reflective practice: a case study of a beginning early childhood teacher in Hong Kong

8/12/2019 reflective practice: a case study of a beginning early childhood teacher in Hong Kong

1/11

66

Hong Kong Journal ofEarly Childhood Vol. 10 No. 1 July 2011

Introduction Teaching has gradually become more complex

and demanding, occurring in a complicated

environment (Dolye, 1986; Shulman, 1987).

Teacher education programs cannot prepare

teachers for every situation they may encounter.It has been suggested that student-teachers and

beginning teachers need more time to become

thoughtful decision makers, to establish their

teaching approaches and to consolidate their

professional development. Many educators

consider reective abilities desirable characteristics

of teachers (Gore & Zeichner, 1991; Herrman &

Sarracino, 1993). Reflective teaching has become

a widely used term in current discussions about

the nature of professional training. Reflectiveteaching approaches to professional training and

Reective Practice: A Case Study of a Beginning Early

Childhood Teacher in Hong Kong

TSUI King Yuk Anita

Department of Early Childhood Education

The Hong Kong Institute of Education

Abstract

This study explores a beginning early childhood teachers reflective practices and looks for evidence

of characteristics of a reective practitioner. The participant took part in a series of reective thinking

activities over ve months. The ndings of this study revealed the participants reective practice in the

following aspects: on students learning, teacher-students interaction and teaching behaviour. Most of her

reections focused on technical and practical levels. The participant had the characteristic of a reective

practitioner. Through this case study the author wishes to facilitate reective teaching by early childhood

educators which in turn is expected to help improve the quality of their teaching, besides promoting

reective practice among early childhood educators.

development have been associated with notions

of growth through critical enquiry, analysis and

self-directed evaluation, and have sometimes

been distinguished from behaviour, skills or craft

apprenticeship approaches which emphasize the

acquisition of pre-determined classroom practices(Zeichner, 1983). Thus, reection can be a tool for

continued personal and professional development

(Ottesen, 2007).

Literature Review

Reective Practice Though considerable research on reflection

and reflective teaching among theoreticians,

researchers and teacher educators has been

conducted, there is no consensus with regard tothe denition of reection (Schon, 1991; Rodgers,


2/11

67


2002; Admiraal & Webbels, 2005; Ottesen, 2007).

Reflection, as a specialized form of thinking, has

long been recognized as an influential factor that

helps improve the quality of teaching (Dewey,

1933; Bowman & Stott, 1994; Hernandez, 2001).

Dewey (1933/1997) initiated a whole new lineof thinking on reflection. He characterized it as

(i) a state of doubt; and (ii) an act of searching.

He proposed that reflection involves not only

a sequence of ideas but also a consequence.

Shulman (1987) dened the process of reection as

reviewing, reconstructing, enacting and critically

analyzing ones own and the class performance.

Dirkx (1989) considered the importance of self-

improvement rather than the importance of moral,

ethical and political issues. Van Manen (1991)

asserted that reflection can take place only if

teachers in general have the time to think about

their teaching in terms of what was done, what

could have been done and what should the next

step be. Moon (1999), based on the above view,

considered that the word reection implies a form

of mental processing with a purpose and/or an

anticipated outcome. In this study, reflection is a

mental activity and a chain of ideas in the mind.

Some scholars, however, have delineateddifferent forms and types of reection. Van Manen

(1977) proposed three forms of reective practice:

technical reection, practical reection and critical

reflection. Technical reflection focuses on the

application of pedagogical knowledge and skills and

of basic principles of the curriculum for attaining a

given end; e.g., teaching content, teaching methods,

management skills and subject matters. Practical

reection involves the clarication of assumptions

related to pedagogical goals and evaluation ofconsequences of a teaching action. This is derived

from subjective perceptions of the situation and

personal experience. Manen argued that critical

reectivity is the highest and most desirable form

of reection. Moral, ethical and political issues are

considered together with the means and the ends. In

this form of reection, teachers are concerned with

the value of knowledge, educational purposes, ends

and aims.

