mentions in the last point what other authors (e.g. Bolton 2010; Brookfrield 1995; Richards 1995) also acknowledge: the usefulness of journals in terms of the interaction that can be achieved with peers and mentors. Lee (2008), for instance, classifies four different kinds of journals that foster the interaction and collaboration between the student teacher and the teacher, and student teacher and other student teacher(s):

63

 Dialogue journals involve teachers and students ‘writing and exchanging their

writing in mutual response’ (Lee 2008:118)

 Collaborative/Interactive group journals (Richards 1995) involve student teachers in writing and exchanging their journals to support as peers

 Response journals require student teachers to record their reflection on and personal reactions to what they read, observe, listen, and think

 Teaching journals refer to reflections based on teaching experiences.

The latter types of journals are also exchangeable with the teacher and/or other student teachers and also promote cooperative development. As Bolton (2010:140) states, ‘journals often inform dialogic work with supervisor, tutor, or mentor […] and give a sense of respect and being valued’. It is suggested (e.g. Bolton 2010; Williams 2001; Hancock 1999; Wong et al. 1995; Mezirow 1990) that dialogue through journals is one strategy for stimulating critical reflection, by giving the opportunity to the educator to question ‘origins of the [practitioner] self perceptions and the consequences of holding them’ (Williams 2001:31). However, as Williams states, we must be aware that the time required for the reflective practitioner to write and for the educator to respond is often seen as a barrier to use dialogue journals. According to Moon (1999), journals can be presented in either a structured or unstructured form. The unstructured forms she identifies are: Free writing and reflecting (usually chronological, not necessarily in a daily-basis),

Recording relating to an ongoing event or issue (for record-keeping), and Double- entry journal (with two columns, one for the description of actual facts and the other one for the thoughts that result of the experience). The classification of structured forms proposed by Moon (1999:194–201) is as follows:

64

1. Autobiographical writing: it may not be chronological and may be related in some way to the current time, such as relating a previous experience that is similar to one in the present.

2. Structure in form of exercise: for instance, writing from different angles, using metaphors, writing unsent letters, reflecting on a book or reading assignment, responding to questions, describing the process of solving problems, lists, dialogues with imaginary people, working with dreams and imagery, etc. 3. Structure in the form of questions to answer or guidance about an issue to be

covered.

As can be observed, there are different activities that can be done with a journal that serve to guide student teachers’ reflection. Writing a journal is a personal and essentially private interest, ‘yet parts can fruitfully be shared with confidential trusted others’ (Bolton 2010:125). In that way, collaborative reflection is promoted and brings many benefits to the teacher candidates’ process of reflection (see section 3.2.8).

Richards (1995) proposes other approaches to critical reflection: Self-observation and Peer observation. These observations can provide opportunities to reflect and be conscious of the actions done in class, as well as to learn from others’ teaching because student teachers are exposed to different teaching styles; they also enable student teachers to compare what they do in specific situations and what the person being observed does during similar events (Richards 1995). Self- observations and peer observations ‘provide opportunities for critical reflection on their own teaching’ even when observing others (Richards 1995:60). During the observations, mainly in situ, student teachers may use different tools to keep a record of what is observed from themselves and others: inventories or check lists (Richards 1995), ethnographic notes (Lengeling 2013; Day 1990), and reflective

65

journals. In the case of the current study, the PSTs observed their peers and in- service teachers as part of the Teaching practice subjects.

Apart from the tools mentioned, it is recommended to video record student teachers’ classes in order for them to engage in post-conference reflection with the teacher or with other student teachers (Fadde et al. 2009). When teaching a class, there can be many variables or things happening simultaneously that the teachers or PSTs cannot capture at the moment and which cannot be recalled later for analysis, thus video recordings can supply student teachers with more detailed and trustworthy information that is grounded in the actual records rather than uncertain recollections for the analysis and evaluation of their teaching performance, from an observer perspective (Kong et al. 2009). As acknowledged by researchers (e.g. Rhine and Bryant 2007; Samuels and Betts 2007; Lee and Wu 2006), a video recording also provides evidence of the actions and time to revisit, think further, and expand initial views. Studies by researchers such as Robinson and Kelley (2007) and Freese (1999) also show that student teachers display significant growth in the levels of reflective thoughts after browsing video recordings of lessons in teaching practice. ‘The use of videos is thus considered to be helpful in enhancing the depth and quality of self reflection by student teachers’ (Kong et al. 2009:546). Kong et al. (2009:547) also state that, through the use of video, student teachers can ‘construct applicable knowledge about classroom instruction, develop reflective practices on their teaching work, and take responsibility for their own learning’. Observing, analysing, and discussing classroom performance is enhanced and facilitated by the use of videotaping (Orlova 2009; Chinnery 2006; Whitehead and Fitzgeral 2006) because it allows trainees to ‘notice and respond to both strong and weak aspects of their teaching […] re-examine it many times [...] and it has a well-known motivating effect’ (Orlova 2009:31). In her study, Orlova

