This article was downloaded by: [University of Stellenbosch]On: 31 August 2013, At: 00:36Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Reflective Practice: International andMultidisciplinary PerspectivesPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/crep20

To what extent can reflectivejournaling help beginning teachersdevelop Masters level writing skills?Helen Gadsby a & Sue Cronina Education Faculty, Liverpool Hope University, Liverpool, UKPublished online: 15 Sep 2011.

To cite this article: Helen Gadsby & Sue Cronin (2012) To what extent can reflective journalinghelp beginning teachers develop Masters level writing skills?, Reflective Practice: International andMultidisciplinary Perspectives, 13:1, 1-12, DOI: 10.1080/14623943.2011.616885

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2011.616885

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

To what extent can reflective journaling help beginning teachersdevelop Masters level writing skills?

Helen Gadsby* and Sue Cronin

Education Faculty, Liverpool Hope University, Liverpool, UK

(Received 25 January 2011; final version received 19 August 2011)

This article considers the theory around the use of reflective journals in teachereducation and puts forward the argument that their use has encouraged studentsto develop as reflective practitioners moving from the descriptive or surfacereflection in their practice towards a greater degree of self-reflection and in afew cases critical reflection. Moving from a consideration of ‘Am I doing itright?’ to ‘Is what I am doing right?’, the article also considers the challengesof using reflective journals as an assessed part of a Masters course.

Keywords: reflective practitioner; reflective journal; reflection in action;pedagogy; critical reflection

Introduction

Reflection has increasingly become a key focus of professional development acrossmany disciplines, particularly those with a professional dimension such as teachereducation (Cornford, 2002; Loughran, 2002; Ottesen, 2007; Parsons & Stephenson,2005), nursing (Thorpe, 2004; Wong et al., 1997) and more recently in fields suchas business management (Pavlovich, Collins, & Jones, 2009; Wilson-Medhurst,2005). The development of the reflective practitioner is a generally agreed aim ofeducators but there is a lack of clarity and agreement on what this actually meansin practice and how best it is achieved. Certainly the authors would argue that instudent education it remains largely an implicit aspiration of course design ratherthan an explicit element.

When the secondary Post Graduate Certificate of Education (PGCE) became aMasters accredited course at the authors’ university in 2007, there was an increasedfocus on encouraging beginning student teachers to critically reflect as part of theirengagement with Masters level writing. This requires the ability to engage with theliterature and pedagogy and critically assess how they relate to and interplay withtheir practice and school-based placements. A pilot using reflective journals as amediating tool to support greater critical reflection was trialled by two subject areas,geography and mathematics, grounded in work by others in the field (Larrivee,2008; Moon, 2006; Spalding & Wilson, 2002). The aim of the journal was to sup-port higher level reflective engagement with the course content by facilitatingincreased opportunity for what Larrivee (2000) refers to as solitary reflection.

*Corresponding author. Email: gadsbyh@hope.ac.uk

Reflective PracticeVol. 13, No. 1, February 2012, 1–12

ISSN 1462-3943 print/ISSN 1470-1103 online� 2012 Taylor & Francishttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2011.616885http://www.tandfonline.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

What is reflective practice, why reflect?

Reflective practice is widely acknowledged to be a problematic area to define(Hatton & Smith, 1995; Ottesen, 2007), open to many different interpretations andnuances (Calderhead, 1989; Day, 1993; Dewey, 1933; Schon, 1983; Valli, 1992;Van Manen, 1977). For this paper the authors are using the term reflective practiceto mean the process by which individuals make sense of their experiences by a con-sideration of, and possible change in, their own personal skills, knowledge and dis-positions in light of the personal, professional and wider social contexts in whichthey as practitioners operate. From this definition it follows that for the authors it isa fundamental requirement of teacher education and teacher educators to supportthis development. Future teachers will need to be resilient practitioners who arerequired to develop their abilities to critically reflect and evaluate their own prac-tice. The reflective dimension of the teacher is recognised as critical for successfullearning; Calderhead (1989) emphasised that reflection is important because it facili-tates the linking of theory and practice, and makes the students engage in criticalevaluation, therefore becoming more actively involved in their own professionalaccountability. Thompson and Thompson (2008, p. 10) support this view and iden-tify that ‘learning will not take place and practice will not develop if no connectionsare made between thinking and doing’. Reflection is the bridge between thinkingand doing, and as such it allows movement in both directions. Sometimes, andmore often for beginning teachers, the doing precedes the thinking. As Dewey(1933, p. 78) argued, ‘we do not learn from experience. We learn from reflectingon experience’. However, as beginning teachers’ experience and confidenceincreases, the deeper thinking may precede as well as follow the doing. Loughran(2002) points out that reflection makes teachers better understand what they alreadyknow by reconsidering what they have already learnt. Without the ability to reflect,students will find that their development tends to be very slow. It is a prerequisitefor professional development and change.