Reflective practice has been one of the most

po pular features of profession al preparation

programmes, especially in education (Nickel et.

al., 2010). As such, in relation to teacher education

programme, reection has several roles. Reection

is the focus of continued professional development

programmes (Moore , 2001). Many educatorsconsider that reflective abilities are desirable

characteristics of teachers (Gore and Zeichner,

1991; Herrmann and Sarracino, 1993). A study

(Ottesen, 2007) of in-service teachers concluded

that reection can be a tool for continued personal

and professional development. Pultorak (1996),

after a three-year qualitative research, proposed that

teacher reflection is a developmental process and

may be characteristic of beginning teachers. Cook

(1993), after reviewing over 170 articles and papers

on reection, concluded that no one has completely

addressed developmental aspects of reection.

Characteristics of Reective Practitioner Research on effective teaching indicates

that relatively more effective teachers are often

reflective thinkers (Callaghan, 2002; Edwards

& Nicoll, 2006). The cultivation of reflective

practitioner has become a major goal of many

teacher education programmes (Chetcuti, 2002).

Earlier, Dewey (1933/1997) indicated three

attitudes to be prerequisites for reflective action.

The first is open-mindedness, an active desire

to listen to more sides than one (p. 29), and the

second prerequisite is responsibility, which refers

to careful consideration of consequences of a

part icular action. Finally, Dewey (1933/1997)

referred to wholeheartedness, according to which

individuals should be willing to take a risk and

put their ideals into practice. These prerequisites

are the cornerstones of teacher reflection.Researchers in America have begun to develop

what they claim to be a set of critical attributes

of reflection in an effort to distinguish reflective

teachers from their less reflective colleagues

(Day, 1933). Numerous scholars have highlighted

their respective versions of characteristics of

reflective practitioners. Calderhead (1992) said

becoming a reflective teacher may be considered

to be a matter of critically examining ones own

and others educational beliefs, and developinga coherent, articulated view of teaching and


3/11

68


learning. It is expected that reective teachers take

personal, social, ethical and political factors into

consideration. Reflective teachers should be as

concerned with student learning as with their own

(Capel et al., 1995). Cruickshank, Bainer & Metcalf

(1999) took a similar view, claiming that reectivepractitioners purposefully deliberate or reflect on

teaching; they are open-minded, freely questioning

their own views and reactions to their teaching

practices; they consider and accept responsibility

for the consequences of the decisions; and they are

enthusiastic and eagerly focus on ways to improve

their teaching. Laker (2001) indicated the following

characteristics of reective teachers: (i) those who

look back on their work, their teaching and their

pupils learning and reconstruct what happened

and why; and (ii) propose alternatives and take into

account the social, moral and political contexts that

surround their teaching and schooling. This echoes

Deweys perception of the reective practitioner: a

person open-minded, responsible and trustworthy.

MethodologyThis study used a case study design, providing

a detailed account and analysis of one single case

(Merrian, 1988). This study adopted an interpretive

approach to explore a beginning early childhood

teachers reflective practice. The main purpose

of an interpretive approach is to understand the

participants world. Human activity in specific

situations, from participants perspectives, is

examined (Hatch, 2002). Interactions between

researchers and participants create ndings usingpredominantly qualitative methods. Thick and

detailed description is used to bring the contexts

and meanings of participants lives and behaviours

to readers (Patton, 1990).

