using technology for enhancing reflective writing, metacognition and learning

This article was downloaded by: [Loughborough University]On: 25 November 2014, At: 07:05Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Further and HigherEducationPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjfh20

Using technology for enhancingreflective writing, metacognition andlearningCarolyn Mair aa Department of Psychology , Southampton Solent University ,East Park Terrace , Southampton , SO14 0YN , United KingdomPublished online: 27 Jul 2011.

To cite this article: Carolyn Mair (2012) Using technology for enhancing reflective writing,metacognition and learning, Journal of Further and Higher Education, 36:2, 147-167, DOI:10.1080/0309877X.2011.590583

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2011.590583

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

http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/cjfh20

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/showCitFormats?doi=10.1080/0309877X.2011.590583

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2011.590583

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Using technology for enhancing reflective writing, metacognitionand learning

Carolyn Mair*

Department of Psychology, Southampton Solent University, East Park Terrace,Southampton, SO14 0YN, United Kingdom

(Received 30 May 2010; final version received 22 August 2010)

There exists broad agreement on the value of reflective practice forpersonal and professional development. However, many students inhigher education (HE) struggle with the concept of reflection, so they donot engage well with the process, and its full value is seldom realised.An online resource was developed to facilitate and structure the record-ing, storage and retrieval of reflections with the focus on facilitatingreflective writing, developing metacognitive awareness and, ultimately,enhancing learning. Ten undergraduate students completed a semi-structured questionnaire prior to participating in a focus group designedto elicit a common understanding of reflective practice. They maintainedreflective practice online for 6 weeks and participated in post-studyindividual interviews. Findings provide evidence for the positiveacceptance, efficiency and effectiveness of the intervention. Using astructured approach to online reflective practice is empowering andultimately enhances undergraduate learning through the development ofmetacognition.

Keywords: reflection; metacognitive; learning; higher education

Introduction

This article describes the rationale, method and outcomes of a pilot studyconducted at Southampton Solent University (SSU). The aim was to design,develop and evaluate a novel online resource to facilitate reflective practicewith the focus on learning, and developing metacognition and enhanced per-formance. Section 1 provides background information; Section 2 describesthe pilot study; and Section 3 draws the evidence and outcomes together,concluding with suggestions for further work.

*Email: [email protected]

Journal of Further and Higher EducationVol. 36, No. 2, May 2012, 147–167

ISSN 0309-877X print/ISSN 1469-9486 online� 2011 UCUhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2011.590583http://www.tandfonline.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

1. Background information

Reflective practice has long been acknowledged as a process for personaland professional development (e.g. Dewey 1933/1993; Kolb 1970; Schön1983, 1987; Boud, Keogh, and Walker 1985; Eraut 1994; Moon 1999). Stu-dents in higher education (HE) are required to critically reflect – that is, totake time to focus on the cognitive aspects (thinking, problem solving andso on) that led to particular actions, the outcomes and lessons learned fromthose actions, and how these inform what they might do in the future.

Reflective practice offers the opportunity for thinking about thinking,learning about learning, self-monitoring and regulation. This is metacogni-tion (Flavell 1979), an inherent part of reflective practice and a strong pre-dictor of academic success (Dunning et al. 2003; Coutinho 2007). The roleof self-regulation, in terms of understanding one’s learning strengths andweaknesses, specific task demands (e.g. Pintrich 1995) and general studyeffectiveness, has been emphasised (Bouffard et al. 1995; Isaacson andFujita 2006). Students who possess self-regulation skills approach learningwith a range of strategies to achieve their goals and are aware of their levelof mastery (Isaacson and Fujita 2006). However, in order to fully exploitopportunities for self-monitoring and regulation through reflective practice,reflection on reflection (meta-reflection; Dewey 1939) needs to take place.Meta-reflection promotes self-monitoring, personal development and learn-ing.

Engaging in reflective practice is a method of evaluating the effectivenessof personal and professional practice (Everitt and Hardiker 1996) in whichpractitioners become critics of their experiences, emotions and the theoriesin use. Thus they ‘reflect-in’ and ‘reflect-on’ action (Schön 1983). The latteris concordant with Dewey’s (1939) notion of meta-reflection. Reflecting onand reevaluating uncertain or uncomfortable experiences in light of one’scurrent position and knowledge leads to formulations of new insights thatlead to changes in the situation (Schön 1983; Boud, Keogh, and Walker1985). Central to this concept is the notion of the practitioner’s ‘repertoire’(Dewey 1939; Schön 1983). Thus, despite the uniqueness of the novel,uncertain situation, similarities or analogies to a familiar situation can bemade so that previously successful strategies can be drawn on and adaptedto fit the new situation. Therefore, in theory, reflective practitioners developand learn by means of a continuous process of thoughtful consideration ofcritical experiences (e.g. Dewey 1939; Boud 2001), using, for example,reflective writing in journals and logs to work through problems. However,in practice, many learners struggle with the concept of reflection, and devel-opment is less than optimal.

The potential for reflection in facilitating learning and understanding in themore unstructured areas of knowledge domains is one of its most powerfulfeatures. (King 2002, 2)

148 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

Despite the large amount of literature, there is no consensus on whatconstitutes reflective practice. The requirements and purposes of reflectivewriting are often poorly defined in HE. Furthermore, Boud and Walker(1998) cite a number of problems, such as reflecting on demand, reflectingwithout learning, inappropriate disclosure, uncritical acceptance of experi-ence and excessive use of teacher power, that arise from basic misunder-standings. They argue that instructor as well as student inexperience oflearning and reflection can cause difficulties for learners.

In addition to the problems described previously, there is little agreementon what constitutes the best, or even appropriate, means of assessment(Sumsion and Fleet 1996). Evidence suggests that when learners knowreflections are to be read, graded or assessed by others, the incentive is todemonstrate knowledge and hide ignorance or doubt (Boud and Walker1998). This is counter to Dewey’s original purpose of reflection. In fact,Boud, Cohen, and Sampson (1999) highlight the dichotomies between thenature of reflection and the nature of assessment, and questions the valueand integrity of assessing reflective practice at all.

