This article was downloaded by: [University of Glasgow]On: 16 March 2013, At: 05:31Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Reflective Practice: International andMultidisciplinary PerspectivesPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/crep20
Reflection in teacher education:exploring pre‐service teachers’meanings of reflective practiceJoan Y. Pedroa University of Hartford, USAVersion of record first published: 20 Sep 2011.
To cite this article: Joan Y. Pedro (2005): Reflection in teacher education: exploring pre‐serviceteachers’ meanings of reflective practice, Reflective Practice: International and MultidisciplinaryPerspectives, 6:1, 49-66
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1462394042000326860
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions
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.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representationthat the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of anyinstructions, formulae, and drug doses should be independently verified with primarysources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings,demand, or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly orindirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Reflective PracticeVol. 6, No. 1, February 2005, pp. 49–66
ISSN 1462-3943 (print)/ISSN 1470-1103 (online)/05/010049–18© 2005 Taylor & Francis Group LtdDOI: 10.1080/1462394042000326860
Reflection in teacher education: exploring pre-service teachers’ meanings of reflective practiceJoan Y. Pedro*University of Hartford, USATaylor and Francis LtdCREP6104.sgm10.1080/1462394042000326860Reflective Practice1462-3943 (print)/1470-1103 (online)Original Article2005Taylor & Francis Ltd61000000February 2005JoanY.PedroUniversity of HartfordDivision of Education200 Bloomfield AvenueWest HartfordCT [email protected]
Reflective practice in teacher education is one reform effort that has taken hold in the educationcommunity. This article shares some of the findings of a qualitative interpretive study that exploredhow five pre-service teachers constructed meanings of reflective practice, and how these meaningsinformed their practice. The purpose of this study was to better understand reflective practice inteacher preparation. The theoretical framework originates in the works of Dewey and Schön, andapplies a symbolic interaction theoretical and analytical framework to give voice to the pre-serviceteachers within the historical and institutional contexts of a teacher preparation program. Ninethemes were culled from the data and categorized within the symbolic interaction social processesof acquiring perspective, achieving individuality, and situating the act of reflection. These themeshighlighted how the pre-service teachers interpreted and practiced reflection in this teacher prepa-ration program. The findings suggest that these pre-service teachers had a general understanding ofreflection and learned to reflect through various opportunities, and in different contexts. This studyhas implications for the ways in which pre-service teachers learn about reflection, raises questionsabout innovative writing practices in reflection and is insightful for teacher educators who preparepre-service teachers to become reflective practitioners.
Introduction
The reflective practice paradigm in teacher education is one reform effort that hastaken hold in the education community (Zeichner & Liston, 1987; Valli, 1992).During the 1980s reflective practice became a popular concept in the United States(Tabachnick & Zeichner, 1991; Valli 1992), and it continues today as a noteworthyreform effort. In the name of reflection, many teacher education programs have incor-porated strategies to encourage pre-service teachers to think critically about theirpractice. Proponents cite many benefits of reflective approaches to teacher education.
*Division of Education, 200 Bloomfield Avenue, West Hartford, CT 06117, USA. Email:[email protected]
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
50 J. Y. Pedro
Some see it as the vehicle for getting the new cadre of teachers involved as active part-ners in school renewal (Zeichner & Liston, 1987; Valli, 1992). Reflection, they say,helps teachers understand and ‘have control over the content and processes of theirown work’ (Zeichner & Liston, 1987, p. 26), and it develops the teacher as a decision-maker, who can help to define the direction of schooling (Zeichner & Liston, 1987;Valli, 1992).
My interest and understanding of reflective practice was heightened because ofmy involvement in a teacher preparation program that encourages reflection.Moving from a traditional teacher preparation in another country to become amentor in an initial teacher preparation program in the United States that focusedon encouraging reflective approaches spurred my interest in the reflective practiceapproach in teacher education. Additionally, I developed a growing skepticism ofthe social efficiency tradition of teaching and learning that I had embraced for manyyears in my career as teacher and teacher educator. Previously my concern was todevelop teachers with ‘skills and competencies which research has shown to be asso-ciated with desirable pupil outcomes’ (Zeichner, 1992, p. 164). Although I believedthat this approach has served to produce effective teachers efficient in basic teachingskills, I acknowledged the reflective practice paradigm as another way to help teach-ers learn how to accommodate the diverse needs of their students.
Through the review of the literature on reflective practice, and mentoring of pre-service teachers, many questions about reflective practice surfaced. I believed thatlooking at reflection through the eyes of the pre-service teachers would greatly add tomy understanding of reflective practice. I felt that the insights gained from such aprocess would allow me to more ably assist pre-service teachers to get a strong starton their practice. The main goal of this study was to discover how pre-service teachersunderstand and interpret reflective practice. This study was guided by three mainresearch questions, (a) how do the pre-service teachers perceive and understand theconcept of reflection? (b) how do the pre-service teachers describe how they learn toreflect on their practice? and (c) in what context did the pre-service teachers engagein reflection?
Links to the literature
A great deal of research has been devoted to the conceptual analysis of the popularslogan ‘reflective practice’ in teacher education (Zeichner, 1999, p. 10). Dewey(1933) has been acknowledged as a key originator in the twentieth century of theconcept of reflective practice (Hatton & Smith, 1995, p. 2). He reasoned that reflec-tion precedes intelligent action and is the act of active, persistent and careful consid-eration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of grounds thatsupport it, and the consequence to which it leads (Dewey, 1933). Reflective thinkingin Dewey’s view generally addresses practical problems, allowing for doubt andperplexity before possible solutions are reached (Hatton & Smith, 1995, p. 2).
Emanating from Dewey’s work are key issues that have guided the interpretationand broadening of the concept of reflective practice. The first issue involves thinking
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Reflection in teacher education 51
about action, the second involves the time frame in which reflection takes place, thethird has to do with whether reflection is by its very nature problem-centered or not,and the fourth issue deals with whether reflection takes into account the widerhistoric, cultural and political values and beliefs (Hatton & Smith, 1995. p. 4). Theseissues have spurned many debates and evolved contemporary models of reflectionadding to the puzzlement and varied use of reflection in teacher education.
