Developing Reflective Practice in Student Teacher Candidates through
Online Threaded Discussion

Gary Barton
Carol Shepherd
National University

Introduction

     Reflection is widely accepted as necessary for those in professions which require constantly unique solutions to highly complex scenarios (Schön, 1987).  These include professions like architects, psychologists, counselors, and teachers, among others.   Individuals in such professions work under unique conditions, and require somewhat artistic solutions to the problems they encounter.  They are practitioners, as opposed to theorists or laborers, and are not necessarily involved with repetitious or mechanical endeavors.  They require interaction and/or negotiation with circumstances, people, or situations to arrive at a solution. 
     Most schools of education or teacher training institutes require teacher candidates to reflect, but few teach them how to do it.  Reflection is hard to teach.  It involves higher level thinking involving application, analysis, synthesis, evaluation, speculation, and problem-solving.  Many students do not reflect naturally or in any organized way.  They tend to describe and summarize when asked to reflect, and tend toward lower level thinking skills, often congratulating themselves and explaining how they do meet criteria, rather than examining ways in which they could improve.  However, with mentoring, many of these future teachers can be taught reflective thinking (Giovanelli, 2003; LaBoskey, 1994; Ward, 2004). 
     The researchers involved in this study developed a plan to increase reflective practice among pre-service teachers that allowed for engaged, facilitated reflection through structured online discussions. The research model used prepared lectures dealing with the process and application of reflective practice as a base, and attempted to develop reflective dialogue through threaded discussion. Through this structured activity, the researchers believe that reflection can be taught and nurtured.
     Research by LaBoskey (1994) provided a plan for measuring the quantity and quality of reflective thought in student teacher candidates. She presents suggestions for pre and post course surveys and a method for scoring each survey response to determine whether the teacher candidate is “commonsense” or “reflective” in approaching the daily issues the new teachers encounter as they move through the student teaching experience. LaBoskey was interested in finding whether reflection could be taught. In a more recent study dealing with reflection as an outcome for pre-service teachers, researchers Ward and McCotter (2004) developed a reflection rubric with four levels, which was used to assess the level of reflective thinking of the participants in this study.