Although evidence on reflective learning highlights the importance ofreflection for developing deeper learning (Strampel and Oliver 2008), it typi-cally omits the connection between learning and reflection (Moon 1999).Furthermore, the literature on students’ perspectives on reflective practiceand about the processes involved in becoming a reflective practitioner issparse (Wilkinson 1999). Sayers (2004), describing problems encounteredby doctoral students, concludes that developing reflective writing requiresthe development of reflective thinking which is concerned not only withhow individuals think, but also with how they construct experience moregenerally. This demands a level of social maturity that affords distancingfrom social pressures, and the ability to make independent judgments andtake responsibility for actions (PISA 2006). It is therefore unsurprising thatmany undergraduate students struggle with the concept of reflective practice.In order to help students develop their reflective skills, a range ofapproaches including ‘metacognitive prompting’ (Hoffman and Spatariu,2008) and using technology have been developed. For example, Hoffmanand Spatariu (2008) found metacognitive prompting enhanced problem solv-ing performance through activation of reflection and strategy knowledge.Furthermore, Lin et al. (1999) and Barak (2006) found that technology facil-itated reflective thinking and can potentially change the traditional role ofthe instructor from being the main source of information and power to beinga partner and facilitator of learning.

The use of technology affords many benefits – for example, accessibleresources, synchronous and asynchronous communication with peers andexperts, a ‘safe space’ for interactions and personal thoughts, and, impor-tantly, anytime, anyplace learning (Barak 2006; Paulus and Roberts 2006).Furthermore, information and communication technology (ICT) is inherently

Journal of Further and Higher Education 149

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

familiar to the ‘net generation’ (McNeely 2005). Thus, net generation mem-bers are likely to welcome technological interventions and therefore be per-suaded to develop adaptive learning expertise, including reflective writingskills using these media. However, without appropriate structure, ICT toolssuch as logs and journals potentially retain the same nebulous aspect as thetraditional reflective approaches. Scaffolding therefore can be used with ICTto create a structure that encourages and facilitates reflections that arefocused on learning (e.g. Aleven and Koedinger 2002).

In sum, agreement on what constitutes reflective practice is elusive andinstruction on becoming an effective reflective practitioner is sparse. Further-more, the focus is frequently on what has been learned rather than on how ithas been learned, and the emphasis is on improving the reflective writingstyle rather than on learning about learning (metacognition). Writing reflec-tions is time consuming, and novices can be deterred by the nebulous natureof the traditional approach, particularly when these are assessed. Assessingreflections can lead to a lack of disclosure of areas for improvement and,moreover, can result in each assessed reflection being seen as a stand-alonepiece of work rather than as a stage in development that should be reflectedon in future. Hence, once assessed, the reflection is not referred to forimprovement. Hence the full value of reflective practice is seldom achieved.Evidence supports the use of ‘scaffolding’ and the application of technology.In order to address these shortcomings and opportunities, a small-scale studywas undertaken to encourage students to engage in non-assessed reflectivepractice using a novel online scaffolded approach. The aim was to design,develop and evaluate a novel online resource to facilitate reflective practicewith the focus on learning, developing metacognition and enhancing perfor-mance.

2. The study

Method and rationale

A resource, Meta-reflection, was developed using Microsoft Excel, situatedon the university’s virtual learning environment (VLE), to which all studentshave 24/7 access on and off campus. It comprised a simple spreadsheetdesigned to make recording reflections simpler by means of prompts (col-umn headings). The rationale was that simplifying the process would demys-tify it and encourage users to be reflective. Furthermore, the structuredapproach meant that recording reflections would be less time consuming,more contained, and more accessible than recording in the traditional media(e.g. by means of a journal or log). The design combined the accessibilityof online recording, storing and retrieval with a structured approach thatwould focus the reflections on learning about how, not what, individualslearn. In this sense, the resource needed to be available online, facilitate and

150 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

encourage reflective practice by means of structuring to develop metacogni-tive awareness, and lead to enhanced learning.

Traditionally, reflections are stored in unstructured documents, often inhard-copy journals or logs, frequently graded, but seldom referred to again.This wastes a valuable resource for putting into practice the experientiallearning. My aim was to eliminate this wastage by ensuring that, as newreflections are being recorded, previous ones can be viewed simultaneously.That is, students write reflections along rows of the spreadsheet, guided bythe column headings. Above the entry they are composing are previousreflections (see Figure 1 for an example of a completed spreadsheet). Thisenables users to monitor their own development and gain a deeper under-standing of the learning process.

Moreover, in traditional reflective practice, although a hard copy is avail-able, typically reflections are retrieved from memory rather than by beingtraced in the original hard copy. This leads to many problems, not least toembellishment and forgetting. When reflections are stored online, technologyallows faithful recording and retrieval, and therefore such problems are elim-inated. Retrieval is further enhanced because using the spreadsheet allowsreflections to be sorted in any number of ways – for example, by the col-umn heading ‘Topic’ or by the column heading ‘What do I need to do toachieve this?’ Thus, students could search for relevant information to makeefficient and full use of their reflections.

Although the resource was edited on each individual participant’s com-puter, it was situated on the VLE for downloading and for uploading follow-ing editing. This ensured reliable access and back-up.

Figure 1. Example of completed cells on the spreadsheet.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

Table 1. Responses to the semi-structured questionnaire ‘Reflecting on reflectivepractice’.