Participant A beginning early childhood teacher with less

than three years teaching experience was invited

to take part in this study (Table 1). The participant

completed a 3-Year (Full-time) Teacher Certicatein Early Childhood Education Programme. After

graduation she taught in a non-profit making

kindergarten. The researcher extended an invitation

to recent Teacher Certificate graduates, briefly

describing the study and soliciting volunteers. The

background, purposes and procedures of the project

were explained to the volunteers. All participants

were required to sign an informed consent form

indicating that they had agreed to participate in

and been informed about the study. All participants

were informed of their right to withdraw their

Table 1: Background of the Selected Beginning Teacher

Selected Teachers Name Teacher C

Sex Female

Years of teaching experience 2.5

Qualications3-years (Full-time) Teacher Certicate in Early Childhood

Education Course

Teachers daily reectivity beforeparticipating in this study

Sometimes reects

Teachers attitude towards participating in

this study and availabilityWilling to participate and available

School locationA newly developed town in the New Territories in a lower

& middle class area

School history 11 years

Type of school Non-prot

Students background Low and middle class families

School support towards reective activity Moderate


4/11

69


consent and discontinue participation at any time,

and it was guaranteed that all findings would be

condential.

Data GatheringA series of reective thinking activities were

conducted in this study (Table 2). These reective

thinking activities took the form of journal writing,

interviews and workshops. Three objectives were

achieved: (1) to enable participant to become a

(more) reflective early childhood teacher; (2) to

enhance participants reection; and (3) to provide

time and opportunity for the participant to reflect

on her teaching. Each interview lasted for about an

hour and was audio-taped. The interviews were the

sources of information for analysis of data. Journal

writing was used to enhance student teachers

reflection during field experience placements

(Bain et al., 1999). Reflective journals allowed

participants time to stop and think about practising

(Regan, 2008). In this study, the participant

wrote a reflective journal and then the researcher

interviewed the participant based on the journal she

wrote. In this way, the chance of imposing personalviews of the researcher was minimized.

Analysis of DataFirst, all the raw data (words, documents

and transcripts) were transcribed and translatedinto English. Second, the researcher went through

transcripts and texts and made comments in the

margins alongside the data. Findings were merged

in the form of themes and patterns.

Further Reections on Methodology For pragmatic reasons, the data collection

took place over a relatively short period of time

(5 months). Yet, the participant, Teacher C,

suggested that following further reflection, she

wished to implement changes into her teaching in

the following academic year. Thus, the duration

of data collection was not sufcient for observing

development of the deep change. Another

limitation in data collection that must be noted

was that the researcher should have collected as

much information as possible from the participants

colleagues and the principal in order to register

other representations and interpretations of the

situation, to avoid bias.

Empirical evidence about reflection in early

Table 2: Summary of the Data Gathering Process

Interventions / Activities

from March to JulyAims

An Interview for Personal and School Information Background Information about the participants

personal and professional development Submitted a piece of monthly Reective Journal

(5 pieces)

Encouraged teacher to reect on her teaching

Monthly Reflective Thinking Interview (5

interviews) with researcher

Participant wrote a reflective journal before

interview and the researcher then interviews the

participant based on the journal she wrote

Encouraged to reflect on understanding of her

teaching

Reflect ive Thinking Workshop (a total of 4

workshops, including participant sharing after

video lesson observation, view about reectionand teaching, etc.)

Enhanced participants reflective ability and

knowledge;

To see whether participant was becoming morereective

A Final In-depth Interview

To explore participants reflect ive practice

and look for evidence of characteristics of the

reective practitioner

Overall aims were to encourage and understand the teachers reection.


5/11

70


childhood education for beginning teachers is

seriously underplayed in Hong Kong. The effects

of reflective thinking activities used in this study

deserve further discussion. School life is a busy

life in Hong Kong and the participant was pre-

occupied with various duties and further studies.It is suggested that the duration of data collection

be at least one year. Also the effects of reflective

thinking activities (journal writing, interview and

workshop) used in this study also deserve further

investigations and discussions in future studies.

FindingsIn this study, it was found that Teacher C had

made considerable reflection on student learning,

made changes in her teaching behaviour, especiallyin her interactions with children. She became more

child-centered. She reected more on her students

abilities and interests, and was more aware of

childrens feedback. It was claimed that Teacher

C was an enthusiastic early childhood teacher

eager to improve her teaching. In this study, there

was evidence showing the participant had the

characteristics of a reective practitioner.