Review of the Literature

     Researchers have indicated that the more insight a teacher candidate has into teaching, the more effective the teaching will be (Dean & Olson, 2003; Giovanelli, 2003; Schön, 1987; Ward & McCotter, 2004). The professional quality of reflection is noted in national and state-level descriptions of professional teaching standards, which suggest that reflection can be used to address problems in teaching methods by reflecting on the possible sources of a problem, the interpretation of a problem, and the solution to a problem. For every study on reflection in teaching, there appears to be a different definition of the term “reflection” used by researchers. It is a broad term, applied to the relation between an action and an outcome, resulting in the enhancement of individual knowledge.
     Researchers have found that there is a significant correlation between a reflective disposition toward teaching and effective teaching in the domains of instructional behavior, teacher expectations, and classroom organization (Giovanelli, 2003). However, not all teachers are predisposed toward being reflective. How, then, can these student teachers be mentored to enable them to become reflective practitioners? What can mentors do to improve the quality of mentoring to aid these individuals in performing a most necessary process? There is very little research in this area. Reflection is a vital aspect of effective teaching. Institutions of higher education with teacher education programs and mentors of student teachers and new teachers must be aware of effective methods to support and nurture reflective practitioners.
     In 1933, Dewey defined reflective action as “behavior which involves active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or practice in light of the grounds that support it and further consequences to which it leads” (as cited in Giovanelli, 2003). Schön (1987) stated that reflective practice is the “dialogue of thinking and doing through which I become more skillful” (p. 37). With reflection on action, it is necessary to leave the situation, mentally reconstruct it, and then analyze the actions (Schön, 1987).
     The Kentucky Teacher Internship Program uses a reflective teaching model. The emphasis of this program is on analyzing student learning. First, student teachers focus on their actions, and examine what they did in their teaching. Then they reflect on the impact of the actions, and examine the effect of their actions. Finally, they refine their actions, and plan for future actions. This is a continuous cycle. It provides a roadmap for student teachers’ reflections regarding the impact of their instruction (Brennan & Roberts, 1999).
     Simpson College, in Redding, California, has a training program for master teachers, where they are taught mentoring strategies for new teachers. The goal is to change teacher thinking, and ultimately, change teacher pedagogy. The coaches ask questions, and the student teachers reflect. The emphasis is on good questioning techniques. Through this process, the student teachers reflect, think, and then modify their teaching (Brooks, 2000).
     In their research, Dean and Olson (2003) recommend Rodgers’ five-part reflective thinking model. The first part is considering the experience; the second, naming the problem; the third, generating possibilities; the fourth, exploring them; and finally, taking action. Ideally, this last step then begins the cycle over again. The researchers found that some students have a tendency toward reflection, and some do not. Rodgers’ model was effective in helping both the reflective as well as the non-reflective groups.
     Directed reflection, which is the goal of the majority of teacher education programs, seeks to create reflective practitioners. In reflection, students recognize and confront their preconceived knowledge. In a teaching curriculum, students are exposed to a variety of theories. They reflect on each one, and determine the positive and negative aspects of each. They then compare their impressions with classmates, and share their reflections. They judge these theories in relation to the level or degree of their effectiveness in aiding students to learn. As a result, the teacher candidates discover their individual perceptions about what techniques help their classmates learn. This creates the awareness that not all perceptions are the same. There is a realization that not everyone gains knowledge the same way as everyone else (Pierce & Kalkman, 2003).
     Thinking about what has happened, assessing the situation, and discussing it is an excellent example of reflection and dialogue (Carpenter, 2004). It is vital that student teachers develop a critical eye for what they are doing, what is working, and how to make it better (Carpenter, 2004). However, research has shown that reflection toward teaching may not be learned if the teacher candidate is not predisposed to being reflective toward teaching (Giovanelli, 2003; LaBoskey, 1994).
     Giovanelli (2003) conducted a study to determine if there is a correlation between a reflective disposition toward teaching and effective teaching. She found that having a reflective disposition toward teaching was positively correlated to effective teaching, especially in the domains of instructional behavior, classroom organization, and teacher expectation. Of vital significance is this reflective disposition toward teaching. A plethora of books and articles have been written about this issue in the last twenty years. The advantage of possessing this quality of reflection is noted in national and state-level lists of professional standards. However, there is very little research linking a teacher’s ability to reflect on teaching with the practical application of effective classroom teaching techniques.