Schön (1983, 1987) introduced the dimension of the time frames in which reflec-tion takes place and linked reflection to action. He suggested that reflection is apurposeful, systematic inquiry into practice (1983), and emphasized that profession-als should learn to frame and reframe problems they face, test out various interpreta-tions, and modify their results (Hatton & Smith, 1995, p. 3). Other models ofreflection (Killen, 1989; Pugach 1990; Smith & Lovatt, 1991) have also consideredvarying time frames in which reflection takes place in order to make changes to behav-ior (Hatton & Smith, 1995).
In a critique of the various models of reflection, Liston and Zeichner (1990)suggested that few of these conceptual approaches ‘identify meaningful criteria fordiscerning what counts as good reasons for educational actions’(p. 236). They arguethat ‘teacher education ought to aim directly at developing teachers who are able toarticulate their purposes … and can be counted on for giving good reasons for theiraction’(p. 236). These researchers imply that underlying the orientation of reflectivepractice is the concept of liberation, which allows the teacher ‘to exercise their judg-ment on the content and processes of their work’ (Zeichner & Liston, 1987, p. 24).
There is also the argument that teacher education should be concerned with issuesof equity and justice through critical reflection (Smyth, 1989; Gore & Zeichner,1991). Zeichner and Liston (1996) argued that in the social reconstructionist tradi-tion, reflection is viewed ‘as a political act that either contributes towards or hindersthe realization of a more just and humane society’ (p. 59). In this tradition, teachersare expected to think critically about the social order and use reflection to addressmoral and social aspects of teaching, and as such deliberate on issues that help themexamine equity and social justice (p. 60).
The use of reflection in teacher preparation programs seems to hold promise forchallenging the traditional/ behaviorist views of teacher preparation that some believehave continually obstructed attempts at educational reform (Bryan, 2000). Thesewriters are often critical of the social efficiency tradition in teacher education which,they say, fail to emphasize a concern for reflection about the institutional, cultural andpolitical contexts of schooling (Zeichner & Liston, 1996, p. 53). It has been arguedthat behaviorism encourages a reductive approach to educating teachers – oftenfocusing on sets of indicators – while ignoring the artistic and moral dimensions thatare essential to teaching (Tom, 1987; Noddings, 1988). The understandings andexperiences of the pre-service teachers in this study were explored against the back-drop of these orientations and views and form a theoretical framework for this study.
An interest in viewing the participants’ construction of meanings of reflective prac-tice led to the theory of symbolic interaction. This theory deals directly with issuessuch as language, communication and their interrelationships (Merriam, 1988), and
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
52 J. Y. Pedro
perpetuates the notion of being able to put oneself in the place of others. A symbolicinteraction theoretical and analytical framework was used to develop a clearer under-standing of how the pre-service teachers interpreted what they learned about reflec-tive practice and how they used it. I utilized the generic social processes, acquiringperspectives, achieving individuality and situating the act (Prus, 1996) to highlightthe emergent and interpretive themes of the pre-service teachers’ association ofreflective practice. Prus (1996) suggests the use of generic social processes as aheuristic device for envisioning the process of lived experiences in a more concertedmanner.
Methodology
Participants in the study
The participants in the study were drawn from a graduate teacher preparationprogram and ranged in age, from 22 to 42 years. They were purposely selected(Cresswell, 1994) to reflect differences in the grade levels they taught, their place-ment schools, gender and ethnicity. A ‘maximum variation’ strategy (Miles &Huberman, 1994) was used to select participants who represented diverse or multi-ple perspectives, but also identified common patterns.
The participants were assured confidentiality and assigned pseudonyms. Barbara isa white female in her forties. Lisa is twenty-two years old and is the only African-American student in the program. Jason is a white male. He is 23 years old, and is oneof two males in the program. Maria, of Hispanic origin, is another of the maturestudents in the program. Paulette is a 22-year-old white female. She is one of theyounger pre-service teachers in the program.
Data collection
This is a qualitative study in a descriptive and interpretive design. The interpreta-tions of the pre-service teachers’ conceptions and understandings of reflectivepractice were captured through the transcription and analysis of three individualin-depth interviews, as recommended by Seidman (1998), and through the exami-nation of the pre-service teachers’ reflection journals. Participant-observations ofthe final teaching practice were recorded in field notes and served to verify the pre-service teachers’ responses. These field notes served to check descriptions againstfacts and note discrepancies (Stake, 1995). Participant observations gave me an‘insider perspective’ of the phenomena under study. Yin (1994) states that observa-tional evidence is often useful in providing additional information about the topicbeing studied. The pre-service teachers were interviewed upon the completion ofthe final teaching practice and submission of their ten-week reflection journals.Data collection was conducted over the period of three semesters to enable me tocollect data from the five pre-service teachers in the program, analyze and write thenarratives.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Reflection in teacher education 53
Interviews. The qualitative interviews were the main source of my data collectionand took on a conversational aspect that covered open-ended questions. Responsesto open-ended questions demonstrated the pre-service teachers’ unique way of look-ing at the world and their definitions of the situations (Silverman, 1993). I also usedfollow-up questions for clarification and to capture the unfolding of their perspec-tives (Rossman & Rallis, 1998). Each interview was one hour long, although somepre-service teachers took more time. These interviews were focused utilizing a set ofquestions guided by the research questions. I asked key questions for facts as well asopinions of the participants, and insights into certain occurrences (Yin, 1994). Carewas taken not to change the wording, context and emphases of the interview ques-tions for each student (Oppenheim, 1992). Silverman (1993) suggests that eachinterviewee should understand the question in the same way. The first interviewestablished the context of the participants’ experience. The second interviewallowed the participants to reconstruct the details of their experiences within thecontext. The third interview encouraged the participants to reflect on the meaningof their experiences (Seidman, 1998). Table 1 outlines examples of questions in thethree interviews.