Reect on Student Learning Teacher C paid special attention to interests of

learning, ability and responses of her students. She

stressed that she gave her students room to express

and learn through self-experiences and exploration.

She said,

Personally, it is extremely essential for

the teacher to have a good understanding

in knowing the interests and abilities of her

students... (Reflective Journal II, & Reflective

Thinking Interview II, p.4)

In her reflection on teaching, Teacher C

mentioned that her students were interested in

trains. For example,

Students were very interested in trains. One

of the students pointed to the picture of a

big train and said, I ride on a train before.

Another student remarked, Trains in the old

days were not like these. The teacher thenasked, What do you think about the trains

that you know? Having heard this question,

more students began to talk about different

trains. Eventually, the teacher decided to take

her students to visit the Railway Museum.(Reective Journal II & Reective Thinking Interview II,

p.5)

The above example shows that Teacher C

considered students interests seriously. In fact, the

Railway Museum is quite far away from the school.

The travelling time from the school to the museum

was about one hour.

Furthermore, Teacher C indicated that her

students need to learn through self-exploration. The

following segment was recorded.

When I talk about how to protect eggs using

suitable methods, I provide many guidelines

and express different views in a direct manner.

However, the students need to learn things

through their self experiences... However, it

is still a good chance for them to learn if they

could find out the reasons behind, and are

eager to try out better protection methods.(Reflective Journal III & Reflective Thinking Interview

III, p.5).

Teacher C considered that she should let

her students think of better methods. She further

pointed out:

Sometimes, when the students were working

for exhibitions and competitions, or when we

have to get their works distributed to their

parents, I always talk too much to the students

during these activities and the process ofproduction. This limits the creativity of my

students because they follow instructions

rather than using their talent. (Reective Journal

III & Reective Thinking Interview III, p. 15-16).

Reect on Interaction with Students Teacher C was more child centered. She

thought about the childrens behaviours and

reactions in the classroom.

I didnt have time to chat with them in


6/11

71


order to know more about what they think.

Recently, because of this reason, I had caused

a student to be heart-broken and it also

affected the relationship between us. One day,

a girl brought me some photos after nishing

her homework. She walked towards me andshowed me some photos. She wanted to share

her happiest moment on a day she had fun in a

park with her parents. At that time, I said, Im

now teaching children to write characters. Can

I see them later? She then went back to her

seat and she did come again and again. She

approached me three times but I gave her the

same answer by refusing to see the pictures(Reflective Journal III & Reflective Thinking Interview

III, p. 9).

She further shared:

Eventually, she did not come again and then

shared those photos with other classmates... I

walked next to her and asked her to share the

pictures with me. And she replied, its fine.

You dont have time. You dont want to see

it. At that moment, I knew that she felt upset.

Then, I tried my best to explain everything to

her. I really wanted to take a look at thosephotos. But I was busy with your classmates

at that time. After a while, she shared her

feelings about the pictures with me. (Reective

Journal III & Reective Thinking Interview III, p. 11).

Teacher C quoted another example.

I had mentioned that the time for activities

was so tight every day. We had to finish

everything in a rush One day, a parentbrought her child to me because the child had

got a few bruises on his arm I asked him,

Why didnt you tell your teacher that you fell

down somewhere? The child replied, No, I

didnt tell my teacher about that. His mum

then asked her, Why didnt you? In class,

children like to report and yell for teachers

over minor problems. The child spoke in a

mature tone. Teacher is very busy. She has

got lots of things to do. And I didnt interrupt

her. (Reflective Journal IV & Reflective Thinking

Interview IV, p. 6).

Teacher C said,

I will not say Im now busy now anymore.

But I will tell them, Please wait for a fewseconds. (Reective Journal IV & Reective Thinking

Interview IV, p 8).

