Advanced and Critical Reflective Practice - Case Study Example

Advanced and Critical Reflective Practice Many descriptions or definitions have been put forward to try to explain what reflective practice is. According to Hargreaves (1997:223), reflective practice can be any tool that can bring about professional maturity as well as improved care of patients. On the other hand, Jarvis (1992:27) defines reflective practice as a process which turns thoughtful practices into situations that are likely for learning activities. This paper provides the reader with a detailed look into advanced and critical reflective practice through a detailed analysis of the theories of reflective practice. Three types of reflection have been identified and these include: i. Reflection prior to action. Reed and Proctor (1993) assert that this type of reflection occurs before an action is taken. The practitioner is expected to look back at what has been done and generate appropriate guidelines to use in accomplishing a forthcoming task. ii. Reflection in action. Schon (1987) refers to this as thinking on one’s feet. This is where the practitioner reflects in person while undertaking the given task. A good example for this case is where a writer is writing a given story and leaves out the setting; this can be corrected with help from reflection in action. iii. Reflection on action. This type of reflection involves reviewing of an incident with hindsight i.e. the practitioner looks back at what has been done and carries out a review of the actions, product and thoughts of the accomplished work (Reed and Proctor 1993). A good reflective practice is dependent on event interpretation and memory. A number of models have been proposed for reflective practice and are in two categories: structured and cyclical models. The former comprises exercises (question and answer) that more experienced practitioners may find limiting (Burton 2000) while the latter provides the practitioner with a framework to act as a guide in the reflection on action way of thinking. The figure below shows an example of a reflection on action model. Figure1. A cyclical model of reflection (Gibbs 1988) Literature Review John Dewey, a leading educational philosopher during early 20th century argued that native America’s traditional learning was rigid, insufficient and stagnant compared to the development of the then society and economy, a feat that is yet to be realized as some critics argue (Schon, 1987). In addition, Reed and Proctor (1993) believed that learning practices that are child-centred should be employed as a heart for learning as this develops into a lived experience for the individual as he/she grows. The development of reflective thinking was vital to Dewey’s philosophy; he believed that the beginning of reflection is when one is in a state of doubt or perplexity. In this case, Dewey believes that the person is only reactive and neither active nor proactive i.e. things that happen are not their cause but they merely happen to them, hence, focus should be put on reflective action rather than routine action as it steers development (Reed and Proctor 1993). Schon (1987) suggested reflection on and in action which can simply be termed to as reflecting after something has been done and reflecting while the something is being done respectively. Schon (1987) believed that delivery of well prepared piece of work or writing encompassed constant monitoring and progressive awareness of the development of the session. This progressive awareness and constant monitoring help the practitioner to correct mistakes, a situation he refers to as ‘thinking on your feet’. After successful completion of the session, one can reflect on, carry out a critical analysis, and evaluate the learning process so as to be able to plan and prepare for any future task. This process then restarts again upon assignment of another task hence forming a cycle with nonstop improvements. Schon (1987) went ahead in his development and made a distinction between tacit knowledge and technical rationality. Schon (1987) concurred with Dewey that reflection starts in a working environment with confusing and somehow unique situations (Schon refers to these situations as the swampy lowlands of practice). Trainers acquire theoretical knowledge (technical rationality) regarding their subject of teaching and/or learning. This is not enough as some trainees may come up with opinions expressing their discomfort with theory stuff; hence trainers have to develop tacit knowledge (combination of theory and practice which is self-developed) from real-life experiences where there is application, testing and evaluating of the learnt theory. Reflection in and on action helps the practitioner to constantly advance their practice and develop practice-based theory. The figure below is an illustration of a learning environment where reflection in and on is used to up teaching and learning. (Source: Schon, 1987) Kolb and Gibbs also developed repetitive models that are associated with reflection practices but they constantly evolve and improve the learning cycle (Gibbs 1988). As a result of their repetitive nature, these models are sometimes referred to as iterative. Kolb developed an experiential theory of learning with activities covered over four stages: concrete experience, reflection, conceptualization of the abstract and active experimentation. A teacher, for instance, employs role play in a given session. The decision to use role play shows that there is concrete experience in the same, and thus the practice partially succeeds. Through reflection, the teacher looks at this practice and identifies areas that need improvements for it to be perfect. In addition, the practitioner and/or teacher digs deep into books and consults with more experienced colleagues on the issue of role play and comes up with a better version of the task (abstract conceptualization) which he/she incorporates into the new plan for a new task (active experimentation) resulting in a new wave of experience, and the cycle begins again (iterates). Gibbs (1988) referred to his model as the model of learning by doing which he only adds feelings as illustrated in the diagram. In addition, the learning by doing model provides the practitioner with vital points of development particularly in description, action plan, evaluation and analysis. Below is a diagram showing Gibbs’s model of learning by doing. The Model of learning by doing (Gibbs, 1988) Critical Reflection Modern-day writing regarding reflective practice requires the practitioner to employ both wider social critique and personal reflection. The health sector has established a model where reflective practice is viewed as a combination of reflection, being aware of you, and thinking critically where the philosophical roots of the practice are identified in the experience of the practitioner and in the critical theory. Moon (2005) asserts that reflection single handed has the tendency to “remain at the level of relatively undisruptive changes in techniques or superficial thinking”. On the other hand, critical reflection comprises attending of talks, political and social analysis so as to bring about social action and transformation. Fook (2006) believes that critical reflection “enables an understanding of the way (socially