Journals. The pre-service teachers were required to write a weekly reflection journalas part of their final teaching practice. In these journals they recorded their reflectionson curriculum matters, class activities, social and personal matters that were signifi-cant to them. At the end of the semester I collected these weekly reflection journalsthat formed part of the data and were used to extend the views of the pre-serviceteachers on reflective practice.
Table 1. Examples of Questions from Interview Guides
Examples of Questions from the Interview Guides Type of Question
What was your undergraduate degree?What do you understand by the term reflection?When was the first time you heard the term reflection?Give me an example of a time you engaged in reflection?
Initial and intake questionsSemi-structuredOpen-ended
Tell me a bit more about yourself?Can you share with me some examples of classes you participated in that incorporated reflective activities?Explain how you did those activities?How did the cooperating teacher help you to reflect?
Follow-upQuestionsSemi-structuredOpen-ended
When you think back on your teaching practice, is there anything you wanted to change?Were there any limitations that you can recall that did not help you to be reflective?Can you share some of those experiences?Do you think the program helped you to be reflective? How?
Follow-up questionsSemi-structuredOpen-ended
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
54 J. Y. Pedro
Data analysis procedures
Cresswell (1994) along with other qualitative authors (Bogdan & Biklen, 1992;Huberman & Miles, 1994; Wolcott, 1994) suggest a general review of informationcollected by reading the data and jotting notes in the margins of the text, this was thefirst step to becoming familiar with the participants’ views. I filed the interviews andorganized the narratives of each student teacher. I numbered the field notes and tran-scriptions for each participant. The ideas that the participants conveyed were firstculled from the interview transcripts. I searched for patterns in the data, noting anyunexpected features (Hammersly & Atkinson, 1983). The materials for one partici-pant were used as a prototype to search for patterns that answered the research ques-tions. I subsequently read the weekly journals and coded them to match the initialpatterns identified in the interviews.
In the thematic analysis of data I developed themes using words and phrases thatserved as labels for the pre-service teachers’ actions. For example, in the data the pre-service teachers defined the concept of reflective practice. I used the phrase ‘definingreflection’ as a theme for discussing the pre-service teachers’ definitions to demon-strate their understandings through the defining process. I also used the participants’words to develop other themes. For example, the pre-service teachers indicated theyquestioned themselves about their actions; they also talked about how they wrotereflections. I used the phrases, ‘questioning as reflection’, and ‘written reflections’ asthemes to highlight the processes they had identified. I used the constant comparisonmethod to read and reread the data to determine that the themes were reflectedwithin and across the responses of the participants (Lalik & Potts, 2001). I color-coded the themes and wrote the lines from each participant that represented theparticular theme.
I searched through the data using a variable oriented strategy (Miles & Huberman,1994) to find themes that cut across the cases. In a carefully inductive manner, Ilooked across the data of the five participants and found recurring themes such as‘verbal reflections’ and ‘content of reflection’. I was cognizant of Maykutt and More-house’s (1994) suggestions that I begin to categorically code and look for simulta-neous comparison of meanings across the units of analysis. I explored these themesfor thematic and cross-categorical relationships and patterns and I sought to integratethe data in such a way as to exemplify an understanding of the participants andcontext in the study.
The excerpts of the pre-service teachers were extracted verbatim from the tran-scripts and put into a flow chart, so that I could see the data clearly (Yin, 1994). Inthis phase of analysis I incorporated the written responses of the participants fromtheir reflection journals under the themes where applicable, to elaborate or emphasizea thematic response of the participant. I constructed a matrix to record all the themesand exemplars that I discerned under each social process
As Table 2 illustrates, there were nine significant themes derived from the data andcategorized within the symbolic interaction social processes of acquiring perspectives,achieving individuality and situating the act of reflection (Prus, 1996).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Reflection in teacher education 55
Trusting the data
In qualitative research the issues of credibility, trustworthiness and offering a correctinterpretation are paramount (Rubin & Rubin, 1995). In order to ensure credibilityand minimize investigator bias, the procedures used in this study included memberchecks where the participants read the interview transcripts to verify the informationthey had given. The views of the pre-service teachers were extracted from the inter-views and the weekly journals without alteration except in changing of grammaticalstructures to reflect as far as possible what the participant wanted to say (Nespor &Barber, 1995). The information from the interviews and weekly journals provided theconvergence and verification of at least two pieces of data, ensuring more than onemode of evidence (Huberman & Miles, 1994, p. 438). As I sifted through the data, Iwas able to check my notes when a participant related an instance that I was privy to.In this way I was able to verify many of the instances shared by the participants in theinterviews.
Ethics play an important role in qualitative research. Stake (1995) observes that‘qualitative researchers are guests in the private spaces of the world. Their mannershould be good and their code of ethics strict’ (p. 44). Merriam (1998) agrees thatthere are ethical dilemmas presented when one collects, analyzes data and dissemi-nates findings. As a participant observer who was also the mentor of the teacherpreparation program from which these participants are drawn, I was aware that thepre-service teachers became accustomed to my presence and revealed many situa-tions to me during the student teaching practice. The analysis of data was filteredthrough my particular theoretical position and biases (Merriam, 1998).
This study was not evaluative, however, I believed the insight was welcomed, inlight of the evolving nature of the teacher preparation program. Furthermore, thisresearch was one of several data collection efforts that informed the continued
Table 2. Research Questions Linked to the Social Processes and the Corresponding Themes
Research Questions Social Processes (Prus, 1996) Themes Arising out of Data
How do the pre-service teachers perceive and understand the concept of reflection?
Acquiring Perspectives 1) Defining reflection2) Questioning in reflection3) Having opportunities to reflect
How do these pre-service teachers describe how they learn to reflect on their practice?