I always say Please wait when the children

ask for my attention. They have also learned

to say Please wait When some children

put up their hands, signalling that they have

finished their homework, another child will

say, Please wait In reality, they signal other

things. Do I say Please wait so many times

to the children in class? (Reflective Journal IV &

Reective Thinking Interview IV, p. 9).

As is evident from the above reflection,

Teacher C treasured the sharing and interaction

with her students.

Reect on Teaching Performance In addition, Teacher C was more aware of her

teaching performance and behaviour. She pointed

out that there were changes in her teaching. She

highlighted an example.

Today, I praised student A and I said, You

drew a wonderful picture. And I never

imagined that student B would say. I dont

understand why it is wonderful! At that time,

I thought, Student B was very impolite by

saying something like this. (Reective Journal V

& Reective Thinking Interview V, p.3).

Thinking it careful ly again and again,

I partially agreed that his comment was

reasonable. When I made my comment on

Student As picture, my words were not

concrete enough. I just generally said that his

picture was wonderful. But I did not mention

why I thought his picture was wonderful. For

example, I should have said the picture is

wonderful for its overall structure, colour or

creativity. (Reective Journal V & Reective ThinkingInterview V, p. 4)


7/11

72


This incident leads me to recall how I praised

the children before. Sometimes, my praise was

not clear and detailed enough... if teachers can

point out their praises more precisely, children

will definitely know more about their own

merits. (Reective Journal IV & Reective ThinkingInterview V, p. 8).

At the end of the project, Teacher C emphasized

that reflection is very significant to her and fellow

teachers:

Reection is certainly very signicant to us.

As for a teacher, no matter what stages he/

she is in, or whether he/she is a beginning

or experienced teacher, he/she also has to

improve himself/herself in different stages

in his/her time Personally, teachers need

reection, and I have mentioned it. I need to

improve myself. (Final In-depth Interview, p. 3).

Teacher C commented that there were some

impacts on her reection after participating in this

project.

In her own words:

The reason why I have to change myself

is that the reflection I did before was

not as precise as the one I did during the

participation in this project. In the past, I

remembered part by part what I had done. Or

I just freely wrote down the key points in my

note book. To me, at that time, this was called

reection. However, after participating in this

project, I have to write all the things in detail.

I have to write and think at the same time. Soeverything makes a deeper impression on my

mind we do observe children closely. (Final

In-depth Interview, p. 8).

Having participated in this study, Teacher C

amended her teaching and learning skills to the best

of her ability, and has become more professional

due to her personal reection.

Yes, I do see something bad in my teaching

sometimes, and I remind myself not to have

it happen again. During the lessons, the tone

I use to chat with children, or the vocabulary

I use in questions and answers, or the way I

handle the conictor the way they take care

of lifeor arrange each of these aspects in

a better way. (Final In-depth Interview, p. 5).

Finally, Teacher C suggested that more sharing

with others (partner / colleagues) could improve

their teaching.

I would like to talk about this with other

people. When doing the reflec tion on my

own, if there is another one denitely. My

partner in the classroom will tell me about his/

her ideas. We may have different views on an

issue, and in some cases our views may be

very different. She will think of it in one way,

and I will think of it in another way. When

having different ideas, we will try to think

thoroughly to work for the best of it. (Final In-

depth Interview, p. 15).

Teacher C also recommended that reflection

should be done at a regular time.

It seems that reflection should be doneregularly at a certain time....a teacher who

does everything that she promises to do can

reect at any time. However, if her workload

is increased, her mind will then be slightly

affected. Shortly afterwards, she will gradually

decrease the time spent for reflection if her

work has not been running so smoothly. She

will do her reflection only if she encounters

difculties that are hard to tackle. As for me,

everyone knows the way of thinking and islikely to nd out where the problem is. (Final

In-depth Interview, p. 20)

Discussions Before this study, Teacher C would and

could reflect only occasionally. It was shown that

her reflective thinking changed gradually as she

participated in the study. The scope of her reection

broadened and she reected in greater detail on her

students learning, relationships with and betweenstudents and her teaching performance. Most of her


8/11

73


reflective thinking functioned at a technical level,

on the application of pedagogical knowledge and

skills for attaining a given end (Van Manen, 1977).

