Reflection in Teacher Education-Towards Definition and Implementation

Pergamon 0742-051 X(94)00012-3 Teaching & Teacher Education, Vol. 11, No. 1, pp. 33-49, 1995 Copyright © 1994 Elsevier Science Ltd Printed in Great Britain. All rights reserved 07424)51 X/95 $9.50 + 0.00 REFLECT ION IN TEACHER EDUCATION: TOWARDS DEF IN IT ION AND IMPLEMENTATION NEVILLE HATTON and DAVID SMITH The University of Sydney, Australia Abstrae~Reflection is claimed as a goal in many teacher preparation programs, but its definition and how it might be fostered in student teachers are problematic issues. In this article, a report is provided of a review of literature on reflection, in particular focusing on strategies which assist its development in preservice programs. Next there is outlined a research project where types of reflection have been defined and applied to an analysis of student writing. Finally, the authors propose a framework for types of reflection as a basis for further research development in teacher education. In the past 10 years, the terms "reflection" and "critical reflection" have increasingly appeared in descriptions of approaches to teacher educa- tion. It is clear, however, that the terms are often ill-defined, and have been used rather loosely to embrace a wide range of concepts and strategies. The authors of this article have been engaged in the design and delivery of a Bachelor of Educa- tion (Secondary) program which seeks to encour- age "the development of competent and reflec- tive professionals". They are undertaking an investigation of reflection, and the manner in which it may be fostered in students during initial preparation for teaching? The sections of this paper reflect the major stages of the research so far undertaken. Part 1 sets out the findings of a literature review, which is not exhaustive, but focuses upon attempts to facilitate the development of reflection in student teachers. It demonstrates the problematic nature of defining and researching reflective concepts and techniques, together with the very wide range of meanings assigned to terms associated with reflection. Part 2 outlines the design for the study undertaken at the University of Sydney into how reflection may be operationally defined, encouraged, and investigated, together with what the findings of that research were. Then the authors put forward their current position on reflection and the possibility of its development irt intending teachers, drawing in particular on a recently published comparative study of seven U.S. programs which were consciously designed to develop reflective approaches in participants (Valli, 1992). Part 1. Definitions of Reflection and Their Implications Historically, Dewey (1993), who himself drew on the ideas of many earlier educators such as Plato, Aristotle, Confucius, Lao Tzu, Solomon, and Buddha (Houston, 1988), is acknowledged as a key originator in the twentieth century of the concept of reflection. He considered it to be a special form of problem solving, thinking to resolve an issue which involved active chaining, a careful ordering of ideas linking each with its predecessors. Within the process, consideration is to be given to any form of knowledge or belief involved and the grounds for its support (Adler, 1991; Calderhead, 1989; Cutler, Cook, & Young, 1989; Farrah, 1988; Gilson, 1989). His basic ideas 1The authors acknowledged the provision in 1992 of an Australian Research Council Small Grant to undertake this study. They also acknowledge the support of Mr. Greg Wrobel, Research Assistant for the project. 33 34 NEVILLE HATTON and DAVID SMITH are seminal, and indicate that reflection may be seen as an active and deliberative cognitive pro- cess, involving sequences of interconnected ideas which take account of underlying beliefs and knowledge. Reflective thinking generally ad- dresses practical problems, allowing for doubt and perplexity before possible solutions are reached. Four key issues with regard to reflection emerge from Dewey's original work and its subsequent interpretation. The first is whether reflection is limited to thought process about action, or is more inextricably bound up in action (Grant & Zeichner, 1984; Noffke & Brennan, 1988). The second relates to the time frames within which reflection takes place, and whether it is relatively immediate and short term, or rather more extended and systematic, as Dewey seems to imply (Farrah, 1988; Sch6n, 1983). The third has to do with whether reflection is by its very nature problem-centred or not (Adler, 1991; Calderhead, 1989; Sch6n, 1987). Finally, the fourth is concerned with how consciously the one reflecting takes account of wider historic, cultural and political values or beliefs in framing and refraining practical problems to which sol- utions are being sought, a process which has been identified as "critical reflection" (Gore & Zeichner, 1991; Noordhoff & Kleinfeld, 1988; Smyth, 1989). In relation to reflective thinking versus reflec- tive action, there seems to be wide agreement that reflection is a special form of thought (Kremer-Hayon, 1988; Waxman, Freiberg, Vaughan, & Weil, 1988; McNamara, 1990; Sparks-Langer & Colton, 1991). But Dewey himself also spoke of "reflective action" presum- ably addressing the implementation of solutions once problems had been thought through, and it is clear that most writers are concerned with the complete-cycle of professional "doing" coupled with reflection which then leads to modified action (Gore & Zeichner, 1984; Noffke & Brennan, 1988). It may be useful to contrast this cyclical idea with routine action, which derives from impulse, tradition, or authority. Reflective action is bound up with persistent and careful consideration of practice in the light of knowledge and beliefs, showing attitudes of open-mindedness, responsibility, and whole- heartedness (Noffke & Brennan, 1988). Sch6n (1983, 1987) clearly writes about reflec- tion that is intimately bound up with action. Rather than attempting to apply scientific the- ories and concepts to practical situations, he holds that professionals should learn to frame and reframe the often complex and ambiguous problems they are facing, test out various inter- pretations, then modify their actions as a result. He talks about "reflection-on-action" and "re- flection-in-action", the latter implying conscious thinking and modification while on the job. But both his forms of reflection involve demanding rational and moral processes in making reasoned judgements about preferable ways to act. A further issue related to the links between reflective thought and action concerns the time frames within which both occur. Sch6n's "re- flection-in-action" (1983, 1987) involves simul- taneous reflecting and doing, implying that the professional has reached a stage of competence where she or he is able to think consciously about what is taking place and modify actions virtually instantaneously. Most other kinds of reflection involve looking back upon action some time after it has taken place. Certain models of what has been termed "technical reflection" (Cruikshank, 1985; Killen, 1989)appear to be based on thinking about skills or competencies with a view to evaluating their effectiveness almost immedi- ately after an attempt at implementation, and then making changes to behaviour. Other models of reflection (Gore & Zeichner, 1991; Smith & Lovat, 1991) are based on encouraging deliber- ation over a relatively extended time about the purposes of action with a view to exploring alternatives which might be implemented in the future. Indeed, some seem to argue that reflection involves conscious detachment from an activity followed by a distinct period of contemplation (Boud, Keogh, & Walker, 1985; Buchmann, 1990; Pugach, 1990). With regard to reflection and problem solving, while there is some consensus that reflection is centrally concerned with finding solutions to real problems (Adler, 1991; Calderhead, 1989; Cutler, et al., 1989), questions can be raised about whether solving problems should be considered an inherent characteristic of reflection. Some proponents would argue by their logic or practice that its essential nature is thinking about action. This may involve processing while a group event is taking place, or debriefing after a specific experience for the purpose of developing insights, in terms of a clearer understanding of the rela- Reflection in Teacher Education 35 tionships between what took place, the purposes intended, and difficulties which arose viewed within broader cultural or professional perspec- tives (Pearson & Smith, 1985). Certain ap- proaches labelled as reflective which are being employed currently, such as the use of journals or group discussions following practicum experi- ences, though encouraging reaction to practical events, often are not deliberately directed to- wards the solution of specific practical problems. The term critical reflection, like reflection itself, appears to be used loosely, some taking it to mean no more than constructive self-criticism of one's actions with a view to improvement (Cal- derhead, 1989). It can be argued, however, that the concept of critical reflection implies the acceptance of a particular ideology, along with its accompanying assumptions and epistemology (Gore, 1987; McNamara, 1990; Wildman & Niles, 1987; Zeichner & Liston, 1990). Taken together, these form a particular theoretical framework for reflection, as outlined below. The one outlined by Dewey to some extent illustrates these points, as do the frameworks of Zeichner or Smith and their associates, especially in terms of what is the particular focus point of any reflection (Noffke & Brennan, 1988). Critiques of reflection (Gore, 1987; Pearson & Smith, 