Achieving Individuality 4) Reflection is learned from self and significant others
5) Reflection on action and for action
6) Reflection is based on personal beliefs, and educational theory
In what contexts do the pre-service teachers engage in reflective practice?
Situating the act 7) Self-reflection8) Verbal reflections9) Written reflections
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
56 J. Y. Pedro
development of the program. Systematic research is one of the ways that can benefitthis dynamic and changing program.
Interpretations and discussion
Acquiring perspectives
The social process acquiring perspective is the category under which the first researchquestion was answered. The pre-service teachers acquired their perspectives in thefollowing ways: through their definitions of reflection, using questioning and throughthe opportunities to reflect.
Defining reflection. Definitions are the basis on which individuals explain theirunderstanding of a particular concept. The literature indicates there are many defi-nitions and interpretations of reflective practice in teacher education, making it aproblematic and puzzling concept. Sparks-Langer (1992) posits the view that theexact meaning of the term ‘teacher reflection’ is difficult to pin down. However,definitions are important to demonstrate how these five pre-service teachers under-stood reflective practice. The symbolic interaction framework used in this studyunderscores the importance of definitions of the pre-service teachers. The fivepre-service teachers offered fairly different definitions, mirroring the literature onreflective practice that states that definitions and conceptions are varied (Zeichner &Liston, 1987; Sparks-Langer, 1992). Two pre-service teachers viewed reflection assimply looking back on action. The others thought about changes that could bemade. For example, Barbara stated, ‘Reflective practice to me means thinking aboutwhat you are doing, looking at what went well, what didn’t go well, and what youcould have done differently’. Maria’s definition was personal and considered whatcould be done in the future.
Reflection is a process, it is where you are acting in certain ways or you are living your lifea certain way and things are happening to you, it poses questions to you about how youcan change or what you need to do.
Thinking back on action is akin to Dewey’s (1933) notion of reflection as prob-lem-solving, that it is the ability to look back critically and imaginatively, to dotask analysis, and also to look forward and to do anticipatory planning. The defini-tions given by the five pre-service teachers somewhat fit with the literature onreflection on action, where Schön (1983) suggested that teachers think back onwhat they had done in order to determine what improvements could be made inthe future.
Questioning in reflection. The five pre-service teachers questioned themselves asthey reflected on different issues. They asked themselves a range of questions as ameans of learning what was expected of them within the classroom context. Mostof their questions were student-related, although some questions were hinged to
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Reflection in teacher education 57
their actions as teachers. Barbara asked herself questions that related to thestudents needs and what could be done. She informed the researcher, ‘It is likelooking at a child and saying why isn’t this working for this person? What do I needto do?’ Lisa asked questions about her work in the classroom, she shared, ‘I canlook over a week and see what happened and reflect on my work. How do I feelabout that now? How did I feel about it then? Have my feelings changed?’ Jasonquestioned his own behavior and his expectations of the students. He shared histhoughts, ‘If I am not holding up my standards, how I expect them to hold up totheir standards?’ Questioning and problem-solving are two ways that individualscan become reflective about their actions in the classroom. The literature on reflec-tive practice encourages pre-service teachers to question how and why they aredoing what they are doing (Cruickshank, 1990). Dewey (1933) referred to engage-ment in objective and rigorous inquiry while exploring alternative possibility asopen-mindedness. By questioning their actions, the pre-service teachers were ques-tioning their firmest beliefs that may be characterized as open-mindedness on theirparts.
Opportunities for reflection
In order for reflection to take place there needs to be opportunity. The five pre-serviceteachers highlighted opportunities for reflection in their classes at the university andin the school where they conducted their teaching practice. They cited certaincourses, the graduate seminar and student teaching. Calderhead (1992) states thatthe opportunities for pre-service teachers to analyze their practice can differ from oneteacher preparation program to the next. Barbara’s explanation mirrors the view ofthe other pre-service teachers. ‘There were many opportunities for reflection in theprogram, although some people may not have been comfortable with it’. In her jour-nal Barbara reiterated ‘I have enjoyed the varied experiences in which I reflected onthis program’. She also explained that ‘All the classes were different. It’s like theyplanned it altogether like they all [were] going to offer different opportunities, andthere were valuable things in each one that I did’. In summary, the pre-service teach-ers all agreed that there were many opportunities for them to reflect on their practice.This is very much in keeping with Dewey’s (1933) suggestion that the primarypurpose of teacher preparation should be to help pre-service teachers become reflec-tive teachers.
Achieving individuality
The second research question dealt with how the pre-service teachers described howthey learned to reflect, and was captured under the social process achieving individ-uality. The pre-service teachers attributed their ability to reflect to their interactionwith significant others in the program. They engaged in reflection on action and foraction in their classrooms, and they based their reflections on their personal beliefs,as well as educational theory
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
58 J. Y. Pedro
Reflection is based on self/significant others
The pre-service teachers all recalled that their introduction to reflective practice in theteacher preparation program came from taking the graduate seminar, and hearing itfrom their mentor during the teaching practice. As Barbara pointed out,
It wasn’t really until Dr Langley, in taking that class, she always asked us to reflect andthink about what we’re doing, and, of course, my mentor was emphasizing it more alsoduring our student teaching.
Three of the pre-service teachers found that the seminars provided the forum forreflective practice, and that the professor encouraged reflection. Unlike Goodman’s(1984) suggestion that the content of many seminars perpetuate unsubstantialdialogue, in these seminars the pre-service teachers were encouraged to reflectthrough dialogue. This dialogue was done verbally and in writing, and allowed themto share what they had in common with other pre-service teachers as well as sharetheir uniqueness as individuals (Harrington, 1994).
