SelfSelf--reflection in the workplace and reflection in the workplace and professional developmentprofessional development

Supported by the German Research Foundation (DFG-Az.: Gr 1384/11-1)

Stefanie Kipfmüller, Hans Gruber, and Helmut HeidUniversity of Regensburg, Institute for Educational ScienceUniversitätsstraße 31, D-93040 Regensburgworkplace.learning@paedagogik.uni-regensburg.de

• Assumptions: (1) Reflection is an activity-oriented concept which strongly implies a social perspective. (2) Reflection should not only be conceptualized as an instrumental activity as it implies a critical perspective. (3) Reflection on errors is crucial for professional development at work.

•Aim of the study: To assess the association between individuals’ reflective activities at the workplace and their self-perception of professional competence.

Introduction

Research questions Q1: Are critically reflective work behaviour and reflection on errors associated with interest in change? Q2: Are critically reflective work behaviour and reflection on errors associated with initiative and acceptance of responsibility? SampleN=44 nurses working in a residential home for the elder in southern Germany (39 female, 5 male). Participants’ age: 18 to 52 years (M=7.88, SD=7.11); work experience: 1-30 years (M=7.88, SD=7.11).

MethodInstrumentQuestionnaires (Error friendliness: 8 items in 2 sub-scales, Cronbach’s α = .56/.73; critically reflective work behaviour: 17 items in 4 sub-scales, Cronbach’s α = .63 to .80; professionalcompetence: 9 items in 2 sub-scales, Cronbach’s α = .69/.88); self-efficacy (Schwarzer, 1994): 10 items, Cronbach‘s α = .84).

Theoretical background

Critically reflective work behaviourMeasuring workplace-related reflective activities, the concept of critically reflective work behaviour (van Woerkom, 2003) was applied. According to the purpose of the study four facets were adopted: sharing knowledge, critical opinion sharing, experimentation, and reflection.

Error orientationThe concept of error orientation was developed to investigate how individuals think about errors happening in the workplace and how they cope with them (Rybowiak, Garst, Frese, and Batinic, 1999). Two out of the eight dimensions of the concept were applied: thinking about errors and error communication.

Professional competence Interest in change addresses an employee’s affinity towards trying out new ideas or work processes and the general open-mindedness towards changes within the organization. Initiative and acceptance of responsibilityrepresents the employee’s willingness to develop own ideas and to face the consequences instead of seeing somebody else in charge of solving difficulties in the first place (Kauffeld, 2007).

ReferencesKauffeld, S. (2007). Das Kompetenz-Reflexions-Inventar (KRI). [The competence-reflection inventory] In L. von Rosenstiel & J. Erpenbeck (Eds.), Kompetenzmessung, (2nd ed., p. 314). Stuttgart: Schäffer-Poeschel.Rybowiak, V., Garst, H., Frese, M., & Batinic, B. (1999). Error Orientation Questionnaire (EOQ): Reliability, validity and different language equivalence. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 20, 527-547. Schwarzer, R. (1994). Optimistische Kompetenzerwartung: Zur Erfassung einer personellen Bewältigungsressource [Generalized self-efficacy: Assessment of a personal coping resource]. Diagnostica, 40, 105-123.Woerkom, M. van (2003) Critical reflection at work. Bridging individual and organisational learning. Enschede: PrintPartners.

Results / ConclusionsTable 1 shows results of the correlation analysis for all scales: error orientation (thinking about errors, error communication), critically reflective work behaviour (sharing knowledge, critical opinion sharing, experimentation, reflection), professional competence (interest in change, initiative and responsibility), self-efficacy as well as age and work experience.Table 1: Correlation analysis

Table 2 shows a regression analysis testing reflective activities as predictors for interest in change and initiative and responsibility.Table 2: Regression analysis

Results to Q1: Experimentation was identified as the strongest predictor for the relation between reflective work behaviour and interest in change. That confirms the significant positive correlation betweenexperimentation and interest in change (see correlation table). Results to Q2: Examining the predictors for initiative and acceptance of responsibility, the regression analysis reveals self-efficacy and sharing knowledge as important factors what also confirms the results of the correlation analysis (see correlation table). To sum up, the results only partly confirm the important role ofreflective work behaviour as was hypothesized in the study. Noneof the reflection-scales correlated with both competence facets.

Notes: *: p < .05; **: p < .01. (IC = Interest in change; I&R = Initiative and responsibility; SE = Self-efficacy; Ref = Reflection; CD = Critical discussion; SK = Sharing knowledge; Exp = Experimentation; ThE = Thinking about errors; CoE= Error communication; PE = Professional experience.)

IC I&R SE Ref CD SK Exp ThE CoE Age IC - I&R .39** - SE .28 .39** - Ref .20 -.13 .17 - CD .24 .25 .28 -.29 - SK .24 .43** .20 -.17 .19 - Exp .31* .22 .02 -.33* .40** .18 - ThE .31* .19 .37* .05 .12 .03 .36* - CoE .22 .04 .28 .23 .09 .05 -.05 .28 - Age -.06 -.19 -.25 .26 -.30* -.13 -.15 -.06 .23 - PE -.02 -.28 -.12 .18 -.34* -.04 -.10 -.23 .28 .76**

Regression analysis Interest in change Initiative & responsibility

(standardised β-values) Self-efficacy .28 Reflection .34 Critical discussion Sharing knowledge .36 Experimentation . 42 Thinking about errors Error communication Age Professional experience -.26 Adjusted coefficient of determination (R2) .16 .30

Significant correlations were found between (Q1) experimentation, thinking about errors and interest in change as well as between (Q2) sharing knowledge, self-efficacy and initiative and responsibility.