Cardiff University Peer Review of Learning and Teaching
Facilitating Reflective Practice:
Drawing extensively on the work of Boud and Walker (2002)), this paper outlines some of the issues surrounding the facilitation of reflective practice in others and possible solutions that may be useful at both the individual and
School/Directorate level.
A definition: Reflective practice is a means by which practitioners can develop a greater self-awareness about the nature and impact of their performance, an awareness that creates opportunities for professional growth and development (Osterman and Kottkamp, 1993). Maximum benefits from reflection are said to occur when the process happens in community, in interaction with others; when participants value the personal and intellectual growth of themselves and others; and when participants have time to engage in slow, non-assumptive thinking (Rodgers, 2002).

Reflection is a meaning-making process. The thread that makes continuity of learning possible

Reflection is a systematic, rigorous, disciplined way of thinking, with its roots in scientific enquiry

Reflection needs to happen in community, in interaction with others

Reflection requires attitudes that value the personal and intellectual growth of oneself and of others
Is reflective practice a valuable process or a ‘fashionable rhetoric’? (Kreber,
2004)
There are many examples of poor educational practice being implemented under the guise and rhetoric of reflection.
Common problems are:

Recipe following : where reflective practice is reduced to a formulaic series of steps and participants are required to reflect on demand.

Reflection without learning : without a focus on conceptual frameworks, learning outcomes and implications, reflection can become self-referential, inward looking and uncritical.

Intellectualising reflection : it is common for reflection to be treated as an intellectual exercise
– a simple matter of thinking rigorously.
However, reflection is not solely a cognitive process: emotions are central to all learning. Recognition of the affective dimensions of learning means teachers taking responsibility to create a climate in which the expression of feelings is accepted and legitimate.

Framing by disciplines and professions : Framing imposes assumptions, it legitimises practice and it provides a language for describing and analysing what we do. The processes of framing are not normally conscious. The invisibility of framing is a major challenge to dialogue within and between communities of practice/ subject disciplines.

Issues of confidentiality : Dilemmas of breaking confidentiality, undermining colleagues, whistle-blowing, privacy etc may arise.
Participants are requested to discuss issues arising from the Duty of
Boud D and Walker D (2002) Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of context, In: Supporting Lifelong Learning, Harrison R et al Eds, Routledge / Falmer: London.

Cardiff University Peer Review of Learning and Teaching
Care legislation and School / Directorate process for progressing concerns before commencing PRLT.

Uncritical acceptance of experience / excessive use of power : there are ethical issues associated with the facilitation of reflective practice in situations where one party may be able to gain greater influence over the other through the PRLT dialogue.
Suggestions to resolve the problems:

Conceptions of reflection : Participants are encouraged to discuss their conceptions of the reflective process so that no assumptions of value / practice are made. Each participant will see reflective practice differently and bring their personal experiences to the PRLT process.

Developing ground rules : create a local context that takes account of participant s’ conceptions of reflection any possible negative influence assumed to be at work in the larger School / Directorate context. Agree a common agenda / approach that will be mutually beneficial.

Build trust : Participants need to be able to express themselves intellectually and emotionally, and know that (within the agreed limits of confidentiality), such expression, and discussion of it is legitimate and accepted. Barriers that prevent open interaction and reciprocal communication need to be addressed.

Allow the reviewee to make their own meaning from the data: reviewees should be encouraged to articulate their position before that position is challenged.

Framing by disciplines and professions : be prepared to explore the assumptions and pedagogic frameworks upon which your discipline teaching is based. It is important to establish a common discourse for reflection within the domain of knowledge that is being considered.

Mutuality of benefit : Overtly acknowledge that PRLT is pursing the interests of both/all parties.

Confidentiality and dissemination ; it is helpful to discuss the boundaries between which outcomes of reflection are/are not to be shared with others.
Key messages:

This is a reviewee-driven process – the reviewer is supporting not assessing

Participants should be aware of their own power and how this may impact on the dialogue.

Be clear about the focus of the review and the data collection that will best supply the evidence to support these focussed reflections.

All staff can be effective reviewers and themselves learn and benefit from the process.

Conceptions of reflective practice and issues of confidentiality should be discussed from the outset.

Advice should only be offered if requested with all other comments based upon the data. This is not an exercise in cloning or justification of opinion or behaviours but rather facilitating the mutual ‘unpacking’ assumptions.
Boud D and Walker D (2002) Promoting reflection in professional courses: The challenge of context, In: Supporting Lifelong Learning, Harrison R et al Eds, Routledge / Falmer: London.