Levels of reflection

There is general agreement that there are different forms of reflection. Many authors(Jay, 2003; Moon, 1999; Regan, Case, & Brabacher, 2000; Van Manen, 1997) sug-gest levels and progression in reflective development, moving from practical issuesto more abstract and profound issues of beliefs and values. This notion of linearprogression is somewhat simplistic and does not fully reflect the complexity ofreflection undertaken by student teachers. The process of becoming a reflectivepractitioner is complex and multi-dimensional, but for the purposes of analysis ofreflective writing there is a benefit in identifying different levels of engagement andreflection. Highlighting these differences is also important to support the students’ability to discriminate between different forms of reflection. Different terms are usedfor these levels but they largely fall into three bands. First is that of descriptivereflection, where the teachers are concerned with only recalling how things are. VanManen (1997) calls this technical reflection, while Larrivee (2008) refers to it assurface reflection. The second level is what Van Manen refers to as practical reflec-tion and Larrivee as pedagogical reflection, where the emphasis of the teacher shiftsto the ways things could be by considering the best pedagogical approaches andstrategies to achieve goals, but does not necessarily question the goals. The thirdlevel of reflection is more widely known as critical reflection (Larrivee, 2008;

2 H. Gadsby and S. Cronin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

Sparks-Langer & Colton, 1991; Van Manen, 1997) and there is general agreementthat this level of reflection represents a shift towards a critical consideration of theworth of the goals. The term critical reflection is still loose and interpreted differ-ently by various authors, some including more emphasis on the element of self-criti-cal reflection referred to as personalistic (Valli, 1992) or intrapersonal (Day, 1993).Hatton and Smith (1995) use the term dialogic for this self-discourse activity andview this reflective practice as a separate precursor to critical reflection. This stanceis argued against by Larrivee (2008), who argues that the two are inextricablylinked as in order to take a critical stance of the wider contextual influences, it isnecessary to have an understanding of one’s own position. The authors wouldfavour the Hatton and Smith (1995) discrimination between dialogic reflection ofself and critical reflection of wider societal, historical and political contexts.Although the linkage that Larrivee outlines is clear, it is helpful to identify betweenthe beginning teachers who are engaged in a dialogical reflection and those who aremore broadly critical of their practice. Throughout this paper the authors refer tothe Hatton and Smith (1995) definitions of reflection and use the terms pre-reflective, descriptive reflection, dialogic reflection and critical reflection, as theyallow for clearer identification of the different forms of reflective writing engagedin by the students.