Item Item Responses Count

1 How do you record yourreflections at present?

Reflective journals 10

2 How often do you record yourreflections?

Weekly 8Four times a week 1Twice daily 1

3 How long have you be usingreflective practice?

Since starting university 8For two years 1Since the age of 8 1

4 Do you find recording yourreflections useful?

Improves memory 3To help with problem areas 2To see progress/changes 2For critical thinking 1To focus on what I need to workon

1

For better organisation of work 1For time management 1Helps avoid feelings of stress 1

5 Do you reflect because you arerequired to as part of your course,or for other reasons?

Part of the course 8Have done so for a long time 2

6 What do you record in yourreflections?

Improvements 10Success 8Problems 8Feelings 5

7a Can you recall a reflection thatled to enhanced performance?

Yes 9

7b How did you retrieve thatreflection?

Memory 6Written record 4

8a Do you receive feedback on yourreflections?

Yes 6

8b Who provides the feedback? Tutor (6) 68c How do you use this feedback? Improving 3

Revising 1Time management 1

9 Do you discuss or compare yourreflections with your peers?

No 8Yes 2

10 What are the most importantaspects of reflective practice foryou personally?

Development 3Planning 2

11a Do you use past reflections toenhance your learning?

Yes 2No 8

11b How do you access these? Memory 5Journal 2

(Continued)

152 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

Participants

Ten first-year psychology undergraduates (9 females, 1 male) at Southamp-ton Solent University (SSU) volunteered to take part in the study. This pop-ulation was appropriate for two reasons: (i) the researcher did not teachthem; and (ii) they needed to maintain a reflective log for a compulsory unit.Participants received ‘participation time’ (a course requirement) for theirtime spent on this study.

Materials

A 14-item semi-structured questionnaire designed by the researcher (Table 1)was administered prior to the focus group. An Excel spreadsheet (Appendix3) was designed and made available to the participants on the university’sVLE throughout the study. A semi-structured interview (Appendix 2) wasadministered at the end of the study.

Procedure

Prior to conducting the study, ethical approval was sought and gained fromthe Psychology Department Ethics Committee. The study took place over a12-week period from January to March 2009. Ten Level 1 studentsvolunteered to take part in the study in return for participation time. At theoutset, students were given an instruction form (Appendix 4) and a semi-structured questionnaire. They were instructed to read and complete thesebefore attending a focus group.

Qualitative methodology was determined to be most appropriate as itaffords the collection of deep and rich information. The Excel spreadsheetformat was selected for its simplicity and students’ familiarity with it. Partic-ipants could access the spreadsheet at any time on the VLE on or off cam-pus. The completed questionnaires were collected and analysed prior to the

Table 1. (Continued)

Item Item Responses Count

12 Do you use any electronicmethods (e.g. spreadsheets, blogs)apart from in this study?

Not at the moment 5Might in future 2Yes 1

13 What would be useful to help youbenefit from your reflectivepractice that is currently notavailable (to your knowledge)?

Diary/blog 2A personalised checklist forskills I’ve mastered and those Ineed to develop

1

14 Is there anything else you’d liketo contribute?

I’d like a personal link toimprovements in life directlyrelated to specific reflections

1


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

focus group. Items from the questionnaire were used to generate discussionat the focus group. The focus group was audio-recorded. Participants wereassured of anonymity and confidentiality. Furthermore, they were informedthat their reflections would neither be commented on nor assessed, andwould not be visible to anyone other than themselves and the researcher,and that the focus of their reflective practice should be on learning.

The focus group continued for one hour, after which participants wereinstructed on how to access, download, edit and upload the Excel spread-sheet from the VLE via an online demonstration. They were instructed toreflect at least weekly. Participants were instructed that they could be flexi-ble with the use of the spreadsheet. That is, they could (i) use it withoutamendment, (ii) add columns as they felt appropriate, (iii) leave any cellsempty in a particular reflection, and (iv) attach supplementary material (e.g.drawings, diagrams, notes, finished work, etc.).

Once all questions that arose were answered, participants were randomlyassigned to one of two groups, A or B. In order to minimise any group dis-advantage, a crossover design was used so that each group acted as theirown control. Participants were given the researcher’s contact details for fur-ther clarification if needed and for any other communication. The studyrationale and participant instructions were uploaded to the VLE for refer-ence. Participants in Group A were instructed to record reflections for a six-week period (weeks 1–6), and participants in Group B were instructed torecord reflections during the following six-week period (weeks 7–12). Dur-ing week 13, participants were invited back for individual interviews. Fourparticipants volunteered to be interviewed. These interviews lasted forbetween 15 and 20 minutes and were audio-recorded.

In summary, the semi-structured questionnaire (Table 1), the focusgroup, and the individual semi-structured interviews were used to elicit arich and deep understanding of reflective practice, to generate a discussionof reflective practice, and to evaluate the effectiveness of the resource,respectively. The focus group and the interviews were audio-recorded, tran-scribed by a research assistant and checked for inter-rater reliability by theresearcher. The transcriptions along with the responses to the semi-struc-tured questionnaire are the main sources of data for the following analysis.Data uploaded to individual spreadsheets were not analysed until after the12-week period.

2.1. Results

Semi-structured questionnaire

Responses from the pre-study 14-item semi-structured questionnaire are tab-ulated in Table 1 and described in the Discussion section.

154 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

Focus group

The focus group was conducted prior to the participants using the Meta-reflection resource. Abstracted comments are given below.

In response to being asked, ‘How long have you been using a reflectivejournal?’, the following answers were given:

Participant (P)7 replied that she’d used a journal for about two years:

Every time I come to exams I always read over it because I get my own per-spective back on how I saw it then I how I see it later on, once I have hadtime to look over it again, and it helps me with my revision so.. .

P4 (who had been reflecting since she was 8 years old) suggested: ‘It isuseful to think about strengths and weaknesses and being more preparedabout the possible results.’

P7 responded that reflecting was ‘useful for topics that I struggle with, Ican go back over it and review it. Because it’s in my own words it’s easierto understand as well.’

