Reflective practice 1
•Télécharger en tant que PPTX, PDF•
1 j'aime•3,199 vues
An overview on commonly used reflective models for education (or practice based areas). This includes the strengths & weaknesses of each to enable practitioners to select a framework that meets their needs.
Recommandé
Contenu connexe
Tendances
Tendances (20)
Similaire à Reflective practice 1
Similaire à Reflective practice 1 (20)
Dernier
Dernier (20)
Reflective practice 1
- 2. Why Reflect?
- 3. Kolbs Influence on Reflective Frameworks: Learning is Integrative
- 4. Choosing a Framework What is the Difference? Gibbs Driscoll Johns Schön Rolfe Brookfield
- 5. • Graham Gibbs (Gibbs 1988) based his reflective model upon each stage of David A. Kolb’s experiential cycle (Kolb 1984). • Full structured analysis of a situation • Prompts questions at each stage.
- 7. Gibbs in a Strengths: Basic, good starting point with explicit stages Weaknesses: • Superficial reflection • No referral to critical thinking/analysis/assumptions or viewing it from a different perspective (Atkins & Murphy 1993). • Does not have the number or depth of probing questions as other models.
- 8. Johns Reflective Model • (Johns 2006) - structured reflection • Analysis throughout the learning experience. Johns used Barbara Carper’s patterns of knowing in his model (Carper 1978) which includes the following: • aesthetics (the art of what we do) • personal (self awareness) • ethics (moral knowledge) • empirics (scientific knowledge) • Johns’ model also adds: reflexivity (how does it connect with previous experiences)
- 10. John in a Strengths Organisational model Examines situations in context of the environment. Provides prompt questions that are easy to follow Can be used by individuals or groups. Based on Carper’s (1978) four types of knowing -empirical, personal, ethical and aesthetic- Johns adds a fifth one – reflexivity- to create his model. Weaknesses: The prompt questions aren’t rigidly structured which could be confusing for someone inexperienced to know which ones could be omitted and which are salient for their particular reflection. Time consuming
- 11. Driscoll’s Reflective Model • Terry Borton’s (1970) – 3 Stem Questions • Further developed by John Driscoll • Matched the 3 questions to the the experiential learning cycle, and added trigger questions that can be used to complete the cycle. Driscoll in 1994, 2000 and 2007.
- 12. Driscoll in a Strengths: Organisational model. Easy to follow cued questions. Easy to remember the simple “What? So what? Now what?” Weakness: It does not lead to deeper reflection about yourself, only the situation.
- 13. Schön’s Reflective Model a) Reflection in action b) Reflection on action • Experiencing • Thinking on your feet • Thinking about what to do next • Acting straight away/action points Schön (1883 & 1991)
- 15. Schön in a Strengths: Reflection-in-action – dealing with surprise & ambiguity Reflection-on-action - a cognitive post-mortem after the fact. Professional model: Mastery & increasing professional confidence. Weaknesses: Highlights the difference between the two types of reflection but does not provide extensive guidance for carrying out either.
- 16. Rolfe Reflective Model Same as Driscoll – What is the difference?
- 19. Rolfe in a Strengths Based on the “What? So what? Now what?” questions using a developmental approach. Repeats these questions at three levels with increasingly deeper reflection at each level to develop from novice to expert. i. Descriptive ii. Theoretical iii. Action-Orientated Weaknesses: Rather complicated for a beginner who is new to reflection.
- 20. Brookfield: A Useful Model for Teaching & Education Brookfield (2005)
- 21. Brookfield in a Strengths Personal development model. Analysing a situation from different Deep Reflection Takes into account personal self-reflection, feedback, peer assessment, and information gleaned from academic literature. Suitable for self directed learning. Weaknesses Covers four different view points so not the most suitable if you wan to look at an area in depth from one angle.
Notes de l'éditeur
- Sense of discomfort in the beginning Avoids ‘tick boxing’ only – difference between competency and proficiency Requires a conscious effort Eventually becomes an automatic process
- Can be used as a reflective model 1. Concrete Experience - (a new experience or situation is encountered, or a reinterpretation of existing experience). 2. Reflective Observation of the new experience. (of particular importance are any inconsistencies between experience and understanding). 3. Abstract Conceptualization (reflection gives rise to a new idea, or a modification of an existing abstract concept). 4. Active Experimentation (the learner applies them to the world around them to see what results).
- It is probably the most cited model by health care professionals but does not contain the number or depth of prompt questions contained in some other models.
- six distinctive stages.
- Kolbs model has the critique as Gibbs – not surprising as Gibbs based the framework on Kolbs work.
- Useful for building an underlying philosophy
- can be used in any order (although they follow a natural progression).
- This is a description of the event. Trigger questions: What… … is the purpose of returning to this situation? … happened? … did other people do who were involved in this? … did I see/do? … was my reaction to it So what… … did I feel at the time of the event? … are my feelings now, after the event, any different from what I experienced at the time? … were the effects of what I did (or did not do)? … positive aspects now emerge for me from the event that happened in practice? … have I noticed about my behaviour in practice by taking a more measured look at it? … observations does any person helping me to reflect on my practice make of the way I acted at the time? … is the purpose of returning to this situation? Were those feelings I had any different from those of other people? Who were also involved at the time? Did I feel troubled, if so, in what way? Now what… …are the implications for me and others in clinical practice based on what I have described and analysed? …difference does it make if I choose to do nothing? …is the main learning that I take from reflecting on my practice in this way? …help do I need to help me 'action' the results of my reflections? …aspect should be tackled first? Where can I get more information to face a similar situation again? How can I modify my practice if a similar situation arises again? How will I notice that I am any different in clinical practice?
- describes as reflecting on the incident whilst it can still benefit that situation rather than reflecting on how you would do things differently in the future. This is a useful tool to use in disciplines where the professional has to react to an event at the time it occurs – rather than having the luxury of being able to think about what happened and make changes at a later time. This process is described by Schön (1983, p.68) as ‘When someone reflects-in-action - reflecting decides what works best at that time, Alternatively, reflection-on-action involves reflecting on how practice can be developed (changed) after the event ‘We reflect on action, thinking back on what we have done in order to discover how our knowing-in-action may have contributed to an unexpected outcome’ (Schön, 1983, p. 26). Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith
- Same model as Driscoll
- At your leisure