Mediating tool for reflective development

To achieve the aim of supporting reflective practitioners, the development of areflective journal was piloted by the authors with two cohorts of PGCE students.Moon (2006) suggests that the use of reflective journals can help to encourage criti-cal reflection because they give learners experience of dealing with the ill-structurednature of learning. By struggling with the messiness of their experiences and howthese can be articulated in written form, a level of meta-cognitive engagementoccurs and the learning process is enhanced (McCrindle & Christensen, 1995). BothBarnett (1997) and Moon (2006) stress the importance of thinking time in becominga reflective practitioner, the need to generate ‘intellectual space’ which will lead toindependent learning and thought. It can be argued that reflective journals providethis space as they require thought before writing. The process of journaling facili-tates reflective thought, addressing many agendas. Moon (2004) notes that theyallow for an acknowledgment of emotion and the letting go of emotional responsesto experiences by writing down feelings. This can prove therapeutic for many stu-dents and is an essential precursor for analysis of why the feelings were experi-enced and what can be done to change and improve particular situations. Theopportunity to revisit journal reflections can be beneficial to the writer and ensuresthat there is time and space for more objective analysis, thus allowing the writer tobecome more aware of their actions and the consequences of their behaviour. Otte-sen (2007, p. 32) makes a useful distinction between reflection as an objective inteacher education and reflection as a ‘discursive tool mediating learning’. The jour-nal serves both agendas. It foremost supports the beginning teachers’ developmentas reflective practitioners but also is a communication tool. This latter outcome isparticularly relevant as the selection and use of the journal entries was a significantpart of the formal assessment of the PGCE course and provided an opportunity forthe beginning teachers to communicate what they felt was the pertinent and impor-tant focus for their reflections.

Reflective Practice 3

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

Issues around journaling

The authors were interested in exploring the notion of reflective journaling as a ped-agogical tool to support the development of critical reflection by students. It wasagreed that the reflective journal would form part of the formal assessment for thePGCE course in the disciplines of geography and mathematics and equate to 40credits out of 60 at Masters level. The authors felt the status of the reflective writ-ing would be enhanced in the eyes of the students if it was a formal requirement.Pragmatically it was felt that as student teachers typically found the one-year coursehighly demanding, although their intentions may be to complete a written reflectioneach week, if it was not a requirement it might become an aspect they did not prior-itise and might not in reality happen. Bain, Ballantyne, Packer, and Mills (1999),when conducting their research, similarly gave their students credit towards part oftheir course to encourage participation in the research, as they too were concernedabout the level of engagement if it was not considered to count towards theirqualification.

For this pilot a group of 100 PGCE students were required to submit weekly/fortnightly written reflections and a summative assignment drawing from these jour-nal entries. The student journal entries were subsequently analysed in terms of theirdifferent levels of reflective engagement. Data were also gathered from a formalevaluation on the impact of the journals at the end of the course. Empirical data,including entry grades, assignment grades and exit grades against Qualified TeacherStatus (QTS) standards, were collated. The grades were subsequently interrogatedfor any associations between the emergent levels of reflection and the students’prior achievement or their professional development with regard to the QTS stan-dards that focused on reflective practice.

Initially tutors in the two subject areas approached the journaling from oppositeends of the spectrum. In the first year of the course the mathematics tutors felt thestudents should be left largely to write as they felt after an initial session of guid-ance. However, it was quickly realised that the students required more structuredsupport in line with Varner and Peck’s (2003) findings of the benefits of coachedreflections. This was delivered in the second year through smaller seminar groupsas it was felt the smaller groups facilitated a more secure and supportive environ-ment in which to share reflective thoughts and ideas. The use of the smaller semi-nars was also viewed as a reflective tool, with the peer reflections feeding into thesubsequent individual written reflections. For geography the initial starting pointwas a much tighter, structured form of reflection which over the years has movedto allow more open, reflective opportunities. Although the two subjects started atopposite ends of the spectrum, the authors now feel they have evolved a similarmodel with a level of freedom available within a structured framework. This alignswith the model of ‘coached reflection’ suggested by Seibert (1999), which involves

Table 1. Variation between traditional and reflective journal assignment grades.

Reflective journal grade up by 2 grades 4 6%Reflective journal grade up by 1 grade 15 24%Assignment grades equal 29 47%Reflective journal down by 1 grade 14 23%

n = 62

4 H. Gadsby and S. Cronin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

a structured approach where help and guidance are given, in contrast to a model of‘Reflection in action’ which is unstructured and spontaneous. Varner and Peck(2003) note that the coached reflection journals helped to develop critical thinkingby making students engage with course material at higher cognitive levels. Ourfindings (Table 1) support this view. The majority of the students engaged with thepedagogy at the higher cognitive level, with all but two students gaining a Mastersaccredited award.