Eight (out of 10) participants reported that they reflected on problems aswell as achievements (item 6):

I usually do, if I have struggled with a certain topic, or if I find some aspectof it really difficult I’ll write that I’ve found it hard, but then write how I haveovercome that, and I can go back and if I’m struggling with it again, I canthink, ‘oh that’s how I did it’. It’s so much easier because you’ve written ityourself, you can give yourself little clues as to what you need to do to under-stand and make it easier. (P4)

Conversely, another participant (P2) stated, ‘I tend not to write any prob-lems. . .’

On the subject of feelings, many participants claimed they found writingabout feelings ‘quite hard’, although some admitted they had written abouthow they felt about group work. I asked if they thought they were improv-ing in this aspect. P2 responded:

I think I’ll be better at it once I have done the actual essay because I thinkthat’s when you’re reflective about your feelings and you’re understandingand how you have overcome your problems and really it comes to the fore-front. Because really, I don’t think the journals really touch on this in depth,it’s more on the subject area that you have covered that week. So I do feelthat I will be better at it after the essay.

This worryingly suggests that this participant’s reflection is on what, ratherthan how, learning has taken place.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

P4 agreed that ‘[e]verything I write has some sort of feelings, because Ifind it hard to write something with some sort of reflection without telling abit about yourself. .. I always write something about feelings.’

I asked participants if they were confident discussing ‘feelings’ in theirreflective log. P3 responded: ‘If it’s got questions relating to that topic andit’s relating to what I’ve done, I do feel that I’ve mainly gone down theroute of addressing the question, rather than being reflective.’

P3 further commented that: ‘It was structured that way, like, “this is yourlesson, how did you feel, what problems did you encounter?”’

An insightful response came from P7, who commented:

I also look forward and write how it will help in the future. .. it can help toreflect and think backwards and forwards so you are thinking about how youwould deal with this problem. Also, how you would go about reflecting onthis issue in the future.

Furthermore, P5 stated that: ‘I find it easier to talk about my feelings, butfind it hard to write about them. When it comes to the reflective journal, Ifind it easy to just dodge around the feeling part.’

Whereas, conversely P1 claimed: ‘I find it easier to write about my feel-ings, it’s easier to put pen to paper than discussing it.’

Further comments related to the differences between scientific writingand the subjective writing typically required for reflecting:

I find it very difficult to change from the scientific writing, going from writingabout theories and methods and writing in your own subjective sense. I gotused to writing objectively, criticising other people’s research and methods butnot my own so it felt really difficult shifting between the different writingstyles. (P3)

Currently, students’ reflective logs are a course requirement and areassessed. P6 commented:

The marking strategy is different so I’m not sure how to go about it [writingthe log], you’re more sure if you’re writing an essay that you have the rightmaterial in there and you’re happy with it and finished it. With the journalyou think ‘did I leave something out or did I reflect deeply enough?’ You’reconstantly thinking I haven’t done it properly, or I haven’t finished it. Howare they going to mark it, you don’t really know.. .

P8 added: ‘The fact that. .. because of the way I write about feelings getsme a certain mark. .. it annoys me!’ P3 agreed.

I wanted to clarify at this stage what ‘reflective practice’ was. I was sur-prised by the responses.

Just to reiterate what you’ve covered in seminar. (P8)

156 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

... it’s to remember what you know. .. you can note things about your reflec-tions and you can have memory or much more detail. .. you can keep a jour-nal and when you look back you have so much more detail to do the essay.(P3)

When asked if they would keep a reflective log if it was not compulsory, Iwas given the following answers:

It’s just because it’s part of the course that I have got into a routine of doingit, but if it was just a diary or log then I’d forget, I wouldn’t do it. (P6)

I probably wouldn’t. If we weren’t supposed to do it as part of the course thenI wouldn’t do it at all. You get into the habit of doing it. (P3)

Two participants (P4 and P7), who had both been reflecting for some time,said they would continue to keep a log if it was not required.

In Year 1, as course practice, the reflective log is focused developing anunderstanding of what has been learned. That is, students are given guide-lines on what to reflect on. I wanted to know if this was useful.

It’s quite a good place to start, but then also I feel I shouldn’t write anythingextra because I should be answering the questions. I just reflect on what Ihave done previously. (P6)

As the focus group drew to an end, I enquired if anyone would like to addanything else. P4 commented:

It would be a good idea to have an online thing like we’re doing [the presentstudy]. .. you can get feedback from your peers and if you have a problemand you think you’re the only one and you’re stuck then other people say it’sthe same for them!

Individual interviews

In week 13, after all data collection had ended, four volunteers from the ori-ginal sample were interviewed to evaluate the resource by means of glean-ing insights into its acceptance and the perceived usefulness. The interviewswere based on the same items as were used in the semi-structured question-naire. However, these were varied as the situation demanded. Each interviewstarted by asking if the participant had enjoyed using the spreadsheet.

It was helpful because it made me look at my work as a problem whichneeded to be resolved. It allowed me to come up with the idea in my ownmind how to sort it out rather than sit there and dwell on it. (P1)

I enjoyed using it very much because it allowed me to reflect on my week’sexperiences rather than a prescribed topic. (P2)


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

I found it really useful and always filled in the spreadsheet. .. after I finishedrecording my thoughts and feelings for this study I continued to do it and Ialways found it was easier to complete my reflective journals [for coursework]after [the study]. (P3)

I enjoyed using the spreadsheet because it gave me time to reflect on thethings in that particular week. .. think about how you dealt with it so itwas actually quite enjoyable. It wasn’t just something I had to do. It wasreally nice to actually think about how I’ve improved and assess myself.(P4)

I asked if the ‘scaffolded’ structure of the resource (the spreadsheet) wasuseful.