The pre-service teachers indicated that they had mainly positive relationships withtheir professors. They shared their preferences for particular university courses taughtby those professors who made their courses relevant to their teaching. There is muchin keeping with the literature that talks about the effects that relationships have onfostering reflective practice of pre-service teachers. Putnam and Grant (1992)espoused that helping students see the relevance of course content by modelingreflective approaches, and linking experiences to professional knowledge facilitatetransfer of learning. Schön (1987) stated that students learn, by practicing whateverskills they intend to become adept at, when they get the help of senior practitioners.He believes that students cannot be taught what they need to know but can becoached, the learners choose their own way. Dewey (1933) called it initiating thestudent into the traditions of practice.
The responses of the participants indicate that the process of reflection was sociallydetermined, and it was a product of the utterances to which the participantsresponded in ongoing dialogue they held with others (Bakhtin, 1986). The pre-service teachers clearly linked their understanding of reflection, and learning to reflectto what their professors taught them in the various courses.
Important to note is that three pre-service teachers attributed their reflections totheir personalities. Although Harris (1997) argues that by focussing on the process ofinterpretation, it is possible to see how the concept of reflection is not pre-ordained.It may be true that the ability to reflect has become innate to some individuals, butthe meanings have been renewed and renegotiated by the individuals in the relation-ships. Blumer (1969) suggests that reflection is a social object that is the result ofinterpretation rather than merely an intrinsic trait within the individual.
Reflection on action and for action
The pre-service teachers discussed reflection as looking back on their action in theclassroom, Lisa’s reflection like the others was a process of thinking back.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Reflection in teacher education 59
I reflect on my lesson plans; I look at those and see what I could have done differently. Igo back and think about how I thought of a situation then, how I think about it now, havemy thoughts and feelings change. Would I have handled anything differently? So I go backand reflect over my reflections, I just keep thinking about it.
Schön (1987) stated that reflection begins with the recognition that an educationaldilemma or emotional discomfort exists in response to professional experiences. Thepre-service teachers recalled that they thought about action that did not go well in theclassroom, and they questioned what could be done to change those actions. Schön(1983, 1987) coined the term ‘reflection-on-action’ to name this type of reflection.These pre-service teachers reflected on their actions in their teaching practice. Threeof the pre-service teachers also thought about how they would change their action inthe future. Schön (1987) called this reflection for action.
Reflection based on personal beliefs and educational theories
Four pre-service teachers shared their personal beliefs as they reflected on their teach-ing practice. Barbara shared, ‘I believe strongly in reflection and analysis, utilizing mystrengths and working on my weak areas, always keeping the student in mind’.Barbara was cognizant that she was a learner and that her students were important.Jason reflected on the ways he wanted to engage his students, he stated, ‘I alwaysthink about actively engaging the students in the learning, then they are activelypaying attention, they have to keep their hands and their minds moving’. Jason valuedthe student as an active learner. Maria reflected on her role with her students, it seemsthat she valued the social aspects of the students’ development and she wanted themto learn about caring.
Some of my students are growing up in a world where they have issues, and how can I helpthem to become healthy adults who care about one another, who are active citizens andwho are socially active, that’s one of the things I think about.
Paulette based her reflection on what she thought was important to do as a teacher.She internalized the concept that all students can learn that is an important conceptin inclusion practices in education.
You have to think about what you are doing as the teacher, thinking about how thestudents are responding to you. Look at all the ways that they do respond to you and intheir actions, what they write anything that you can notice, not just the things that weretraditionally formally assessed or whatever. I think that one of the most important parts ofteaching is that you really feel like your students can learn.
The pre-service teachers’ reflections were also based on educational theory thatthey had learned in their university courses as they progressed through the teacherpreparation program. Barbara shared her childhood experience as a math learner ina traditional program where ‘We sat in quietly in rows, diligently filling out uselessworksheets’. Barbara adopted the educational theory of constructivism in her practiceas a teacher, she stated, ‘I have tried to develop units that illustrate the connection ofmathematics to real life through exploration in a fun, engaging, non-threatening
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
60 J. Y. Pedro
manner’. Lisa explored ideas of how to introduce multiculturalism into the class-room, a theory developed in several of her courses. ‘I think that bringing in materialson different races of people is important, and using textbooks that have people ofdifferent races’. Maria reflected on opportunities for building self-esteem in herstudents. She saw the importance of providing a forum for active learning to takeplace. She felt that students would grow in confidence, when they are given opportu-nities to clarify issues that are important to them.
I think students should be provided with opportunities to speak out and explore issues thatare important to them, this is so vital for their self-esteem and for helping them to becomeresponsible socially caring human beings.
The study revealed a picture of five pre-service teachers who brought theirexperiences to bear on their approach to reflection in teaching in a model of teacherpreparation that emphasized inquiry and reflective practice. The way pre-serviceteachers learned to reflect supports Kagan’s (1992) view that institutional and indi-vidual perspectives influence how pre-service teachers come into their identities asreflective practitioners. The findings portrayed three of the pre-service teachers whothought of themselves as reflective individuals. Britzman (1991) claims that for begin-ning teachers, the most powerful self-image is one that captures self as the author ofthe teacher she is becoming. I agree with Britzman that teaching is a time when one’spast, present and future are set in dynamic tension (Britzman, 1991). Furthermore,the process of becoming a reflective practitioner is heavily contextualized by thestudents’ own history as well as the historical and institutional context in which theteacher education program is situated (Britzman, 1991).
Situating the act
The social process situating the act of reflection, points to the different contexts ofreflection, in answer to the third research question; in what context did the pre-service teachers engage in reflection? The pre-service teachers were involved inmany reflective activities in the university courses and in the school classrooms inwhich they practiced. They engaged in self-reflections, verbal reflections and writtenreflections. The pre-service teachers voiced their preferences for the differentcontexts of reflection based on their own philosophies and values that they placedon these activities.