Methodology

     This case study of student teacher candidates in two sections of the Student Teaching Seminar at National University involved two primary researchers (Barton and Shepherd), each of whom acted as an instructor of one section of the TED 629 Student Teaching Seminar (one semester of student teaching). The participants in the study consisted of the student teacher candidates enrolled in the seminars.
     The class was constructed as a hybrid (on site instruction meeting twice a month for three months and on line instruction in a virtual classroom consisting of a Blackboard class shell that contained a class syllabus, bi-weekly readings, and bi-weekly threaded discussions). The instructors selected topics for reflection and students responded to each topic as it related to their student teaching experience. The instructors responded to students’ reflections as part of the reflective threaded discussion, and monitored the quantity and quality of the reflective responses of the students in the seminar.
     The study attempted to replicate other studies (Giovanelli, 2003; LaBoskey, 1994) which used personal learning journals to monitor and assess the reflective thought of student teacher candidates. It attempted to adapt the definitions and standards used in these studies to assess the value of using online threaded discussions to stimulate reflective thought and provide a method for monitoring the quantity and quality of candidates’ reflective thought.
     At the end of the seminar, the primary researchers analyzed the threaded discussions for the existence of reflective thought, the amount of reflective thought, and the quality of the reflective thought of the participants. Additionally, they examined whether the quantity and quality of reflective thought improved and evolved from routine to transformative over the course of the seminar.
Findings
     In their threaded discussions, students were asked to write at least three responses: their initial post and two follow-up responses to fellow students. Students did not always write three responses, so the data represent one to three responses from each of the participating student teacher candidates. The number of students who responded to each threaded discussion varied; twenty-four students responded to Discussion One, while only nineteen responded to Discussion Five. Because this study was based on a pre-test/post-test design, only those students who responded to both Discussions One and Five were included in the data analysis. This consideration limited the study to the eighteen students for whom complete data existed.
     The data analysis began with an examination of what each participant wrote and a holistic evaluation of how their responses should be coded. Of course, one of the research concerns was whether online lectures and threaded discussions led to an increase in reflective thought. Additionally, the researchers knew that they would have to determine in the context of student writing what constituted reflection and what did not. Originally, the increase in the number of questions students asked about their teaching situations seemed like one criterion that would help determine whether reflection increased. After an initial examination of the responses, researchers found that the number of questions asked was not necessarily indicative of the presence of reflection, and they decided to search for another method for assessing the frequency and quality of the reflections expressed by the participants.
     A rubric approach (see Appendix) was eventually adopted (Ward & McCotter, 2004). While this rubric was much more specific than the division of students into “commonsense” or “reflective” categories, it did provide a consistent framework for assessing students’ reflective efforts. Using the rubric, each post was first analyzed by idea (one sentence or several sentences), and the ideas expressed in the post were assessed to be “Routine,” Technical,” Dialogic,” or “Transformative.” As the coding progressed, the researchers found that many statements and many ideas expressed by the participants fell into none of those categories. A fifth category was added, which included “Unclear/Non-Examples.” This category was comprised of descriptions, statements of fact, beliefs, opinions, and feelings.
     After each of the statements/ideas was coded, the researchers went back over each post to determine which main category the entire post fit into, and it was labeled as a Routine, Technical, Dialogic, Transformative, or Unclear/Non Example of reflection. The results of the analysis of the reflection for the eighteen student teacher candidates for only the first and last reflective responses were as follows:

(See Table 1)
Discussion

     Based on the rubric, the data show a clear trend toward more and deeper reflection over the treatment period. The number of Unclear or Non-Instances of reflections dropped from thirteen to four cases, which indicates that students were beginning to understand the difference between reflection and other forms of writing. Students moved from simply describing their practice, giving their opinions, and making statements of fact to more introspective writing that actually examined their practice, their interactions with students, and their consideration of theory.
     The fact that the number of Routine Reflections dropped from ten to seven indicates that some students moved away from the lowest form of reflection, but that the changes at this level were not as dramatic as between non-reflection and reflection. The main improvements seen at this level are that students were somewhat less likely to make excuses for problems arising in the classroom, were less likely to complain about master teachers and students, and less likely to take on the role of a victim regarding events that occurred in their classrooms.
     The number of entries that were coded as Technical Reflection increased from six to nine. Again, this is not a dramatic move, but it does show that more students were concerned with responding to unique or problematic classroom circumstances. It is at this level that the pre-service teachers moved to problem solving approaches for events that took place in their classrooms. Generally, they talked about how they solved management problems in the class and how they would have to improve in order to maintain effective classrooms.
     Dialogic Reflection more than doubled, moving from four to nine cases. This movement reflects a greater awareness of students, student engagement, and reflection that involves others. At this level, candidates were considering the special needs of students, the importance of making connections to the students and gaining their trust, and working with the master teacher to talk through events in the classroom that could have been handled more effectively. Parenthetically, we might note that this effect could have been a result of the candidates getting to know the students and their supervising teacher better as a result of being in the classroom.
     Finally, the number of cases of Transformative Reflection moved from zero to five. Change at this level requires candidates to actually alter their beliefs and perspectives about teaching and learning, which requires candidates to take a critical view of their practice in relation to established methods and theory. One candidate wrote about how surprised he was that a lesson could go well in one class but not in another and what that implied about his growth as a teacher. Another candidate discussed things he had learned about himself as a person which would allow him to be a more effective teacher.
     Generally, the results of this study indicate that students who are given instruction about the nature of reflection, some information about what the major authorities on reflection have said, and who have had a chance to interact with fellow students in an attempt to improve their reflection, actually can become more reflective practitioners. On the other hand, the data also suggest that the evolution from “commonsense” approaches to classroom circumstances to becoming a reflective practitioner does not happen in a single semester.

