Teacher Reflection

Educational researchers often refer to John Dewey’s definition of reflection as the theoretical basis for their work. Dewey defined reflection as “active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or… knowledge in light of the grounds that support it, and the… conclusions to which it tends.” It may be tempting to view teacher reflection as an abstract activity, done while training to become a teacher and then dismissed after entering the profession. However, different kinds of teacher assessments required for initial or continuing certification also require teacher reflection. For example, the Danielson Framework for Teaching states that teachers “use their reflections to make adjustments in their practice.” Similarly, the Marzano framework requires that teachers reflect on the effectiveness of instructional performance. Additional teacher behaviors described in these frameworks include teachers Assessing the effectiveness of a lesson based on student achievement of outcomes, Identifying and keeping track of specific areas for improvement, Writing analysis of specific causes of success or failure, Explaining the effects of instructional strategies on student learning, and Making adaptations to a lesson for increased effectiveness. In addition, teacher performance assessments such as National Board for Professional Teaching Standards, Beginning Educator Support and Training, California Teacher Performance Assessment, and Ed Teacher Performance Assessment include teacher reflection as a performance criteria. Despite ubiquity in education, there are several obstacles to effective reflection, including Possessing insufficient vision for using reflection to improve teaching Confusing reflective or analytical writing with descriptive writing Viewing reflection as inconsequential – or busy work Fearing reflection will expose gaps in performance requiring remediation, and Unwilling to take emotional risks associated with gathering feedback for reflection. Another obstacle worth special mention is time. Teacher work disallows moments of solitude and pause, unless one includes lunch or restroom breaks. However, implicit in Dewey’s definition and model of reflection are temporary pauses in action for deliberate analysis of events. The literature dealing with teacher reflection includes numerous models, indicating various perspectives, approaches, and areas of emphasis. Boody describes teacher reflection as occupying one of four types of accounts, either retrospection, problem-solving, critical reflection, or reflection-in-action. The first account, reflection as retrospective analysis means looking back at prior experiences to make sense of them. The second account, reflection as problem solving is based on John Dewey’s model of reflection which includes five steps: identifying a problematic situation, suspending action to consider possible solutions, processing feelings of disequilibrium, identifying a workable solution, connecting the solution with other context elements, and testing the solution for suitability along with making revisions. The third account, critical reflection, is based on theory proposed by Van Manen who posited three levels of reflection The first level is technical, which focuses on achieving an objective using a technique. For example, observing that students are misunderstanding a particular grammar rule and deploying a mini-lesson for remediating confusion. The second level is interpretation, which emphasizes making a decision based on a commitment to some value. For example, overhearing a student speak a disparaging word to a peer, and pulling the perpetrator aside to discuss the expectation that students speak kindly to one another. The third level is critical reflection, which emphasizes pursuit of a virtuous goal such as greater student autonomy and self-determination. For example, convening a circle group meeting with class at the beginning of the year to solicit student input on classroom rules. The final account, according to Boody, is reflection-in-action, which is derived from Schon’s widely cited theory of teacher reflection. Reflection-in-action occurs during acts of teaching, like an ongoing conversation in the teacher’s head about the problem, context, and possible solution, which produces decisions that start the cycle of reflection-in-action over again. Kember and colleagues have also proposed a four-fold model for assessing reflective thinking. It includes non-reflection, understanding, reflection, and critical reflection. Non-reflection is characterized by reproduction of content without comprehension of concepts or theory, or any application to real situations. Understanding shows evidence of comprehending concepts and reliance on theory, but fails to connect to personal experience or context. Reflection shows application of theory to practical situations, along with personal insights. Critical reflection shows evidence of change in perspective over fundamental beliefs – and given its significance, critical reflection occurs infrequently. Yet another model with four levels has been proposed by Larrivee. The first level, pre-reflection, is characterized by Writing descriptively rather than analytically, Operating in survival mode, such as using lessons from the curricula without inspecting their quality, Viewing student and classroom circumstances as beyond control, Focusing on management, and Enforcing procedures without flexibly. Statements indicative of pre-reflection include “I use direct instruction