For example: teaching content, teaching behaviours

and students abilities and needs. Furthermore, she

reected on clarications of assumptions related toteaching goals and evaluation of consequences of a

teaching action.

As the study proceeded, Teacher C was not

confined to a technical level anymore; she also

reflected on a practical level. She analyzed her

lessons related to teaching goals and evaluation

of consequences of a teaching action (more aware

of her teaching behaviour and its significance).

This level derives from subjective perceptions of

the situation and personal experience. Previous

studies (Lawson, 1989; Baptiste & Sheerer, 1997)

have suggested that beginning teachers focus

their reflection on technical level as they need to

survive the transition from being students to being

teachers; many beginning teachers fail in the course

of transition. However, it is of interest to note that

teacher C had a significant part of her reflection

at the practical level. It is worthwhile to further

investigate the factors that helped her to advance in

the hierarchy of reective thinking.

It was interpreted that Teacher Cs past

learning experience in primary and secondary

studies was with a noticeable emphasis. She wanted

her students to be able to think. This study revealed

that Teacher C had a clear and specific teaching

goal, to help her students become persons who

could think. She wanted to achieve this teaching

goal. The goal propelled her to use reflective

teaching to accomplish this goal. Through reectionto achieve the goal is one of the characteristics of

a reflective teacher. Moon (1999) and Rodgens

(2002) have emphasized that we reflect for a

purpose. The participant had a passion that came

from deep inside her heart. She gave herself a clear

direction and she knew the goal she wanted to

achieve; to learn how to think through encouraging

and helping her students to think and giving them a

sense of self-initiation. She wished to train them to

become persons who could think. Her role was to

impact knowledge but to scaffold students in their

learning and facilitating their growth. She was not

a knowledge reproducer, rather a scaffold person

and a promoter to help the students learn and grow.

She used reflective teaching to achieve this goal.

Teacher C had met teachers she considered good

at different times in her preschool and these goodteachers had greatly inuenced her attitude towards

early childhood teaching, nudging her in the

positive directions. She admired her teachers and

consciously or unconsciously wanted to become a

good teacher like them. These teachers had become

role models for her to follow. This was her common

goal and achieving this became a driving force that

pressed her to improve.

The study indicated that Teacher C accepted

suggestions and criticism from her students.

Calderhead (1992) said becoming a reflective

teacher is considered to be a matter of critically

examining ones own and others educational

beliefs, and developing a coherent, articulated

view of teaching and learning. In other words,

the characteristics of a reflective teacher are self-

criticize ones teaching, actively and consistently

review, in detail, ones own teaching behaviour,

and accept the views of her students. From the

interaction between the teacher and the students,as well as her teaching behaviour, it can be seen

that the teacher cared for learning and development

of her students. Reflective teachers should be as

concerned with learning of students as with their

own (Capel, Leask and Turner, 1995). Researchers

(Cruickshank, Bainer & Metcalf, 1999; Laker

2001) take a similar view, claiming that reective

practitioners share certain characteristics. They

purposefully deliberate or reect on teaching; they

are open-minded, freely questioning their ownviews and reactions to their teaching practices;

they consider and accept responsibility for the

consequences of their decisions; and they are

enthusiastic and eagerly focus on ways to improve

their teaching.

Based on the literature and research in

this field, it is generally agreed that reflective

teachers are those who are able to analyze their

own practice and the contexts in which it occurs.

They are expected to be able to stand back from


9/11

74


their own teaching, evaluate their situations,

and take responsibility for their own actions.

This study concluded that Teacher C possesses

a reflective practitioners characteristics. She

could reflect on her teaching, ultimately for self-

improvement. She could reflect on or review heractions. She displayed self-awareness and strives

towards self-improvement. She possesses open-

mindedness, responsibility and whole-heartedness.