Conclusions

     The results of this study indicate reflection by student teacher candidates can be improved through interactive online instruction and practice. The written lectures provide candidates with information about the nature of reflection (which they perhaps have never received before), and the interactive nature of the threaded discussions provide them with feedback on the issues they are encountering in their pre-service teaching experience. In fact, threaded discussions offer a more dialogic alternative to learning journals, which are currently being used in many pre-service teaching programs. Reflective journals are usually read by the instructor and the candidate only. In the online environment, postings can be read by all students in the class, and candidates can receive clarifications, suggestions, support, and new perspectives from peers, whose opinions and feedback often count for more than the instructor’s response alone.
     The study also demonstrated that the use of a rubric provides a reliable method for assessing the quality of pre-service teacher reflection. The rubric developed by Ward and McCotter (2004) focuses specifically on teacher reflection and this focus makes it uniquely appropriate for assessing reflection by student teacher candidates. Using rubrics makes widespread, consistent analysis of writing possible and is therefore useful for assessing large numbers of students by multiple scorers.
     Future studies should examine larger groups of students and their abilities to reflect on teaching situations. Not only should student teacher candidates be studied, but beginning and veteran teachers should be studied to determine if teacher reflection increases, decreases, or remains the same throughout a teaching career. Additionally, online threaded discussions could be studied to measure the degree to which they increase the quality and quantity of reflection among pre-service and practicing teachers.

References

Brooks, G. (2000, Fall). Cognitive coaching for master teachers and its effect on student teachers’ ability to reflect on practice.
      The Delta Kappa Gamma Bulletin, 67(1), 46-50. Retrieved March 16, 2004 from Firstsearch database.
Brennan, S., Thames, W., & Roberts, R. (1999, May). Mentoring with a mission. Educational Leadership, 56(8), 49-52.
      Retrieved March 16, 2004 from Firstsearch database.
Carpenter, B., II. (2004, May). Reflection and dialogue. Art Education, 57(3), 4. Retrieved July 6, 2004 from ProQuest
      database.
Dean, D., & Olson, S. (2003, August). Reflection in teacher education: Building a process for improvement. English
      Leadership Quarterly, 26(1), 7. Retrieved July 6, 2004 from ProQuest database.
Giovanelli, M. (2003, May/June). Relationship between reflective disposition toward teaching and effective teaching.
      The Journal of Educational Research, 96(5), 293. Retrieved March 10, 2004 from ProQuest database.
LaBoskey, V. (1994). Development of reflective practice. New York: Teachers College.
McGill, I., & Beatty, L. (1996, 2nd ed.). Action learning: A practitioner’s guide. (2nd ed.) London: Kogan Page.
Pierce, J., & Kalkman, D. (2003, Spring). Applying learner-centered principles in teacher education. Theory Into Practice,
      42(2), 127-32. Retrieved March 16, 2004 from Firstsearch database.
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the Reflective Practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Ward, J., & McCotter, S. (2004). Reflection as a visible outcome for preservice teachers. Teaching & Teacher Education:
      An International Journal of Research and Studies, 20(3), 243-257.

Table 1
Number of instances by reflection type for first and fifth threaded discussions

Appendix
REFLECTION RUBRIC
By John Ward, Millersville University