and mini-lectures for input experiences. It’s not my fault if students disengage – this is how they’ll learn in college. I think class would be better if students weren’t so poorly behaved; once I start my lecture, it’s like they tune out, probably because they’re used to playing video games.” The next level, surface reflection, is characterized by Reacting to situations, but failing to recognize patterns of student learning or behavior, Limiting analysis of pedagogy to technical questions, such as the most efficient way to take attendance, and Modifying teaching strategies without questioning underlying assumptions. Narrative characteristic of surface reflection includes “I think direct instruction and mini-lectures are effective, but I have observed that students grow tired of these after repeated use. So I try and vary input experiences by using guided-notes, or concept maps. Students don’t object to these activities, at least not in front of me, but I know that some students would prefer to learn in other ways.” The third level, pedagogical reflection, is characterized by Committing to continuous learning and improvement with genuine curiosity, Experimenting and extending the boundaries of what is usually done, Analyzing the connection between instruction and student learning, and Acknowledging the values, interests, and curiosity of students. Narrative suggestive of pedagogical reflection includes “Direct instruction and mini-lectures are effective, when they are well-planned and concise and used in moderation. But, they’re also easily over-used so I am careful to observe student body-language when deploying direct instruction as the primary input method, and I may decide to chunk the content as needed. Similarly, I always pause after a few minutes to assess students formatively - to ensure comprehension.” The fourth level of Larrivee’s model is critical reflection, characterized by Viewing pedagogy within the broader cultural, historical, political context, Questioning leaders and policymakers regarding the educational system, Addressing issues of equity and social justice, Considering ethical implications of teaching and learning, and Equating the work of teaching with the greater good. Narrative suggesting critical reflection includes “I’ve asked students which instructional practices they like best, and they often say group work. But I’ve observed that students aren’t always honest in their self-assessments. But still, I listen to student feedback, and carefully analyze assessments to ensure I’m making wise decisions. I also teach in a community that equates learning with listening and teaching with talking so I do use mini-lecture and direct instruction from time to time, but mostly to present the appearance of maintaining the status quo. I am on my school’s leadership team and hope to change perceptions of my community over time.” One characteristic shared between these models of reflection is that they are episodic. They dependent on episodes in the work of a teacher. Some criticize emphasis on episodes because they are perceived as deficient for describing change over time. Another criticism is that these models are insufficient for explaining why teachers are motivated to change, which is implicit in the act of reflecting. One explanation for this is that teacher response to reflection is a moral act. For example, overhearing students say they dislike drill-and-practice worksheets may cause teachers to select an alternative method because they desire to preserve students’ enthusiasm. Reflection as moral response is predicated on teacher compassion for students, which generally manifests itself in desires and activities that promote positive relationships. Reflection as moral response infers that a teacher will change for the sake of student well-being, but this may bring with it risks associated with having to acknowledge one’s fears and character flaws. A tangential obstacle to this kind of reflection is that it generally occurs in the midst of carrying on all of the regular responsibilities of teaching. Time and distance from situations for introspection and contemplation are scarce or altogether absent during a teacher’s work day. Engaging in reflection leading to profound change revolves around various sources, such as those described in models of reflection, including problematic situations, pursuit of virtuous goals, or application of theory in practical ways. Another source is solicitation of student feedback about teacher performance, such as deploying a survey. One survey used in some districts is Tripod, which teachers give to their students for assessing student perceptions of teacher care, classroom control, and challenge. Sample items include My teacher in this class makes me feel that he really cares about me. And, Students in this class treat the teacher with respect. Similar to reflection as a morel act, collecting this kind of feedback may be perceived as a risk, since responses have the potential to expose profound weaknesses. Student surveys aside, there are many other sources of information and activities for promoting reflection, including Analyzing student work, Reflecting aloud with nearby colleagues (keeping in mind that effective reflection need not always be written), In Reflecting when inspired rather than waiting until it is required, Surrounding oneself with enthusiastic colleagues, Exercising decisions about instruction and curricula, and Having freedom in the form of time and opportunity to collaborate with peers.