It focused me more. I would say yes. Because the other ones [journals] aremuch broader. (P1)

Overall it helped. The guidelines helped focus what I was writing about;whereas if I just had one open-ended question I wouldn’t have reached aconclusion about what I learnt. Breaking down the topic which I wastalking about gave me more focus and more relevance as I went along.(P2)

P3 found the structure ‘useful and helpful for focusing’. P4 commented:

It’s hard getting my thoughts down on a blank canvas. I like visual things soI did find it really helpful having those boxes, and every box helped lead meonto the next one. It flowed really well. Each box directed me think abouthow I dealt with that issue.

In order to understand if they reflected on reflections, I asked if they lookedback at previous entries to help them learn.

... sometimes. I thought it was useful, because it focused on learning andmade me evaluate everything quite well. Yeah I think it makes you assessyourself. (P1)

When I was going into the next week, I’d look at what I’d put the weekbefore. (P4)

I was interested to know whether they had added columns or changed thestructure in any way. All interviewees responded that they considered thestructure broad enough to cover all aspects. I wanted to know if the spread-sheet made reflecting easier than using the reflective journal.

It is more focused on learning and helps with stress management. (P1)

158 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

I can reflect on managing social life, relationships, work, home and uni life. Itwas like a personal diary. It helped me put my thoughts, it was just like hav-ing a counsellor, letting out my thoughts and feelings and things. So it waspart informant and part therapeutic as well and I try to offer advice to otherstudents so people might read it but also it was quite cathartic. (P2)

The participants all agreed the structure was useful in helping them to dealwith issues. I asked about editing, amending or reusing reflections in orderto learn from them.

I sometimes wrote on the same topic for more than one week, but didn’trecord changes on the originals. (P1)

I didn’t change the reflections once written, but I if I went back now, I wouldprobably write it differently. .. It was important to see how thoughts developand to break problems down before and after doing them. .. it’s a learning expe-rience. .. (P2)

P3 told me she had continued to use the spreadsheet after her six-week datacollection period, and P4 used the spreadsheet to focus on one particularproblem area each week as she considered this to be a good learning experi-ence. In closing the interviews, I asked the participants to consider whetherthey had learned from using the spreadsheet and taking part in the study.

Yes because it’s like an overview. When you start to get stressed sometimesyou just can’t start to do the work. So by putting it down. .. as you’re typingit in you can think, yeah. (P1)

I liked the cells because they allowed me to enter small chunks of informa-tion. This stopped me needing to write it all out first. (P1)

The spreadsheet helped cover new topics on a personal level and reflect onreflections. This is useful for personal development. (P2)

... it helps you gain confidence by realising you have the ability and strengthsand you are potentially successful. .. you can accomplish what you set out todo. (P2)

I enjoyed analysing myself. .. thinking about weakness and strengths. (P3)

P4 told me she was ‘less than enthusiastic about having to complete thespreadsheet weekly’, but added that when she did, she ‘enjoyed it and foundit beneficial’. She concluded that she’d ‘like to add another box [column] on[to write about] how the reflections could be applied to improve skills in thefuture’.

The main focus of the study was to develop and evaluate a resource whichwould encourage and facilitate reflective practice, develop metacognition and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

enhance learning. Therefore I was interested to know if the group used theresource to enhance performance, and thus whether they looked back on pre-vious reflections before reflecting on their most recent experience.

An encouraging response was given by P1: ‘I will now’ (several partici-pants echoed this).

3. Discussion and conclusions

Reflective practice, engaging with experience, reflecting-in and reflecting-onaction (Schön 1983) should help lead to new understanding to enable adesired outcome to be reached (Boud, Keogh, and Walker 1985; Moon1999). Results from the pilot study described in this article suggest that theresource helped students develop metacognitive awareness by guiding themto reflect in and on action. This is Dewey’s notion of meta-reflection. Theresource explicitly and simultaneously makes aware past reflections as cur-rent ones are recorded. Thus, personal learning development was madeexplicit. Post-intervention comments from participants clearly show suchdevelopment.

The structure of the spreadsheet designed to guide participants throughthe reflective process was positively evaluated as successfully achieving thisaim. The guidance removed ambiguous and conflicting interpretations andinstructions of reflective practice, such as those cited by Eraut (1994). Inorder to create an appropriate and efficient context for reflective practice, theMeta-reflection resource was developed and evaluated in a pilot study com-prising 10 psychology undergraduates at SSU, described in this article.

Data on acceptance and perceived benefits in terms of learning were col-lected from a 14-item semi-structured questionnaire, focus group and indi-vidual interviews (with four of the 10 participants). Reflections uploaded tothe spreadsheet were used as a vehicle for students to evaluate their ownmetacognitive development. These reflections were neither monitored norassessed, and are described in Mair (2010). In the Meta-reflection resource,the connection between learning and reflection is made explicit as recom-mended by Veenman et al. (2006).

The extent to which metacognitive skills generalise is inconclusivedespite much empirical research. For example, a study by Schraw et al.(1995) generated domain-specific results, whereas Veenman and Beishuizen(2004) obtained strong support for the generality of metacognitive skills.The Meta-reflection resource supports the latter findings as it provides gen-eric guidance, in that it can be used for reflective practice in any unit anddiscipline.