1985) often make use of the hierarchy outlined by Van Manen (1977), who proposed three levels derived from Habermas (1973). The first level, technical reflection, is concerned with the efficiency and effectiveness of means to achieve certain ends, which themselves are not open to criticism or modification. The second, practical reflection, allows for open examination not only of means, but also of goals, the assump- tions upon which these are based, and the actual outcomes. This kind of reflecting, in contrast to the technical form, recognises the meanings are not absolute, but are embedded in, and negoti- ated through, language. The third level, critical reflection, as well as including emphases from the previous two, also calls for considerations in- volving moral and ethical criteria (Adler, 1991; Gore & Zeichner, 1991), making judgements about whether professional activity is equitable, just, and respectful of persons or not. In addition, critical reflection locates any analysis of personal action within wider socio-historical and poli- tico-cultural contexts (Noflke & Brennan, 1988; Smith & Lovat, 1991; Zeichner & Liston, 1987). Sch6n's framework is able to incorporate all levels or kinds, including critical reflection. His reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action in- volve an epistemology of professional practice based upon knowing-in-action and knowledge- in-action (Alricher & Posch, 1989; Munby & Russell, 1989). Such tacit knowledge is derived from the construction and reconstruction of professional experience, in contrast to applying technical or scientific rationality (Adler, 1991; Polanyi, 1958, 1667; Sch6n, 1983, 1987). Reflec- tion-in-action, an element of knowing-in-action, occurs while an action is being undertaken. It is therefore seen to be one means for distinguishing professional from non-professional practice (Feiman-Nemser, 1990; Sch6n, 1983, 1987). It may be characterised as part of the artistry or intuitive knowledge derived from professional experience (Gilson, 1989) and includes engaging in a reflective conversation with oneself, shaping the situation in terms of the reflector's frame of reference, while consistently leaving open the possibility of reframing by employing techniques of holistic appraisal (Alrichter & Posch, 1989). While different contexts in teacher education may lend themselves more to one kind or level of reflection than another (Calderhead, 1989), it is important that the types are not viewed as an increasingly desirable hierarchy. Technical re- flection is an essential aspect of initial student teacher development and a precursor to other kinds of reflection (Fuller, 1970; Gore & Zeich- ner, 1991; Hall, 1985). For example, Cruik- shank's "reflective teaching" involves the use of microteaching to assist in developing student teacher competence (Cruikshank, 1985; Cruik- shank, Kennedy, Williams, Holton, & Faye, 1981). While claims about the benefits of this approach have been asserted (Killen, 1989), little research evidence has been presented, and any reflection involved seems to be fairly superficial, confined to whether ends have been achieved. Nonetheless, it may constitute a basis for pro- viding tools which will enable other forms of reflection to develop. But the argument that teacher education should also be concerned with questions of equity and justice, developed through strategies which stimulate critical reflection, has been ad- vanced with some vigour (Cutler et al., 1989; Notlke & Brennan, 1988; Smyth, 1989). The theoretical framework for reflection adopted by 36 NEVILLE HATTON and DAVID SMITH a particular program will depend upon its pur- poses and focus, and therefore in turn upon the assumptions about teaching and teacher educa- tion upon which these are based. For instance, Gore and Zeichner (1991) have identified four varieties of reflective teaching practice, each with its own underlying ideology, which are outlined in some detail in a later section. Strategies Claimed to Promote Reflection A wide variety of approaches has been em- ployed in attempts to foster reflection in student teachers and other intending professionals. Not all appear to be appropriate for stimulating reflection, and there is little research evidence to show how effective they are. At least four broad strategies can be distinguished, as follows. 1. Action Research Projects (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; Pugach, 1990; Sparks-Langer & Colton, 1991; Zeichner, 1986). 2. Case Studies and Ethnographic Studies of students, teachers, classrooms, and schools (Ross, 1989; Sparkes, 1991; Stoiber, 1990). 3. Microteaching and Other Supervised Prac- ticum Experiences (Cruikshank, 1985; Sparks- Langer & Colton, 1991; Zeichner, 1986). 