Self-reflections
Three pre-service teachers engaged in self-reflections as they explored issues andproblems that occurred in the classroom. Barbara took her habit of reflection homewhere she reflected on what had happened in the classroom. ‘A lot of times, too, espe-cially if something went really great I ’d go home and I think to myself, “I’ve got towrite this down”, because I want to make sure that I do it again. But there are a lotof times when I go home now and I sit just thinking about school’.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Reflection in teacher education 61
Maria engaged in reflection about many aspects of her teaching, she said, ‘When Iam alone, I think about how I can create lessons that take the outside the classroom’.Paulette’s self-reflections represented her way of unraveling the confusion that sheencountered in her practice. She thought, and wrote about things that perplexed her.
I run and I do a lot of deep thinking then. From that I can write things or make time formyself at night before I go to bed to filter through what I have done in the day, and thenmaybe write something about that so that I can look back on the event. I can look back onmy feelings. At a later point, I can, when I have more experience, see that for what it was,because it is very confusing when a thing happens.
These pre-service teachers engaged in self-reflections as they examined theirthoughts. Introspection is a conscious awareness of itself. It is a social process of self-examination involving conversation with oneself. Ellis (1991) states that it is activethinking about one’s thoughts and feelings and it emerges out of social interaction.This finding exemplifies Dewey’s (1933) notion of active deliberation of their actionsand the consequences of those actions.
Verbal reflection
The pre-service teachers engaged in verbal reflections with various individuals in theteacher education program. They reported however, that they mainly engaged inverbal reflections with their cooperating teachers, explaining that it was the easiestway to communicate, and accommodated the busy schedules in the classroom.Barbara’s response is indicative of how the pre-service teachers viewed verbal reflec-tion, ‘I talk with somebody on how things go, what they think went well, would gobetter, or what they would have done if it didn’t go well’. In her journal Barbara wroteabout her cooperating teacher, ‘Rather than letters from her as a form of communi-cation, we have several conversations throughout the day about my teaching. This isvery rewarding for me’.
Written reflections
The literature suggests that journal writing helps to bridge the gap between knowl-edge and action (Calderhead, 1991; Surbeck et al., 1991), and that reflective narra-tives help to prepare teachers to gain the skills of doing and analyzing what they do(Zeichner, 1983; Colton & Sparks-Langer, 1993). The pre-service teachers wererequired to engage in a number of written reflections during the program. Theyreflected on readings and completed journals and other written responses in theuniversity classes, and they wrote reflection journals as part of their student teachingpractice. The five pre-service teachers recollected that they had to write many typesof written reflections in the university courses. Lisa pointed out ‘In most of the classeswe had to write journals’. Lisa, Barbara, and Paulette agreed that writing journalshelped them in a number of ways in their courses.
During the student teaching practice in the school, the pre-service teachers wererequired to write a weekly reflection journal for ten weeks. The four femalepre-service teachers wrote somewhat lengthy weekly reflections, whereas the only
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
62 J. Y. Pedro
male pre-service teacher wrote short entries. The pre-service teachers indicated thatthe written reflection became somewhat burdensome as their student teachingprogressed; Jason indicated that he did not like to write. He felt it was something hedid only because it was ‘forced’ upon him. Although Maria found that keeping a jour-nal was helpful, she did not see herself doing it in the future. She said she was not surethat she would keep a journal in the future. Barbara and Paulette seemed to agree thatit was not always ‘fun to write’. Paulette found that it was ‘mandated’, and Barbaraconfided that she was in a class where she had to write, and it was not fun or relevant.She remembered that ‘many people did not like to do written reflection because thesereflections were time consuming’.
Writing journals has been seen as one way to promote reflective thinking in pre-serviceteachers. Smyth (1992) proposed that reflective thinking is promoted by posing ques-tions to be answered in journal writing projects. Hatton and Smith (1995) also encour-age the pre-service teacher to write about reflection and problem-solving. However, inthis study the pre-service teachers raised the issue of the requirement of reflectionjournals for many courses, which made it difficult for them to see the benefits of writtenreflection. Research indicates that carefully guided mentoring of the writing process canenhance reflection. Hunter and Hatton’s (1998) study of case story writing based onstudents’ experiences revealed that peer and professor collaboration helped pre-serviceteachers move from initial writing that demonstrated low levels of reflection to higherlevels of thinking. I believe that writing helped these pre-service teachers to develop theirthoughts that were evident in their thoughtful and reflective journal entries.
Discussion: facilitating reflection through practice
The study resulted in an interpretation of the pre-service teachers’ views of reflectivepractice, as they experienced it in the teacher education program they felt providedthem with many opportunities for reflection. They had a general understanding ofreflection, although they possessed varying notions of reflective practice as inter-preted in their definitions. This finding is very much in keeping with the literature thatsuggests that there is no single definition of reflective practice (Sparks-Langer, 1992).The pre-service teachers understood and learned to reflect through courses and fieldactivities, and they engaged in reflection in different contexts. They used reflection asa conceptual device to help them think about their knowledge and better their teach-ing skills. Reflection came through their ability to link the concept to themselves, andto other significant individuals. Thus, they linked their reflections to their personalvalues and educational theories they were learning. These findings are in keeping withthe literature that pre-service teachers develop theoretical perspectives throughcourses at the same time they develop practical experience through their fieldwork.Their reflections therefore lie at the intersection of theory and practice (Putnam &Grant, 1992). Calderhead (1989) posited that pre-service teachers learn differently indiverse ways and they take different meanings from the experiences offered to them.
The pre-service teachers attributed their learning to reflect to significant others inthe teacher preparation program. Putnam and Grant (1992) espoused that helping
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Reflection in teacher education 63
students see the relevance of course content by modeling reflective approaches, andlinking experiences to professional knowledge facilitate transfer of learning. Schön(1987) also stated that students learn, by practicing whatever skills they intend tobecome adept in, when they get the help of senior practitioners. Dewey (1933) calledit initiating the student into the traditions of practice.
This study found that there was a leaning in the education courses towards manywriting activities that seemed burdensome to the pre-service teachers. This raises thequestion about the necessity of extensive writing requirements as a means of fosteringreflection. The literature points heavily towards developing portfolios, journals, andother writing tasks, however it behooves us as teacher educators to find ways that maynot seem burdensome to pre-service teachers that they write only because they haveto. This is certainly not a positive approach to learn to become critical reflectivepractitioners.