All these should be enduring characteristics of

the behaviour rather than simply surface level

attitudes of mind. Being reflective practitioners,

teachers should comfortably engage in the mental

activity of reflection and relate more strongly to

the characteristics of reective persons, rather than

to habitual use of reection as a mental tool. This

echoes Dewey (1933/1997): reective teachers look

at classroom problems from many perspectives and

especially from those of their students.

Conclusions and Implications From the study, it was observed that Teacher

C displayed reflective thinking in her teaching.

Most of the reection mainly focused at technical

level and a few functioned at practical level. Some

changes in her teaching performance were revealed

after a series of reflective thinking activities.

She could analyze her teaching activities and the

details of what had happened, and looked back on

her teaching and evaluated her own situation and

learning of her students. These had positive effects

on her teaching and her students learning. Teacher

C was an eager learner, and this was the driving

force behind her continuous self-improvement in

teaching. This study indicated that Teacher C had

the characteristics of a reective practitioner. Thesecharacteristics included having passion in teaching

aiming at improving the quality of teaching and

learning.

Reective abilities are desirable characteristics

of teachers (Herrmann and Sarracino, 1993;

Chetcuti, 2002); reflection can be a tool for

continued personal and professional development

(Ottesen, 2007). Early childhood educators and

school administrators should take further actions

to allow teachers to engage in regular reflections.

Even though early childhood teachers in Hong

Kong are very busy in their daily working

schedules and duties, it is of importance for them

to have a regular time for reflection and sharing

with others (colleagues). The researcher concurs

with Dewey (1964, 1977) in that reection does not

occur naturally. Thus, it is suggested that reection

should be explicitly taught in teacher education

programmes and school staff development

programmes. If reection is used properly, it leadsto learning, more critical inquiry, intelligent living

and fruitful living.

Appendix 1: List out some Questions and Sharings from Reective Thinking Workshops

1. From your point of view, what does reection mean to you?

2. In your teaching experience, do you know when you reect on your teaching or anything related to

your teaching?3. Did you engage in any reection after class?

4. The researcher shares with the participant about reection: denitions of reection,

5. What do you think about your teaching after observation of your lesson through video-taping?

6. Do you have anything more you want to share with me?

Appendix 2: List out some Interview Questions from Final In-depth Interview

1. Do you think reection is important to you? If important, why? If not, why and how?

2. Are there any changes in your teaching after participating in this research project?

3. Have you ever thought that you will revise or change your teaching methods or strategies in the

coming year?


10/11

75


4. Apart from reective teaching, what other things or factors help or improve your teaching?

5. Do you think that this project has enhanced your teaching?

6. What is an ideal and satisfying lesson?

References

Admiraal, W. & Wubbels, T. (2005). Multiple voices, multiple realities, what truth? Students teachers learning to

reflect in different paradigms, Teachers and Teaching: theory and practice, 11(3), 315-329.

Baptiste, N. E. & Sheerer, M. (1997). Negotiating the challenges of the survivalstage of professional development.

Early Childhood Education Journal, 24(4), 265-7.

Bain, J. et. al. (1999). Using journal writing to enhance student teachersreflectivity during field experience

placements, Teachers and Teaching, 5,51-73.

Calderhead, J. (1992). The role of reflection in learning to teach. In L. Valli (ed.).Reective Teacher Education: Cases

and Critiques. pp. 139-148. New York: State University.

Callaghan, K. (2002). Nurturing the enthusiasm and ideals of new teachers through reflective practice, Canadian

Children (the journal of the Canadian Association for Young Children), 27(1), Spring, 38-41.

Capel, S., Leask, M. and Turner, T. (eds). (1995). Learning to teach in the secondary school: A companion to school

experience. London: Routledge.

Chetcuti, D. (2002). Becoming a reflective practitioner. In C. Bezzina, A. Camilleri Grima, D. Purchase & R. Sultana

(Eds).Inside secondary Schools: a Maltese reader (Malta, Indigobooks), 154-165.