4. Structured Curriculum Tasks (Ben-Peretz, 1984; Beyer, 1984; Smith, 1991). Within these overall approaches more specific techniques may be used, such as various versions of reading fiction and non-fiction (Tama & Peterson, 1991), and oral interviews (Andrews & Wheeler, 1990; Smith, 1991). Writing tasks are often employed (Cutler et al., 1989; Sparks- Langer & Colton, 1991; Surbeck, Park-Han, & Moyer, 1991), most frequently based upon keeping journals. It is claimed these allow stu- dents to find their voice (Freidus, 1991) and by deliberately making explicit their own thoughts and actions, foster reflection (Andrews & Wheeler, 1990; Wedman, Malios, & Whitfield, 1989). The effectiveness of such techniques may depend very much on prior structuring, while serious questions must be raised about the veracity and ethics of journal writing which is to be assessed. Genres apart from journal writing have also been used, including narratives and biographies, as well as reflective essays focused upon neophytes' own experiences as students (Connelly & Clandinin, 1990; Gore & Zeichner, 1991; Ross, 1989; Wellington, 1991). The use of students' metaphors of teaching as a basis for reflecting upon their underpinning assumptions, and how these can inform solutions to teaching dilemmas, has also been advocated (Bullough, 1989, 1991; Marshall, 1990). While the above strategies all have the poten- tial to encourage reflection, there is little research evidence to show that this is actually being achieved. It is necessary to move beyond self reports to the identification of ways in which reflective processes can be evidenced. It is not sufficient to assert that reflection is encouraged by a procedure or technique, rather means must be specified to demonstrate that particular kinds of reflecting are taking place (Smith & Hatton, 1992, 1993). Further, there is a need for longi- tudinal studies that follow students into their first years of teaching, again with a clear dem- onstration of the ways in which reflective ap- proaches are being retained, developed, or lost. Problems Associated With Reflection There are a number of barriers which hinder the achievement of reflective approaches. These include existing preconceptions about teaching as a profession, the essential preconditions which allow student teachers to develop reflective ca- pacities, their possible responses to being re- quired to undertake reflection, and the structural and ideological program milieu within which various kinds of reflecting are being encouraged. First, problems can arise because reflection is not generally associated with working as a teacher. Teaching is often seen to be primarily about the immediate present and instant pragmatic action, while reflecting is perceived as a more academic pursuit (Elbaz, 1988; McNamara, 1990). An emphasis upon reflection too soon in their prep- aration may be alienating to neophytes. It can become difficult to sustain, for student teachers may see it as a rather esoteric and useless diversion from mastering the technical skills and content of teaching which they regard as essen- tial, especially early in their training (Hall, 1985; Zeichner, 1990). In a study of American pro- grams designed to encourage reflective ap- proaches (Valli, 1992), problems of this kind were identified as obstacles to the implementation of reflective teacher education. In particular, the persistence and strength of participants' own Reflection in Teacher Education 37 conceptualisation of teaching proved a consider- able barrier. For example, many students in the Florida PROTEACH program were seen to comply on the surface with strategies used to encourage reflection, but their deep positions reflected a fixed view of the nature of teaching which they had developed prior to entering the program. There was some evidence of resistance resulting from preconceptions in a small number of students who participated in the Sydney program which isdescribed in some detail below, and in a few cases their views of teaching were so instrumental that they resisted going beyond basic descriptive reflection. Second, in order to foster effective reflection, what is needed is time and opportunity for development, so that the required essential meta- teaching and metacognitive skills can be ac- quired (McNamara, 1990; Noffke & Brennan, 1988). It appears necessary to adopt a develop- mental approach, where the early concerns of students for survival skills can be addressed through technical means, which in turn then become the focus for attempts at descriptive reason-giving using narrative and biography. These then may provide a basis for moving on to other forms of reflection which take account of a wide range of factors, including broader socio-political contexts (Elbaz, 1988; Hall, 1985; Smith & Hatton, 1992). An associated difficulty concerns the identification of a suitable knowl- edge base as a starting point for helping student teachers first understand concepts of reflection and then apply esp