Implications for practice
The findings in the study imply that it is a worthwhile effort that teacher educatorscontinue in their efforts to develop reflection in pre-service teachers. According to thestudy’s findings the pre-service teachers understood the concept of reflection. Theyused reflection as a conceptual device to help them think about their knowledge, andbetter their teaching skills. Calderhead (1989) encourages teacher educators to beaware of the attitudes, knowledge and skills they want to encourage, and how theycould facilitate this. Another significant implication of this study is the leaning towardswriting activities to develop pre-service teachers’ ways of instilling critical reflection.Diverse ways of writing to develop critical reflection is another area that could bedeveloped, and research into the various ways of writing reflections can be explored.
However, the question remains whether the pre-service teachers were taught whatthe concept of reflection is, and whether they understood fully the principles of reflec-tive reflective practice. The literature is replete with seminal works of Dewey (1933),Schön (1983, 1987) and van Manen (1977) to ground reflective practices. Manycontemporary writers such as Calderhead (1989, 1991), Tom (1991), Valli (1990,1992, 1993), Zeichner and Liston (1987) and Zeichner (1992) have all conductedresearch and have written extensively on reflective practice. I believe that pre-serviceteachers, who participate in teacher education programs that maintain reflective prac-tice as a conceptual orientation, should be exposed to such works.
This study has raised many questions. First, can reflective practice be taught in amore clearly articulated fashion? Secondly, will the pre-service teachers continue toreflect on their practice as they begin teaching in the schools? Next, what other formsof writing reflections can teacher educators use to teach pre-service teachers to criti-cally reflect on their practice? Additionally, how can reflection are fostered withoutrequiring extensive writing assignments?
This study was conducted to determine how pre-service teachers understand andinterpret reflective practice, as a result of conducting this study my knowledge on reflec-tive practice was strengthened. This study sought to put on center stage pre-service
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
64 J. Y. Pedro
teachers who are often not heard. In so doing they have been empowered by sharingtheir histories with others in the hope that they will be heard, and teacher educatorswill continue to provide them with the experiences that will empower them as reflectivepractitioners. These pre-service teachers were extremely positive about their experi-ences when they were encouraged to engage in reflection and inquiry in their own prac-tices. Canning (1991) believes that reflection during the pre-service teachingexperiences allows for discovery and synthesis of understanding into a personal andworld view. We must be mindful that reflection is a process, and to become a trulyreflective teacher involves time, experience and, inevitably, a bit of wear and teararound the edges (Brubacher et al., 1994). It is also hoped that the stories of thesepre-service teachers will also inspire professors, cooperating teachers and mentors toconsider how they work with newcomers to the profession of teaching. There are valu-able lessons to be shared with teacher educators committed to the development ofreflective practitioners. This study can contribute to the discussion on the usefulnessof reflective practice as a reform effort. It also offers insights about improvements inteacher education in this particular teacher education program, and suggests ways thatteacher educators may support the development of beginning teachers.
Note on contributor
Joan Y. Pedro is an assistant professor and coordinator of teacher education at theUniversity of Hartford. In addition to reflective practice, her interests includeteacher development, multicultural and international education and assessmentin teacher education.
References
Bakhtin, M. (1986) Speech genres and other late essays (Austin, TX, University of Texas Press).Blumer, H. (1969) Symbolic interactionism: perspective and method (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-
Hall, Inc).Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S. (1992) Qualitative research for education: an introduction to theory and meth-
ods (2nd edn) (Boston, MA, Allyn & Bacon).Britzman, D. (1991) Practice makes practice: a critical study of learning to teach (Albany, NY, State
University of New York Press).Brubacher, J., Case, C. & Reagan, T. (1994) Becoming a reflective educator: how to build a culture of
inquiry in the schools (Newbury Park, CA, Corwin Press).Bryan, L. (2000) Student teachers as researchers: using teacher inquiry projects to promote reflective practice
during field experiences. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American EducationalResearch Association, New Orleans, April.
Calderhead, J. (1989) Reflective teaching and teacher education, Teaching and Teacher Education,5(1), 43–51.
Calderhead, J. (1991) The nature and growth of knowledge in student teaching, Teaching andTeacher Education, 7(5/6), 531–535.
Calderhead, J. (1992) The role of reflection in learning to teach, in: L. Valli (Ed.) Reflective teachereducation: cases and critiques (Albany, NY, State University of New York Press), 139–146.
Colton, A. B. & Sparks-Langer, G. M. (1993) Conceptual framework to guide the development ofteacher reflection and decision making, Journal of Teacher Education, 44, 45–54.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Reflection in teacher education 65
Cresswell, J. W. (1994) Research design: qualitative and quantitative appraoches (Thousand Oaks,CA, Sage).
Cruickshank, D. R. (1990) Research that informs teachers and teacher educators (Bloomington, IN,Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation).
Dewey, J. (1933) How we think: a restatement of reflective thinking to the educative process (Boston,MA, Heath).
Ellis, C. (1991) Sociological introspection and emotional experience, Symbolic Interaction, 14, 23–50.Goodman, J. (1984) Reflection and teacher education: a case study and theoretical analysis,
Interchange, 15(3), 9–26.Gore, J. & Zeichner, K. (1991) Action research and reflective teaching in pre-service teacher educa-
tion: a case study from the United States, Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(2), 119–136.Hammersley, M. & Atkinson, P. (1983) Ethnography: principles on practice (London, Methuen).Harrington, H. (1994) Teaching and knowing, Journal of Teacher Education, 45, 190–198.Harris, S. (1997) Status inequality and close relationships: an integration typology of bond-saving
strategies, Symbolic Interaction, 20(1), 1–20.Hatton, N. & Smith, D. (1995) Reflection in teacher education: towards Definition and implementation,
available online at: http://www.alex.edfac.usyd.edu.au/LocalResource/study1/hattonart.html(accessed 13 October 2000).
