Critical Reflection

I think as Teachers we work through the process of reflection on a daily basis, whether conscious of its meaning or not. Every class provides new challenges and new ways need to be thought of to overcome old problems. What might work for one student might not work for the next if you need to change your approach or teaching style to match the student you must truly understand the idea of what you are teaching.

For teachers to be able to get the best out of their student, they need to know how each student in their class learns best, and adapt instruction to meet their needs, an example of how we as teachers use Schon’s (1983) reflection-in-action and Kottcamp (1990) reflection on-line, daily whether conscious or not. If a student does not understand a correction the teacher needs to adapt their methods in order to find an instruction that the children can comprehend.  Honey and Mumford developed the four learning styles based on Kolb's but Honey and Mumford believed that people would use different methods for learning depending on the situation and their experience, moving between the models of learning. I feel knowing how students learn best will help teachers to provide a greater learning experience, however knowing how we learn ourselves will allow us to reflect better upon our experiences and help us to expand our knowledge and learning.

I found Karen Osterman (Osterman and Kottkamp 2004) theory of explaining tacit knowledge and the concept of learning from experience and finding the missing knowledge one and the same. After some further research and coming across both of these in my practice I now understand it as:

Learning from experience discusses how we have missing knowledge in an experience that we are unaware of until an unexpected circumstance arises that presents that absent knowledge to us. It is then that we reflect on our experience. Schon (1983) suggests that, “in practice, reflection often begins when a routine response produces a surprise, an unexpected outcome, pleasant or unpleasant.  The surprise gets our attention.  When intuitive, spontaneous performance yields expected results, then we tend not to think about it; however, when it leads to surprise, we may begin a process of reflection.”

           

The idea of tacit knowledge is that some knowledge is instinctual. For example, while we can teach the idea and implications behind certain moves there sometimes needs to be knowledge of how to perform and highlight body movements, this can be difficult to transfer to another person. Maughan (1996) explains that as teachers most of our work involves tacit knowledge or muscle memory. When we find a teaching method that works we will stick with our process, the result implies that we are unconsciously aware of our processes until an occurrence that is unexpected makes us aware and we reflect on its effectiveness.

“The purpose of reflection is therefore to bring our reasoning processes and behaviour patterns to the surface and make them explicit.  However, uncovering these can be difficult because so much of this knowledge is tacit and spontaneous.  When we develop a pattern of behaviour that works in certain situations, we will tend to repeat it until it becomes automatic.  We can’t describe the processes involved because we are not aware of what is going on. It is only when something goes wrong or something unexpected happens that we may stop and think about what we did and what we could or should have done in the situation.”

Carolyn Maughan, “Learning how to learn:  the skills developer’s guide to experiential learning” in Julian Webb & Caroline Maughan, eds., Teaching Lawyers’ Skills, (London: Butterworths, 1996) 59 at 76.

I feel that as teachers we should not allow ourselves to wait until unexpected circumstances arise to reflect on our work and practice. If we learn to involve reflection in our daily professional work we can also learn from results that produced an expected result and therefore process why and how we can repeat these results. Reflection should be an ongoing process.

Fitts and Posner (1967) theory that learning is sequential; moving through specific phases as we learn strengthens Twyla Tharp (2006) suggestion on muscle memory. Fitts and Posner state there are three stages of learning a skill.

×          Cognitive stage relates to the initial learning. The identification and understanding of a skill results in the student watching, thinking and analysing the desired skill.

×          Associative stage is where the student applies practice to their understanding, this stage takes the longest and some people may never progress to the next stage. Any implication at this stage will be co-ordinated.

×          The Autonomous stage of skill revolves around executing a skill automatically without having to stop and think about what to do or how it needs to be executed. It is an advanced level of performance where the individual can perform the skill fluently and instinctively.

Through my studies with ISTD muscle memory is covered in both theory and practical classes. Once a skill is taught muscle memory occurs as a result of practice to the point of unconscious thought. Once muscle memory is implicated the dancer can develop moves to a higher level adding greater difficulty and better performance.

Kolb (1983) suggests that depending on our learning style or what we are learning we will enter his cycle at different markers. Some people may choose to watch and reflect on a skill before they are to try it themselves, others however may feel more compelled to first try the execution of the skill and then reflect on how this needs to be improved. This theory acknowledges that people learn differently depending on a number of influences e.g. level of education, social and will enter at different stages. In order for a learning experience to be effective the learner must pass through all four stages. Kolb believed that our preference towards learning styles comes from the choice of how we think about a task (Processing Continuum) or how we feel about the task (Perception Continuum) and that we cannot perform both at the same time but will choose which one will come first. This will determine are learning style.

This model is especially relevant for teachers, understanding how someone learns helps to make their leaning more effective. If you know how your students learn best you can adapt your teaching method to help enrich their learning. Honey and Mumford developed on Kolbs work and published four distinct learning styles: Activist, Theorist; Pragmatist and Reflector. To optimise learning they suggested the learner identify their style, understand and implicate it in their learning. Honey and Mumford (1982) devised a learning style questionnaire to help people to identify and understand their learning style.

Below is a Link to a word document of Honey and Mumford's Learning style questionnaire

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDkQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.hrdevelopment.co.nz%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2010%2F09%2FLearning-Styles-Questionnaire-Honey-and-Mumford11.doc&ei=zS0_U6ngJIORhQfbsYAg&usg=AFQjCNFUKCe-5659jUE8M4yE0ZdvuQ_WTQ&sig2=yhZu1t8StuZ0R36C6-qjYg&bvm=bv.64125504,d.ZG4

A British educational and training developer Phil Race believes like Kolb that experimental learning is the most effective, to learn by doing. However Race (2010) finds Kolb’s learning cycle too academic and had developed a model based on how the majority of people learn and identifying the internal motivation that makes a person want to learn.  He implicates the use of everyday terms rather than the language of professional psychologists. In 1993 Race’s ‘Ripple model’ of learning states there are four elements to successful learning, Needing/Wanting, Doing, Feedback and Digesting(reflecting) he further developed this to incorporate a further two explaining/teaching and Assessing. This model differs from Kolbs as it does not take a cycle formation but is regarded as a whole a system of ripples on a pond one stage leading to the next. 

Race's Ripple Model of Learning

I feel that to varying degrees I have used these theories subconsciously in my professional work. Having researched them in greater detail I now understand the degree of reflective practice I have used and how I can develop them further. This can be through use of a reflective diary and associating Kolbs reflective theory and by exercising Honey and Mumfords learning styles to understand how I and my students learn best. A greater understanding of how refection and learning theories can be applied will help me to deepen my learning and that of my students.


References

Fitts, P.M., and Posner, M.I., 1967, Human performance. Belmont, CA: Brooks Cole.

Honey, P. and Mumford, A., 1982, Manual of Learning Styles London: P Honey

Kolb, D. A., 1984, Experiential Learning, Englewood NJ: Prentice Hall.

Kottcamp, R. B. (1990). Means for Facilitating Reflection, Education and Urban Society.

Race, P., 2010, Making Learning Happen: A Guide for Post-Compulsory Education, Second Edition, London, Sage Publication Ltd.

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

Webb, J.S and Maughan, C., 1996, Teaching lawyers' skills, London, Butterworths.