Writing reflectively is often considered problematic, and scaffolding isseen as facilitative. During the post-intervention interviews, the ‘scaffolded’structure was evaluated by the participants as useful in guiding and main-taining the focus on learning, and as helpful for problem solving,

160 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

self-development and assessment. Scaffolding, as suggested by Strampel andOliver (2008), facilitates students’ reflecting in two ways. First, it affords aquick and simple way to get started, in contrast to a blank sheet; and sec-ond, it maintains the focus on learning. The second point is importantbecause participants in this study referred to their coursework instruction onreflective practice as guiding them to recap on what they had learned (thecontent), rather than on how it was learned (the process). The objectives ofstructuring according to the Meta-reflection resource were: (i) to maintainfocus on learning how rather than what; (ii) to remove the nebulous natureof reflective journals; and (iii) to build in flexibility concerning the degreeof the structuring. That is, participants could leave cells blank and add col-umns as they felt suitable. In this sense, the resource follows a constructivelearning philosophy empowering learners to learn how to learn by develop-ing their metacognitive strategies and skills which promote efficient thinkingand problem solving in a range of learning contexts (Brown 1978). Dweck(1989) and Elliot and Dweck (1988) provide evidence that metacognitivestrategies, such as self-monitoring and self-regulation (Bouffard et al. 1995;Isaacson and Fujita 2006) of one’s own learning process and appropriateallocation of mental resources, enhance academic performance, and are thusstrong predictors of academic success (Kruger and Dunning 1999; Dunninget al. 2003).

Al-Mahmood and McLoughlin (2004) emphasise the numerous com-puter-mediated tools which potentially can support learning and reflectivethinking. However, typically these tools function as logs (blog is derivedfrom ‘web-log’) which present similar problems for reflective practice ashard-copy logs or journals. Additional advantages of the Meta-reflectionresource being on the VLE include exploiting the culture of the ‘net gener-ation’ (McNeely 2005), and returning the main source of information andpower to the student (Barak 2006), and, furthermore, in doing so, it goessome way to alleviating some of the staffing problems associated withrecent changes in higher education institutes (HEIs) (Sims and Bovard2004).

Prior to using the developed resource, all participants reported that theyreflected in journals at least weekly as a course requirement. The majority(8) started reflecting at university, because it was part of the course, and 2had been reflecting for two years or more. However, comments suggestedthat reviewing reflections occurred infrequently, and mainly for revision pur-poses. This suggests that reflections were on content, rather than on process.

A main aim of the study was to develop an online resource for reflectionthat focused on learning. That this aim was achieved is evidenced by com-ments. Furthermore, an unintended, but nonetheless valuable outcome wasthat using the resource was perceived to reduce stress, and P2 reported thatit was like having a counsellor. This would also be conducive to learningand general well-being (Whitman 1987).


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

Many students report problems understanding assessment strategies forreflective practice and how to write reflections on demand. Moreover, whenstudents know that reflections will be read and assessed by others, theymight not disclose problems (Boud and Walker 1998). Participant 8 reportedthat being graded on how she wrote about feelings in reflective journals wasproblematic. P3 was concerned that the reflections required as courseworktypically focused on the structure of the writing rather than on the contentof the reflections per se. The reflections uploaded to the Meta-reflectionresource were neither assessed nor monitored, with the aim of encouragingopen disclosure of uncertainties and discomfort, so that through reflection inand on action, new insights and solutions could be developed (see Mair[2010] for an analysis of the reflections in this pilot study).

Participants cited a range of benefits of reflecting, including improvingmemory, helping with problem areas, seeing progress, encouraging criticalthinking, focusing on weak areas, assisting organisation and time-manage-ment skills, and bringing stress relief. They mainly recorded improvements,success, problems and feelings, and considered the most important aspect tobe development and planning. The majority (9 out of 10) were able to recalla reflection which had led to enhanced performance, and two thirds of these(6) retrieved that reflection from memory. However, when asked in a lateritem if they used past reflections to enhance their learning, only two repliedthat they did (from the journal), and the remainder said that they did not.Six of the 10 participants had received tutor feedback on their reflections.Half of these (3) used the feedback to improve their work, one used it forrevising, and another for time management. When asked if they sharedreflections with peers, 8 said they did not, but 2 said that they did. Thesetwo were the participants who had been reflecting for at least two years.Half the participants had not previously used electronic methods for reflect-ing. Two participants thought a blog would be useful, and were aware thiswas already available. However, they did not blog themselves. Oneparticipant suggested that adding a link to resources for making broaderimprovements in life in general would be valuable. Most worrying were thepre-study responses to the question ‘What is reflective practice?’ Thegeneral understanding was that its purpose was to recap on what waslearned. In this study the focus was maintained on learning about learning,as opposed to learning about content.

Prior to the study, the majority of participants neither discussed reflec-tions with peers nor used past reflections to enhance learning by referring totheir reflective log prior to tackling a new or ongoing problem or task.Given the inherent problems of human memory, it is worrying that themajority of the sample retrieved reflections from memory rather than fromtheir written record. The resource encouraged meta-reflection whilereflecting in the here and now, rather than discarding (or forgetting) previousreflections. This was achieved by using a single spreadsheet over a number

162 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

of weeks. Hence, previous entries were displayed simultaneously with cur-rent ones being recorded. This eliminated the need to search for previousreflections which may be problematic for many reasons. For example, thejournal or log could be stored at a different location from that at which thecurrent reflection was written. Even if previous reflections had been recordedand stored on a computer, these might be stored on a different computer orunder different names and be difficult to locate, or, moreover, they mighthave been overwritten. The present resource eliminated these possibilities bycreating a single spreadsheet which was updated at least weekly and storedon the university’s VLE.

As the study was a pilot, it was time-limited. Therefore participants hadrestricted opportunity to amend the resource. Some participants left somecells blank, as was their prerogative, but no participant added columns.Hence, although, the facility existed, no interviewee amended the spread-sheet from its initial design or uploaded attachments. The reasons given forthis were that the spreadsheet ‘was broad enough to cover requirements’(P1), and ‘I didn’t realize I could’ (P2). Of course, it could have been thatstudents were not reflecting critically enough. Regardless, a corollary of notmonitoring the participation was the lack of opportunity for the researcherto restate or emphasise the functionality of the spreadsheet once the studywas under way. This weakness will be addressed in future developments.