Variation between traditional Masters assignment and reflective journal

The students’ first assignment in both subject areas was constructed around a tradi-tional literature review. When the grades achieved in the literature review andreflective journal were analysed (Table 1) it was found that 47% of the studentsachieved the same grade in both styles of assignment, 30% achieved a higher gradein the reflective journal and 23% a lower grade. This was in spite of many statinginitially that they had found the assignment more difficult to complete than the ‘tra-ditional’ Masters assignment undertaken as the first assignment. The authors wouldsuggest this evidence supports the argument that the journaling process supportedthe students’ progression in writing at Masters level.

When analysing the results against the exit grades determined by the placementmentors awarded for a cluster of QTS standards known as the Reflective Practi-tioner strand (Table 2), there was also a correlation between those who exited asthe strongest reflective practitioners and those who achieved higher grades in thereflective assignment. The authors would like to argue that the journaling processsupported the development of the reflective practitioner in action. The students whodeveloped their ability to reflective critically in their writing tended to be those whodevelop as stronger reflective practitioners in the classroom.

Reflective practitioner grade vs. assignment grade

Extracts from students’ reflective journals

The extracts below are taken from a number of students’ reflective journals andillustrate the different levels of reflective engagement in their writing. The studentsentered the process of writing at different levels, some already displaying high lev-els of critical thought, whilst others were writing largely at a descriptive level.Although the nature of written engagement with reflective thought is complex andfluid, with many students moving between descriptive, dialogic and critical

Table 2. Reflective practitioner exit grade vs. reflective journal assignment grade.

Assignment grade A B C D E PI

Exit grade

Grade 1 6% 16% 11% 6%Grade 2 1% 5% 24% 10% 1% 2%Grade 3 3% 5% 5% 1%

n = 62

Note: grade 1 = outstanding, grade 2 = good, grade 3 = satisfactory.

Reflective Practice 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

reflection, overall there was, in the authors’ opinion, some movement towards agreater degree of critical reflection in the later stages of their entry writing. This issupported by the results illustrated in Table 1.

Below is a typical early entry that includes a high level of description. Thereflection was completed during the first placement after six weeks in the schooland was centred on creativity in the classroom.

Extract 1

I have also tried to initiate imaginative thinking through the use of poetry with a year9 class on the topic of globalisation. The class were given a poem and song lyricsabout blood diamonds and they had to try and relate the message being portrayed bypeople to their own age group. They worked well, the work produced was outstand-ing. They were supportive towards each other through the presentations and they alsopeer assessed. . . . On the introduction of animal adaptation, I wanted to try a creativeapproach to teaching to let the pupils in groups create their own adapted animal spe-cies. I provided the material and had a prize for the most adapted animal. This processmade the pupils work really hard and it became more competitive when it came topresenting. To make it fair the winner was chosen through peer and self assessmenton their contribution to teamwork. If I were to carry out this lesson again I wouldhave an ICT lesson first where the teams can find out more information and the typeof species they would like to create. I felt very proud of them and their finished prod-ucts and my mentor asked for my lesson plan and resources. My strengths from mysecond review states: being successful in creativity in the classroom by trying newideas and concepts through teaching.

When reading the above extract it can be seen that the student is displaying the ele-ments of pre- and descriptive reflection. They have described the event that tookplace during the lesson but have not considered why the lesson worked and whythe pupils’ learning was developed. The student is still at the ‘what happened stage’and has not developed into questioning why or thinking about the wider implica-tions of what happened in the classroom and how this impacted upon pupillearning.

The second extract is from the same student’s journal but was completed afterfive months of teaching. The extract considers the impact of peer review on theirteaching and others. It was completed during an international placement in Poland.

Extract 2

I feel my experience had matched prior expectations, along with the development ofprofessional skills in collaborative and EAL teaching strategies and techniques. Collabo-ratively teaching an EAL class, demonstrated to me how information and examplescould be structured in different forms to clarify understanding e.g. images, keywords,diagrams by sharing their strengths and insights into their various linguistic, culturaland educational backgrounds teachers could benefit and grow professionally both asindividuals and as a group . . . I felt very anxious teaching in front of my peers however,they undertook the role of professionals and the positive reinforcement and encourage-ment they provided was vital. Peer expertise was valued, as well as new ideas, alterna-tive perspectives, and problem solving. Teachers actively engaged in self assessing andreflecting on their professional needs and shared expertise become active problem solv-ers together (Kayler 2009). The constructive feedback from peers was extremely effec-tive and became a positive form of positive engagement. The feedback was a critical