66

attested that students typically show an increased self-awareness and a sense of continuity regarding reflection for professional development.

Chen et al. (2009:283) state that, since reflection is a mental process, some strategies such as questioning can make reflection ‘become more effective and produce better results’. King (1994) classifies prompt questions into memorization, comprehension, and integration questions, the last two types being high level questions. According to Chen et al. (2009), ‘providing high level prompts [questions] is a key factor for promoting reflection […] [and] are more helpful for constructing new knowledge’ (pg. 284). Likewise, Williams (2001:31) indicates that critical questioning promotes critical reflections through discussion and dialogue about experience, prompts ‘explicit assumptions and encourage[s] learners to question the validity of the premises underlying the assumptions’. Moreover, when including critical incidents as a means to trigger reflection, a set of guiding questions is generally provided to analyse the critical incident; analysis ‘is perhaps even more important than the incident itself’ (William 2001:31) because it provides valuable means in understanding essential assumptions and beliefs (Kim 1999; Smith 1998; Minghella and Benson 1995; Kottkamp 1990).

The final part of this section deals with the affordances that new developments in technology make possible. Wach (2015:40) argues that ‘technology may promote reflective thinking in pre- and in-service teachers by creating opportunities for a conscious articulation of their practice, a reconstruction of knowledge, and enhanced awareness of learning and teaching processes’. According to her (2015: 40, citing Chapman et al. 2005), reflective practitioners ‘have time to reflect before they respond, as well as opportunities for deeper thinking and challenging assumptions, and for formative feedback and peer mentoring’. Although there are many web-based tools (e.g. e-portfolios, blogs, academic platforms, chatrooms)

67

helping with reflection nowadays, in this section I would like to centre attention on online social networking sites. According to Hart and Steinbrecher (2011) and Carter et al. (2008), online social networking sites (e.g. Facebook, MySpace) are being considered mechanisms for communication and support in order to enhance instruction. Hart and Steinbrecher (2011:320) state that ‘as members of the Net Generation increasingly enter the teaching profession, more and more teachers are becoming active users of social networking sites […] joining virtual discussion groups based on interest in a topic, cause, hobby, or organization’. Whipp (2003) notes that online discussion can enhance RP if the dialogue is ‘carefully structured to support high levels of reflection’ (Whipp 2003:331). According to MacKnight (2000), web-based interaction can be an effective tool when it is performed with specific goals, structured tasks, and thoughtful questions that guide and encourage fruitful discussion. Rhine and Bryant (2007) conducted a study which demonstrates that web-based discourse (as well as digital video) between student teachers and teacher educators can link practice and theory while training pre-service teachers. According to Rhine and Bryant (2007:347, citing Moffett 2002), teacher educators have recently explored the value of online discussion in helping pre-service teachers process field experiences. Findings in a study carried out by Hart and Steinbrecher (2011) related to the use of Facebook suggest that pre-service teachers engage in interactions of a professional nature, on three major purposes:

1. Collaborating and generating ideas for instruction. 2. Connecting, updating, and supporting one another. 3. Seeking professional advice.

It appears, in Hart and Steinbrecher’s (2011) experience, that pre-service teachers interact on and use Facebook for a variety of professionally-oriented aims, such as: making requests for strategies in teaching, sharing experiences, or supporting one

68

another as they undertake the teaching venture. Nevertheless, as Hart and Steinbrecher (2011) caution, ‘more research is needed on interaction in online environments and on best practices for encouraging productive online learning’.