4. Conclusions and further work

Much evidence supports the use of reflective practice for personal and pro-fessional development, yet it is not typically used as a learning tool by stu-dents. Frequently in HE, reflective writing is a process of responding topredetermined questions and is assessed as a stand-alone piece of work.Moreover, the questions frequently relate to what has been learned, ratherthan to how it has been learned. Thus it is not surprising that during thepre-study focus group participants had defined reflective practice as ‘recap-ping’ and ‘reviewing’.

Each participant completed a semi-structured questionnaire to elicit acommon understanding of the purpose and components of reflective prac-tice. The focus group was built on the responses to the questionnaire. Fourvolunteers were individually interviewed after the 12-week study in order toevaluate the efficiency and effectiveness of the technology.

This study has several limitations. These include the small sample size,the short duration of the data collection period, and the lack of clear responsevariable. It is difficult to measure the impact of this resource on learning, butperceptions of its impact were positive. A larger sample, using a designincorporating a control group and a longer data collection period, wouldaddress these shortcomings. However, many valuable lessons have beenlearned from this pilot. First, an additional column has been added to the


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

latest version of the spreadsheet to prompt users to consider how they willapply what they have learned in future. In addition, a sharing facility is beingdeveloped so that users will have the option of sharing some or all of theirreflections with other resource users. In this sense, they will not only be ableto help others learn, they will also be able to learn from others themselves.

In an attempt to encourage open and personal disclosure, particularly ofproblematic areas, the reflections were neither monitored nor assessed. How-ever, the lack of monitoring by the researcher resulted in missed opportuni-ties to emphasise and remind participants about the functionality of theresource, such as by attaching documents, images and videos and insertingadditional columns. In future developments, the frequency and pattern ofreflection will be monitored and action taken to address shortcomings.Reflections will remain neither monitored nor assessed.

Despite the limitations, overall this study achieved its aims: to encouragea systematic and structured (scaffolded) approach to reflective practice thatwould lead to enhanced performance, inform pedagogic practice, andenhance student experience. The technology was well received and evalu-ated positively by its users. The structured nature of the spreadsheet activelypromoted using reflections to improve performance. The act of recordingreflections was simplified by using prompts (column headings) to encouragestudents to engage with reflective practice beyond the requirements of theircourse. Furthermore, the headings were designed to lead the participants toconsider how, rather than what, they had learned. The structured approachwas assessed as more systematic, less time consuming, and more constrained(focused) and accessible than the process of recording reflections in a tradi-tional hard-copy journal or online blog.

Future developments of the resource will integrate graduated scaffoldingsuch that, as a user develops proficiency in reflective practice, he or she willrequire less scaffolding. As Azevedo et al. (2005) point out, such anapproach leads to the greatest benefit. Participants in the Meta-reflectionstudy may have used the scaffolding (cell headings) less with increasingproficiency, but unfortunately they were not asked about this. For example,once a participant has entered several reflections, the cell headings may nolonger be visible on the monitor and he or she may have used the previousreflection or reflections for guidance. The researcher will monitor the use ofthe cell headings in the extension to the Meta-reflection resource, Reflectionand Learning: Sharing Experience (ReaLiSE), which is currently underdevelopment, to establish the degree of scaffolding required at different lev-els of expertise.

The design of the ReaLiSE resource incorporates feedback from dissemi-nation and from the participants in the Meta-reflection study. For example,the resource explicitly emphasises flexibility (that is, cells can be left blank,columns added and attachments uploaded) as this functionality was not uti-lised by participants in the study described here. Column headings to guide

164 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

reflection on using reflections to improve skills in future (meta-reflection)have been added. Furthermore, a major advance in the resource is the addi-tion of a database to enable sharing of reflections. The database has beenpopulated with the reflections recorded in the Meta-reflection pilot study.Participants in the ReaLiSE study can search these, and also upload theirown reflections, and so can learn from others as others can learn from them.All reflections remain anonymous and each participant maintains controlover what is uploaded.

Thus, whilst the basic idea of using a spreadsheet to organise and struc-ture reflections is not complex, it is unlocking a good deal of potential, asevidenced by the results of the pilot study and by the ongoing extensionsand enhancements in follow-up projects.

Notes on contributorCarolyn Mair is a chartered psychologist. She obtained her PhD in cognitiveneuroscience from Bournemouth University for her investigations into spatio-temporal aspects of visual short-term memory and completed her post-doc at BrunelUniversity. She was awarded the MSc Research Methods from the University ofPortsmouth and the BSc Psychology and Computing from Bournemouth University,and gained her PGCLT(HE) at Southampton Solent University. Carolyn’s researchinterests lie in the real-world application of theoretical cognitive psychology andneuroscience. Carolyn has over 25 peer-reviewed publications and has beennominated for the National Teaching Fellowship Award.

ReferencesAleven, V., and K.R. Koedinger. 2002. An effective metacognitive strategy: Learn-

ing by doing and explaining with a computer-based cognitive tutor. CognitiveScience 2: 147–179.

Al-Mahmood, R., and C. McLoughlin. 2004. Re-learning through e-learning:Changing conceptions of teaching through online experience. Paper presentedat the 21st ASCILITE Conference, 5–8 December, in Perth, Australia.

Azevedo, R., J.G. Cromley, F.I. Winters, D.C. Moos, and J.A. Greene. 2005. Adap-tive human scaffolding facilitates adolescents’ self-regulated learning with hyper-media. Instructional Science 33: 381–412.

Barak, M. 2006. Instructional principles for fostering learning with ICT: Teachers’perspectives as learners and instructors. Education and Information Technologies11: 121–135.

Boud, D. 2001. Introduction: Making the move to peer learning. In Peer learningin higher education: Learning from and with each other, ed. D. Boud, R.Cohen, and J. Sampson, 1–20. London: Kogan page.

Boud, D., R. Cohen, and J. Sampson. 1999. Peer learning and assessment. Assess-ment & Evaluation in Higher Education 24, no. 4: 413–26.

Boud, D., R. Keogh, and D. Walker. 1985. Reflection: Turning experience intolearning. London: Kogan Page.