6 H. Gadsby and S. Cronin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

element in reflection and on our progress, as a team and individually. Peer observationsand peer feedback can facilitate the development of professional knowledge (Kaasilaand Lauruala 2010) as it helped in our team planning to adapt and improve our teachingfor the next day (by incorporating diagrams and images, rather than using repetitiveterms. Giving feedback was strange; however I found it encouraging as I was able toselect the positive and negative attributes of their classes, which I feel confirms my ownprogression and professional development. . .). From this experience I have been pro-vided with insights into my own schooling and culture and have opened my mind to abroader educational perspective. I believe this experience has improved my self-effi-ciency as well as my professional development in terms of global learning.

Here the student is much more confident in their own views and opinions and usesthe theory around the topic to support their ideas and consider how this experiencehas helped to move their learning forward. They are much more critical of the pro-cesses that have taken place and the authors would argue that the writing is display-ing a more dialogic level of reflection.

Extract 3 is from the meta-reflection written by the same student halfway throughtheir second placement. The student had spent seven months in school. The meta-reflection requires students to pick a topic that they have struggled with and evaluateand reflect upon their progress to date and how their perceptions and ideas havechanged over time. As can be seen from the below, the student has spent timeexploring the theory around the topic and here reflects upon how their perceptionshave changed. Again the authors would argue that the student is dialogic in the styleof reflection. This extract shows a progression towards a greater level of reflection.

Extract 3

Chosen focus: differentiation and inclusion

I initially found the topic of differentiation daunting as I thought it was only to assistthe SEN pupils and I could not plan when or in what format to provide personalisedassistance. The teaching assistants in my first placement school were very supportiveand helpful as they provided me with valuable feedback. Towards the end of my firstplacement I became confident in my ability to differentiate between sets, abilities andyear groups. . . . I found pupils’ progression increased across the topic as their inde-pendence and understanding became clearer. In my second placement the pupils wereacademically able and needed to be challenged. This is where my perspective changedand I had to begin to think of ways of challenging and extending pupils’ knowledgeto assist them in reaching their potential. With the aid of writing frames and set group-ings, among other strategies I began to see an improvement in the behaviour of certainindividuals . . . On reflection I strongly believe praise and encouragement go hand inhand with success. To be able to assess teaching style/strategy and pupil success, it isessential to incorporate assessment into daily lessons. Formative assessment is crucialfor peer collaboration and the understanding of knowledge . . . I have learnt that per-sonalised learning and differentiation is a provision put in place to assist, develop andextend both SEN and Gifted and Talented pupils’ knowledge and understanding andshould be made accessible to all pupils. During my time in school I have been explor-ing the answers to the following questions:

(1) Will differentiated resources take up too much time?(2) What level should I pitch my lesson when teaching a mixed ability class?

Reflective Practice 7

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

(3) How can I promote inclusion in a mixed ability class?(4) Is it fair to use peer assessment in a mixed class?(5) How can I challenge and progress the learning of the Gifted and Talented?

Differentiation and personalised learning is interlinked. Inclusion is about the presence,participation and achievement of young people with diverse needs. Establishing learn-ers’ entitlement irrespective of social background, culture, race and gender is vital.

Extract 4

The extract below includes another example of a meta-reflection by a studenttowards the end of the course. In this extract the student reflects back on an earlierdescriptive entry completed in the first term. This process of revisiting earlierentries supports a deeper level of engagement and demonstrates the shift by the stu-dent towards a more critical style of reflection.

Initial journal entry

This week’s focus is ICT. In the classes which I have been observing, ICT is rarelyused effectively. The interactive whiteboards appear to be used in place of the regularwhiteboards, for the teacher to simply make notes on. The teachers also use the inter-active whiteboards to display the work for the class to complete by putting work froman electronic textbook on there. I don’t believe that this is using ICT effectively as thepupils are simply passive learners, there is no interaction regarding the board. Wouldit be so difficult to include small segments of interaction where the pupils can comeup and use the board?