Huberman, A. M. & Miles, M. B. (1994) Data management and analysis methods, in:N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds) Handbook of qualitative research (Thousand Oaks, CA,Sage), 428–444.
Hunter, J. & Hatton, N. (1998) Approaches to the writing of cases: experiences with preservicemaster of teaching students, Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 26, 235–246.
Kagan, D. M. (1992) Professional growth among pre-service and beginning teachers, Review ofEducational Research, 62(2), 129–169.
Killen, L. (1989) Reflecting on reflective teaching, Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 49–52.Lalik, R. & Potts, A. (2001) Social reconstructionism as a framework for literacy teacher education,
in C. M. Roller (Ed.) Learning to teach reading: setting the research agenda (Newark, DE,International Reading Association), 119–135.
Liston, D. & Zeichner, K. (1990) Reflective teaching in action research in pre-service teachereducation, Journal of Education for Teaching, 16(3), 235–249.
Maykut, P. & Morehouse, R. (1994) Beginning qualitative research: a philosophical and practical guide(London, Falmer).
Merriam, S. B. (1988) Case study research in education (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass).Merriam, S. B. (1998) Qualitative research and case study applications in education (San Francisco,
CA, Jossey-Bass).Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994) Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook (2nd
edn) (Thousand oaks, CA, Sage).Nespor, J. & Barber, L. (1995) Audience and the politics of narrative, International Journal of
Qualitative Studies in Education, 8, 49–62.Noddings, N. (1988) An ethic of caring and its implication for instructional arrangements,
American Journal of Education, 96(2), 215–230.Oppenheim, A. N. (1992) Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement (London,
Pinter Publishers Ltd).Prus, R. (1996) Symbolic interaction and ethnographic research: intersubjectivity and the study of human
lived experience (New York, State University of New York Press).Pugach, M. C. (1990) Self-study: the genesis of reflection in novice teachers? Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Boston, April, ERICDocument Reproduction Service No. 322–124.
Putnam, J. & Grant, S. G. (1992) Reflective practice in the multiple perspectives program atMichigan State University, in: L. Valli (Ed.), Reflective teacher education: cases and critiques(New York, State University of New York Press).
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
66 J. Y. Pedro
Rossman, G. B. & Rallis, S. F. (1998) Learning in the field: an introduction to qualitative research(Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications).
Rubin, H. J. & Rubin, I. S. (1995) Qualitative interviewing: the art of hearing data (Thousand Oaks,CA, Sage).
Seidman, I. (1998) Interviewing as qualitative research. A guide for researchers in education and socialsciences (New York, Teachers College Press).
Schön, D. A. (1983) The reflective practitioner: how professionals think in action (New York, BasicBooks).
Schön, D. A. (1987) Educating the reflective practitioner: towards a new design of teaching and learningin the professions (San Francisco, CA, Jossey-Bass).
Silverman, D. (1993) Interpreting qualitative data (London, Sage Publications).Smith, D. & Lovat, T. (1991) Curriculum: action on reflection. (2nd ed) ( Wentworth Falls, Social
Science Press).Smyth, J. (1989) Developing and sustaining critical reflection in teacher education, Journal of
Teacher Education, 40(2), 2–9.Smyth, J. (1992) Teacher’s work and the politics of reflection, American Education Research
Journal, 29, 267–300.Sparks-Langer, G. (1992) In the eye of the beholder: cognitive, critical, and narrative approaches
to teacher reflection, in: L. Valli (Ed.) Reflective teacher education. Cases and critiques (NewYork, State University of New York Press), 147–160.
Stake, R. (1995) The art of case study research (Thousand Oaks, CA, Sage Publications, Inc).Surbeck, E. Han, E. P. & Moyer, J. E. (1991) Assessing reflective responses in journals, Educational
Leadership, 48(6), 25–27.Tabachnick, B. & Zeichner, K. (Eds) (1991) Issues and practices in inquiry-oriented teacher education
(New York, The Falmer Press).Tom, A. (1987) Replacing pedagogical knowledge with pedagogical questions, in: J. Smyth (Ed.)
Educating teachers: changing the nature of pedagogical knowledge (London, Falmer Press).Tom, A. (1991) Restructuring teacher education (Indiana, Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation,
1).Valli, L. (1990) Moral approaches to reflective practice, in: R. Cliff, W. R. Houston & M. Pugach
(Eds) Encouraging reflective practice in education (New York, Teachers College Press), 39–56.Valli, L. (1992). Reflective teacher education: cases and critiques (Albany, NY, State University of
New York Press).Valli, L. (1993) Reconsidering technical and reflective concepts in teacher education, Action in
Teacher Education, 15(2), 35–44.van Manen, M. (1977) Linking ways of knowing with ways of being practical, Curriculum Inquiry,
6, 205–228.Wolcott, H. F. (1994) Transforming qualitative data: description, analysis and interpretation (Thousand
Oaks, CA, Sage Publications).Yin, R. (1994). Case Study research: Design and methods (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.Zeichner, K., & Liston, D. (1996). Reflective Teaching: An Introduction. New Jersey: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.Zeichner, K., & Liston, D. (1987). Teaching student teachers to reflect. Harvard Educational
Review, 57, 23-48.Zeichner, K. (1983). Alternative paradigms of teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education,(3),
3-9.Zeichner, K. (1992). Conceptions of reflective teaching in contemporary U.S. teacher education
program reforms. In L. Valli (Ed.), Reflective teacher education. Cases and critiques. New York:sate University of New York Press.
Zeichner, K. (1999). The new scholarship in teacher education. Educational Researcher 28,(9), 4-15.
Dow
nloa
ded
by [
Uni
vers
ity o
f G
lasg
ow]
at 0
5:31
16
Mar
ch 2
013
Recommended