dominant) assumptions may be socially restrictive, and thus enables new, more empowering ideas and practices. Critical reflection thus enables social change beginning at individual levels. Once individuals become aware of the hidden power of ideas they have absorbed unwittingly from their social contexts, they are then freed to make choices on their own terms” (Moon 2005). Reynolds identified four distinguishing characteristics of critical reflection and usual reflection. They include (Moon 2005): i. The concern is has on assumptions for questions. ii. It focuses on social as opposed to individuals covered by other reflection versions. iii. The specific attention it gives to power relations analysis. iv. The pursuit it has for emancipation. Moon (2005) argues that managers are more aware of their operating environment when they use critical reflection as compared to when a mere reflection is used. Reflexivity This is a case where practitioners critically reflect themselves and the organization simultaneously. The three terms; reflection, critical reflection and reflexivity are sometimes used interchangeably wrong. According to Finlay and Gough (2003), these concepts can be better understood if they are thought to be a continuum; one end represents reflexivity (a dynamic self-awareness process), another end representing reflection (thinking of something after it happened), and between them stands the critical reflection concept/process (Moon 2005). Reflective Practice Models Ghaye and Lillyman (1997) identified five types of reflective practices and they include iterative, structured, synthetic, hierarchical and holistic (Burton 2000). Most of these models are derived from Schon’s model; reflection on action; with notable differences in levels of explanation, criticality, prescription and reflexivity. According to Burton (2000), three major processes are involved in these models: retrospection-reviewing a given experience or situation; self-evaluation- critical analysis and evaluation of the feelings and actions associated with the situation with the aid of theoretical perspectives; and reorientation- the employment of results from self-evaluation to influence future outcomes of similar experiences or situations. According to Johns (1991), structured models of reflection employ staged questions as a guide to reflection, hierarchical models focus on providing the learner with a guide through subsequent reflexive ability levels. On the other hand, holistic and iterative models are more cyclical with emphasis on the learning process. Levels of Reflection It might prove tricky to distinguish between levels and types of reflection but Argyris and Schon (1974) provided a simple idea of single and double-loop learning. According to Argyris and Schon (1974), single loop refers to learning about values that have already been accepted while double loop refers to learning that critics the values that have been accepted (Schon, 1987). According to Moon (2005), at least two levels are assumed by a host of reflection approaches – the lower level of experimentation and a higher level of conceptualization). On the other hand, Mezirow (1991) proposes three levels of reflection starting with a descriptive level, followed by a reflective level and finally a transformational or critical level (Burton 2000). The content, process and reflection of the premise levels are distinguished based on the setback’s content, approaches to the setback, and the fundamental premises of the setback followed by a questioning of the relevance of the strategies. Leung and Kember formulated another with four reflection levels: i. Habitual action ii. Understanding iii. Reflection iv. Critical reflection These levels represent the abilities to develop: i. From a state of performing automatically with little awareness, ii. Via understanding of the situation without consultations or relations to prior cases, iii. Onto methodical consideration of knowledge grounds and their implications, iv. To finally being aware of what entails given thoughts and views. According to Burton (2000), Hatton and Smith came up with another version of the four levels of reflective practices and they include: unreflective descriptive – this entails capacity to provide a report and interpretation from own perspective; reflective descriptive – demonstration of an effort to analyze a piece of work from either a different or own perspective; dialogic – the ability to look back and carry out an analysis based on numerous perspectives; and critical – this is where one is able to integrate cultural, social and political considerations. Tools and Techniques of Reflection Numerous tools and techniques have been proposed and can be used verbally or in written form, either in self-reflection or interactively. According to Moon (2005), they include case studies, critical or reflective chats, journaling, poems, metaphors, critical incident technique, fiction, jotter wallet and on-line talks. Furthermore, in some cases where assumptions are taken for granted and need interrogation, the analysis of logically occurring reports and case records, ethnic and demographic data, or meeting’s transcripts may prove to be vital (Moon 2005). Conditions for Reflection Little literature exists that describes the appropriate environment in which reflection occurs. According to Mezirow this climate is referred to as reflective discourse (Burton 2000). This includes being free from compulsion, having access to correct data and/or information, welcoming to new ideas and other views of arguments, as well being able to objectively assess the arguments and weigh the provided evidence. On the other hand, Burton (2000) refers to this climate as the critical acceptance where efforts to challenge old approaches and employ new ones are respected. In this climate, emphasis is placed on dialogue and communication processes as opposed to closed judgements of the practitioners. Conclusion Critical and reflective practice have emerged as popular concepts yet very sophisticated. The two are written and used based on different backgrounds in a host of disciplines for different reasons. These concepts can either be stand alone approaches or visualized as a wide method of transformative or action research and/or learning. References Burton, S. (2000) A critical essay on professional development in dietetics through a process of reflection and clinical supervision, Journal of Human Nutrition and Diet, vol. 13, no. 5, pp. 323-332. Gibbs, G. (1988) Learning by doing: a guide to teaching and learning methods, Further Education Unit - Oxford Polytechnic, Oxford. Hargreaves, J. (1997) Using patients: exploring the ethical dimension of reflective practice in nurse education, Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 223-228. Jarvis, P. (1992) Reflective practice and nursing, Nurse Education Today, vol. 12, pp. 23-30. Johns, C. (1991) The Burford nursing development holistic model of nursing practice, Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 16, pp. 1090-1098. Moon, J. (2005) Guide for busy academics no. 4: learning through reflection. Higher Education Academy. Reed, J. & Proctor, S. (1993) Nurse education - a reflective approach, Edward Arnold, London. Schon, D.A. (1987) Educating the reflective practitioner, Jossey-Bass Publishers. Read More