Student meta-reflection

I believe that in the school where I was on placement, the interactive whiteboard wasnot used to its full potential. The teachers allowed pupils very little opportunity, if anyat all, to interact with the whiteboard. One teacher even stated that they would havebenefited more from having one thousand whiteboard markers instead of having theinteractive whiteboard installed.

This highlighted the differences between what university and research promotes asgood practice and what is actually carried out in school. Furlong et al. (1988, citedin Maynard & Furlong, 1995) provide a theory as to why this may happen. Duringa teacher training course an individual will experience four levels of training. Levelone is training in school; level two is training in the form of workshops and semi-nars; level three is the critical study of principles of study; and level four is the crit-ical study of practice taking into account research. With regards to training inschool, universities can only theorise what may happen with classroom practice asthe training requires specific knowledge of the school, which only the school-basedmentor would have. University staff can provide advice, although this may notalways be accurate. On the other hand, universities have great experience regardingthe other three levels. This is largely due to the research carried out in universitiesand the professional knowledge and experience of lecturers, whereas mentors inschool may not have the same breadth of knowledge.

8 H. Gadsby and S. Cronin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

Implication of results

Brookfield (1995) found that Initial Teacher Education (ITE) students in the earlystages of their development made no connection between theory and practice, onlyreaching level one of Hatton and Smith’s (1995) framework when writing abouttheir practice. However, as their confidence in the classroom increased Brookfieldsaw evidence of the journals moving through the stages towards critical reflectionwhere a link between theory and practice in the journals emerged. Morrison (1996)also noted that teaching students ‘move on’ in their thinking through the use ofjournals. This is supported by our own research. In most cases the journal entriescompleted at the start of the course displayed all the elements of descriptive writingor descriptive reflection with few students reaching the dialogic stage, but by theend of the course the majority of the students had reached the dialogic reflectionstage with a small number showing some elements of critical reflection.

At the end of the course a detailed evaluation of the journals was completed,which included a questionnaire for all students who had been part of the pilot. Thequestions were structured to ascertain the students’ preferred style of assessment,and how effective the journals had been in encouraging critical reflection and devel-oping the students as reflective practitioners. The vast majority felt the journals hadsupported this development. Comments included:

The purpose of being a reflective teacher is the ability to ‘flash back’ on your class-room practice and make connections to theory and opinions of others so as to improveyour practice. (Maths student, 2009)

The reflective journal gets you to look back at your teaching and from that ways toimprove can be identified. (Geography student)

Even though many of the students (67% of the geographers and 72% of the mathe-matics students) said they would have preferred to complete the traditional assign-ments. When asked which type of assessment supported their development better,the majority acknowledged that the journal had a greater impact on improving andinforming their practice (78% of geography students and 65% of mathematics stu-dents). The students were asked: ‘The PGCE assessments are designed to supportyou to become a better informed and effective teacher. Which type of assignmentenables you to do this more effectively?’ The positive responses included commentssuch as:

The reflective journal encouraged me to not only read around a source in general butalso look more closely at aspects that directly affected me and therefore improve mypedagogy and practice. (Maths student)

Reflective journal because we are forced to look back on our failings. (Geography stu-dent)

The minority of students who did not respond positively about the reflective journaldid so for two main reasons. Most comments were around the activity of writing.The students recognised the value of reflection and felt they were reflecting on theirpractice and reading, but felt this did not require written reflective action. As onecommented:

Reflective Practice 9

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

I reflect internally, the need to write these down merely provided another task to com-plete in an already extensive list. (Maths student)

The second reason given was the need to incorporate reading and theory into thereflection. Some students felt this was contrived and unnecessary. This was summa-rised by one student who commented:

Linking reflection to theory seemed an unnecessary attempt to make the journal Mas-ters level. (Maths student)

These comments suggest there is still work to be done in ensuring the studentsfully appreciate the value of articulating their reflections in written form and, bylinking to reading and theory, enhance the reflection to move to a more criticallevel.