Boud, D., and D. Walker. 1998. Promoting reflection in professional courses: Thechallenge of context. Studies in Higher Education 23: 191–206.

Bouffard, T., J. Boisvet, C. Vezeau, and C. Larouche. 1995. The impact of goal ori-entation on self-regulation and performance among college students.. BritishJournal of Educational Psychology 65: 317–29.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

Brown, A. 1978. Knowing when, where and how to remember: A problem of meta-cognition. In Advances in Instructional Psychology, ed. R. Glaser, 77–165. Hills-dale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Coutinho, S.A. 2007. The relationship between goals, metacognition, and academicsuccess. Educate 7: 39–47.

Dewey, J. 1933/1993. How we think. New York: D.C. Heath.Dewey, J. 1939. Experience, knowledge and value: A rejoinder. In The philosophy

of John Dewey, ed. P. Schilpp, 517–608. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University.Dunning, D., K.L. Johnson, J. Ehrlinger, and J. Kruger. 2003. Why people fail to

recognize their own incompetence. Current Directions in Psychological Science12: 83–87.

Dweck, C. 1989. Motivation. In Foundations for a Psychology of Education, ed.A. Lesgold and R. Glaser, 87–136. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Elliot, E.S., and C.S. Dweck. 1988. Goals: An approach to motivation and achieve-ment. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 54: 5–12.

Eraut, M. 1994. Developing professional knowledge and competence. London: Fal-mer.

Everitt, A., and P. Hardiker. 1996. Evaluating for good practice. London: Macmillan.Flavell, J.H. 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cogni-

tive-developmental inquiry. American Psychologist 34: 906–11.Hoffman, B., and A. Spatariu. 2008. The influence of self-efficiency and metacogni-

tive prompting on math problem-solving efficiency. Contemporary EducationalPsychology 33: 875–93.

Isaacson, R., and F. Fujita. 2006. Knowledge monitoring and self-regulated learn-ing: Academic success and reflections on learning. Journal of the Sholarship ofTeaching and Learning 6: 39–55.

King, T., 2002. Development of student skills in reflective writing. Paper presentedat the 4th World Conference of the International Consortium for EducationalDevelopment in Higher Education, 3–6 July, in Perth, Western Australia.

Kolb, D. 1970. Learning in groups. London: Croom Helm.Kruger, J., and D. Dunning. 1999. Unskilled and unaware of it: how difficulties in

recognizing one’s own incompetence lead to inflated self-assessments. Journalof Personality and Social Psychology 77: 1121–34.

Lin, X., C. Hmelo, C.K. Kinzer, and T.J. Secules. 1999. Designing technology to sup-port reflection. Educational Technology Research and Development 47: 43–62.

Mair, C. 2010. Structured reflection facilitates metacognitive awareness and learn-ing. Paper presented at the 35th Improving University Teaching Conference, 1–3July, in Washington, DC.

McNeely, B., 2005. Using technology as a learning tool, not just the cool new thing.In EDUCAUSE, ed. D.G. Oblinger and J.L. Oblinger. www.educause.edu/educat-ingthenetgen/.

Moon, J. 1999. Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory andpractice. London: Kogan Page.

Paulus, T., and G. Roberts. 2006. Learning through dialogue: Online case studies ineducational psychology. Journal of Technology and Teacher Education 14: 731–54.

Pintrich, P.R. 1995. Understanding self-regulated learning. New Directions forTeaching and Learning 63: 3–12.

PISA(Programme for International Student Assessment). 2006. Science competen-cies for tomorrow’s world. Vol. 1: Analysis. Paris: OECD publications. http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/17/39703267.pdf

166 C. Mair

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen/

http://www.educause.edu/educatingthenetgen/

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/17/39703267.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/30/17/39703267.pdf

Sayers, P. 2004. Reflective writing and reflective thinking: The implications ofintroducing reflective practice into a professional doctorate programme in Phar-macy. In Studies in writing, 14: Effective learning and teaching of writing, ed.G., Rijlaarsdam (Series Ed.) and G. Rijlaarsdam H. Van den Bergh, and M.Couzijn, 3, 519–31. London: Springer.

Schön, D. 1983. The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.Schön, D.A. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design of

teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Schraw, G., M.E. Dunkle, L.D. Bendixen, and T.D. Roedel. 1995. Does a general

monitoring skill exist? Journal of Educational Psychology 87: 433–44.Sims, R., and B. Bovard. 2004. Interacting with online learners: How new elabora-

tions of online presence can foster critical thinking and reflection. In: Atkinson,R., McBeath, C., Jonas-Dwyer, D., Phillips, R., in Proceedings of the 21stASCILITE, in Perth, Australia.

Strampel, K., and R. Oliver. 2008. We’ve thrown away the pens, but are they learn-ing? Using blogs in higher education. Paper presented at the 21st ASCILITEConference, 5–8 December, in Perth, Australia.

Sumsion, J., and J. Fleet. 1996. Reflection: Can we assess it? Should we assess it?Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education 21: 121–30.

Veenman, M.V.J., and J.J. Beishuizen. 2004. Intellectual and metacognitive skills ofnovices while studying texts under conditions of text difficulty and time con-straint. Learning and Instruction 14: 619–38.

Veenman, M.V.J., B.H.A.M. Van Hout-Wolters, and P. Afflerbach. 2006. Metacogni-tion and learning: Conceptual and methodological considerations. MetacognitionLearning 1: 3–14.

Whitman, N.A. 1987. Reducing stress among students. Washington, DC: Associationfor the Study of Higher Education, ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.

Wilkinson, J. 1999. Implementing reflective practice. Nursing Standard 13: 36–40.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Lou

ghbo

roug

h U

nive

rsity

] at

07:

05 2

5 N

ovem

ber

2014

using technology for enhancing reflective writing, metacognition and learning

Documents