Cook, P. (1993). Defining reflective teaching: How has it been done for research?Paper presented at the Annual

Association of Teacher Education Conference. Los Angeles.

Cruickshank, D. R., Bainer, D. L. and Metcalf, K. K. (1999). The acting of teaching(2nd

eds). Boston: McGraw-Hill

College.

Day, C. (1993). Reflection: A necessary but not sufficient conditionfor professional development. British Educational

Research Journal, 19(1), 83-93.

Dewey, J. (1933).How we think?Chicago: Regency.

Dewey, J. (1964).Experience and education.New York: Collin books.

Dewey, J. (1997).How we think? (Mineola, NY, Dover).

Dirkx, J. M. (1989). Self-reflection in the clinical experience: Using group processes to improve practitioner-

client relationship. Paper presented at the Conference of the American Educational Research Association,San

Francisco.

Edwards, R. & Nicoll, K. (2006). Expertise, competence and reflection in the rhetoric of professional development,

British Educational Research Journal, 32(1), 115-131.

Glaser, B. G. and Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research.

Chicago: Aldine.

Gore, J.M. and Zeichner, K. M. (1991). Action research and reflective teaching in preservice teacher education: A case

study from the United States. Teaching and Teacher Education. 7(2), 119-136.

Hatch, J. A. (2002).Doing Qualitative research in education settings. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Herrmann, B. A. and Scarracino, J. (1993). Restructuring preservice literacy methods course: Dilemmas and lessons

learned.Journal of Teacher Education, 44(2), 96-106.

Laker, A. (2001).Developing personal, social and moral education through physical education: A practical guide for

teachers.London and New York: Routledge Falmer.


11/11

76


Lawson, H. A. (1983). Toward a model of teacher socialization in physical education: The subjective warrant,

recruitment and teacher education.Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 2(3): 3-16.

Littleton, K. Mercer, N., Dawes, L., Wegerif, R., Rowe, D. and Sams, C. (2005). Talking and thinking together at Key

Stage 1,Early Years: An International Journal of Research and Development, 25(2), 167-182.

Merriam, S. B. (1998). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach.San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Moon, J. A. (1999).Reection in learning and professional development: Theory and practice.London: Kogan Page.

Moore, A. (2001). Teaching and learning: Pedagogy, curriculum and culture.London and New York: Routledge/

Falmer.

Nickel, J. Sutherby, L. & Garrow-Oliver, S. (2010). Fostering reflection through challenging practica.Journal of Early

Childhood Teacher Education, 31,49-62.

Ottesen, E (2007). Reflection in teacher education.Reective Practice, 8(1), pp. 31-46.

Paige-Smith A. & Craft, A. (2008). Developing reflective practice. In Developing Reflective Practice in the Early

Years, Alice Paige-Smith and Anna Craft (eds). MGH, Open University Press.

Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods.(2nd eds). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Pultorak, E.G. (1996). Following the development process of reflection in novice teachers. Three years of

investigation.Journal of Teacher Education, 47, 283-291.

Regan, P. (2008). Reflective practice: How far, how deep?Reective Practice, 9(2), 219-229.

Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking, Teachers College Record,

104(4), 842-866.

Schon, D. A. (1991).Educating the reective practitioner.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Shulman, L. S. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Education Review, 57(1),

1-22.

Van Manen, M. (1977). Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6,205-218.

Van Manen, M. (1991). The tact of teaching: The meaning of pedagogical thoughtfulness. Albany, New York: SUNY

Press; London, Ont.: Althouse Press.

Zeichner, K. M. (1983). Individual and institutional factors related to the socialization of beginning teachers. In G.

Griffin & H. Hukill (eds).First year of teaching: What are the pertinent issues? pp. 1-30. Austin: University of

Texas, Research and Development Centre for Teacher Education.

Documents

reflective practice: a case study of a beginning early childhood teacher in Hong Kong