Ethical considerations

There are obviously ethical implications of assessing reflective writing. Ghaye(2007, p. 151) discusses the applied ethics of journals, noting that they havethe capacity to contain a ‘plethora of ethical issues’. His editorial considers thecomplexity and interconnectivity of emotion in the processes of learning andthe tensions in making public and offering up for assessment what is possiblya private and personal set of reflective viewpoints and emotions. He argues thatworking within the context of formal assessment, the university has a responsi-bility to clearly communicate an ethical approach to the process. For theauthors this was an essential element and required careful consideration of howthe assessment outcomes could be achieved to appropriate ethical standards. Inpractice this involved giving the student teachers ownership of the selection ofexcerpts from their private journal entries that would be submitted for theassessment.

Final conclusions

The reflective journal pilot set out to consider the impact of the use of reflectivejournals on the one-year PGCE course. The authors would argue that their findingsindicate in a small way that the journaling process can provide a powerful pedagog-ical tool supporting the development of the student teachers as increasingly criti-cally reflective practitioners. Reflection is complex and relational, but it is an aspectof professional development that can be nurtured and advanced. Although the stu-dents may all start with different levels of skill in writing reflectively, they can allmove themselves to deeper levels of reflection over time as they return to analysesome of their earlier descriptive writing. The journaling process requiring weeklyreflections and subsequent written ‘meta-reflections’ scaffolded increasing depth ofengagement with ideas and issues relevant and purposeful for the beginning teach-ers. Although not sufficient to ensure the growth of professionally reflective practi-tioners, the journal can be argued to be an effective tool in supporting the process.The students teachers’ assignments submitted towards the end of the course demon-strated increased levels of criticality required for Masters level work.

10 H. Gadsby and S. Cronin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

Notes on contributorsHelen Gadsby is the course leader for the PGCE secondary geography course at LiverpoolHope University. She also teachers on the BAQTS and PGCE Primary courses. She has 16years teaching experience in secondary schools in the home counties. Helen’s researchinterests include reflective practice, education for sustainable development and globallearning. She has presented workshops and papers around these topics at a number ofnational and international conferences. She is joint series editor for the TeachingContemporary Themes in Secondary Education books and joint editor of the first book inthe series Global learning and sustainable Development published by David Fulton.

Sue Cronin is coordinator for mathematics education and course leader for the PGCEsecondary mathematics course at Liverpool Hope University. Sue has taught across a range ofITE programmes as well as professional development courses for teaching assistants, primaryand secondary mathematics teachers. Sue’s research interests include reflective practice, earlyprofessional development and creativity. She is presently involved in a funded research projectinto the creative experiences of newly and recently qualified teachers. Sue has presentedworkshops and papers around these topics at a number of national and internationalconferences.

ReferencesBain, J., Ballantyne, R., Packer, J., & Mills, C. (1999). Using journal writing to enhance

student teachers’ reflectivity during field experience placements. Teaching and TeacherEducation, 5(1), 51–73.

Ballantyne, R., & Packer, J. (1995). The role of student journals in facilitating reflection atdoctoral level. Studies in Continuing Education, 17(1 and 2), 29–45.

Barnett, R. (1997). Higher education: A critical business. Buckingham: Society for Researchinto Higher Education (SRHE) and Oxford University Press.

Brookfield, S.D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Calderhead, J. (1989). Reflective teaching and teacher education. Teaching and TeacherEducation, 5(1), 43–51.

Calderhead, J., & Gates, P. (1993). Conceptualizing reflection in teacher development. Lon-don: Falmer Press.

Chitpin, S. (2006). The use of reflective journal keeping in a teacher education programme:A Popperian analysis. Reflective Practice, 7(1), 73–86.

Cornford, I.R. (2002). Reflective teaching: Empirical findings and some implications for tea-cher education. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 54(2), 219–235.

Day, C. (1993). Reflection: A necessary but not sufficient condition for professional develop-ment. British Educational Research Journal, 19, 83–93.

Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to theeducative process. Boston, MA: Heath.

Ghaye, T. (2007). Is reflective practice ethical? (The case of the reflective portfolio) EditorialReflective Practice, 8(2), 151–162.

Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition andimplementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(1), 39–49.

Jay, J.K. (2003). Quality teaching: Reflection as the heart of practice. Lanham, MD: Scare-crow Press.

Kaasila, A., & Lauruala, A. (2010). Towards a collaborative, interactionist model of teacherchange. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 854–862.

Kayler, M.A. (2009). Teacher development and learner-centred theory. Teacher Development,13(1), 57–69.

Larrivee, B. (2000). Transforming teaching practice: Becoming the critically reflective tea-cher. Reflective Practice, 1(3), 293–307.

Larrivee, B. (2008). Meeting the challenge of preparing reflective practitioners. The NewEducator, 4(2), 1–20.

Loughran, J.J. (2002). Effective reflective practice. In search of meaning in learning aboutteaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(1), 33–43.

Reflective Practice 11

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013

Maynard, T., & Furlong, J. (1995). Learning to teach and models of mentoring. In T. Kerry& A.S. Mayes (Eds.), Issues in mentoring (pp. 10–25). London: Routledge.

McCrindle, A., & Christensen, C. (1995). The impact of learning journals on meta-cognitiveprocesses and learning performance. Learning and Instruction, 5(3), 167–185.

Moon, J. (1999). Learning journals: A handbook for academics, students and professionaldevelopment. London: Kogan Page.

Moon, J. (2004). A handbook of reflective and experiential learning. London: RoutledgeFal-mer.

Moon, J. (2006). A handbook for reflective practice and professional development (2nd ed.).London and New York: Routledge.

McGarr, O., & Moody, J. (2010). Scaffolding or stifling? The influence of journal require-ments on students’ engagement in reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 11(5), 579–591.

Morrison, K. (1996). Developing reflective practice in higher degree students through alearning journal. Studies in Higher Education, 21(3), 317–332.

Ottesen, E. (2007). Reflection in teacher education. Reflective Practice, 8(1), 31–46.Parsons, M., & Stephenson, M. (2005). Developing reflective practice in student teachers:

Collaboration and critical partnerships. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11(1), 95–116.

Pavlovich, K., Collins, E., & Jones, G. (2009). Developing students’ skills in reflective prac-tice. Design and Assessment Journal of Management Education, 33(1), 37–58.

Regan, T.G., Case, C.W., & Brabacher, J.W. (2000). Becoming a reflective educator: How tobuild a culture of inquiry in the schools. Thousands Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York:Basic Books.

Seibert, K.W. (1999). Reflection in action: Tools for cultivating on-the-job learning condi-tions. Organisational Dynamics, 27(3), 54–65.

Spalding, E., & Wilson, A. (2002). Demystifying reflection: A study of pedagogical strate-gies that encourage reflective journal writing. Teachers College Record, 104, 1393–1421.

Sparks-Langer, G.M., & Colton, A. (1991). Synthesis of research on teachers’ reflectivethinking. Educational Leadership, March, 37–44.

Thompson, S., & Thompson, N. (2008). The critically reflective practitioner. Hampshire:Palgrave Macmillan.

Thorpe, K. (2004). Reflective learning journals: From concept to practice. Reflective Prac-tice, 5(3), 327–343.

Valli, L. (1992). Reflective teacher education: Cases and critiques. New York: Albany StateUniversity of New York Press.

Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. CurriculumInquiry, 6(3), 205–228.

Varner, D., & Peck, S. (2003). Learning from learning journals: The benefits and challengesof using learning journal assignments. Journal of Management Education, 27, 52–77.

Wilson-Medhurst, S. (2005). Supporting student development using reflective writing. Inves-tigations in University Teaching and Learning, 2(2), 89–92.

Wong, K.Y., Loke, A.Y., Wong, M., Tse, H., Kan, E., & Kember, D. (1997). An actionresearch study into the development of nurses as reflective practitioners. Journal of Nurs-ing Education, 34(10), 476–481.

Yost, D.S., Sentner, S.M., & Forlenza-Bailey, A. (2000). An examination of the construct ofcritical reflection: Implications for teacher education programming in the 21st century.Journal of Teacher Education, 51, 39–49.

12 H. Gadsby and S. Cronin

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f St

elle

nbos

ch]

at 0

0:36

31

Aug

ust 2

013