Reform Forum: Journal for Educational Reform in Namibia, Volume 8 (September 1998)

Teacher reflection in learner-centred education

Paul F. Cook, BES Project
Teacher reflection has a larger role to play in learner-centred education in Namibia. Teachers can be better when they cultivate a thoughtful, problem-solving disposition toward their teaching. There is no lack of proposed educational curriculum reforms in Namibia. However, there is strong logic in the belief that until teachers are themselves reformed, educational practice in the classroom is unlikely to improve a great deal. Reflection is believed by many modern-day experts in education to be a genuine way of fostering change in teachers. As John Dewey (1933) said, "Experience plus reflection equals growth". Reflection is a foundation aspect of how a teacher becomes effective. In the literature there are many labels for teacher reflection including: "reflective thought," "instructional decision-making," "wisdom," "critical thought," "educational beliefs," "views of self as teacher," and "perceptions of teaching" (Cook, 1993). These names suggest different ways that teachers may improve themselves, but they essentially mean reflection. The basic idea of reflection has historical roots in antiquity. It is not a new idea. However, reflection was reintroduced into education in this century by John Dewey. He criticized education as "fad-driven" because teachers were learning only "how to do things" but were not learning "why they did things", or how to learn to improve from their own experience. Most especially in How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the Educative Process (1933), Dewey encouraged "reflective" or "thoughtful" action instead of "habitual" action. He believed that teachers should use a great deal more reason and apply the scientific method a great deal more than they do. Deweys criticism of educational practice reads as validly today as it did when he wrote it, and it applies to teachers world wide. Reflecting Productively Teacher reflection looks back on teaching, calling some aspect of it into question, analyzing it, evaluating it and making plans for improvement. All teachers engage is some form of this activity, but too often it is participated in insufficiently. To cite Dewey: "quality educators and education cannot be derived from the imitation of techniques that have worked in the past, but rather teachers should be trained in analyzing and defining principles behind the techniques. In short, it is theorized that the more teacher reflectivity occurs, the better the quality of teaching." "Unreflective teachers tend to accept everyday reality, working only to find the means to carry out most effectively the ends demanded by their culture, which leads to further enslavement for it leaves the person at the mercy of appetite, sense and circumstance (Dewey, 1933, p. 89)". He argues that reflective teachers look at other possible realities and might not want to do all of the things that the everyday reality of their school might seem to call for.

Page 1 of 8

Reform Forum: Journal for Educational Reform in Namibia, Volume 8 (September 1998)

Dewey specifies three attitudes that are prerequisite for reflective action: openmindedness, responsibility, and whole-heartedness. Open-mindedness refers to wanting to listen to more than just one side. It refers to wanting to actively seek out or create and consider alternate possibilities, and to be open to the possibility that anything we believe may be false, no matter how dear it is to us. Responsibility requires careful attention to and consideration of the consequences to which an action leads. It requires extended concern and not just immediate reaction. It means going beyond dependence on a formal description of the situation to investigation of its actuality. Whole-heartedness means that the previous two attitudes must be part of the person's lifeconsistently activelyand not just put on when convenient or for special occasions. This is especially important, as Grant and Zeichner (1984) point out, because of the powerful socializing effect generated by a preservice program and by a school culture. Thinking and a disposition to reflect are not all there is to reflection. There is a prior, often unrecognized feature to thinking. When relating to another person in a highly interpersonal role such as "teacher", there is an "ethical demand" felt toward the learner. There is a demand to do no harm to me and to help me learn. A teacher may act in response to this demand or ignore it. Teaching will be learner-centred if the teacher responds to the obligation that they feel toward the child. Doing Reflection Reflection is a cyclical process through stages: (1) observing oneself as a teacher, (2) thinking about the observed experience to gain understanding and meaning of what is happening, and (3) applying the insights gained to future teaching experiences. Like learning to read the printed word, reflection is learning to read teaching. The goal is to comprehend teaching, to see patterns, make predictions and the like. Beyond gaining meaning we use reflection to plan changes in the way we are to "be" with our learners or to "do" things differently if we are unsatisfied. It is a way of turning from wrong action toward right action. There are different ways of doing reflection (Cook, 1993). Doing reflection is like doing writing. The reflecting person should have a clear audience, a clear sense of purpose, and a clear message. The audience for a reflection is usually the self but it might be helping another as well. Helping the learner to learn is the purpose. Clarity is obtained by keeping a focus on some aspect of teaching until something new is learned about ones self. A reflection may be entirely an internal mental event, or it may be written to oneself or another, or spoken to a listener in conversation. We probably think more clearly when we write things down. I have heard many people say they do not know what they think until they have written it down. Many enjoy writing about something when they have energy about it. Personal journals use this style. Others prefer to use a more structured technique we might call a heuristic. A heuristic is a step-by-step set of guidelines that help solve a problem (Cook, Young, & Cutler 1990) A heuristic has the advantage of helping the reflecting person to keep a focus. I and my students have developed a heuristic to do structured reflection that has been useful. I only briefly mention it in this paper. It involves these steps. First writing

Page 2 of 8

Reform Forum: Journal for Educational Reform in Namibia, Volume 8 (September 1998)

down descriptive details about a teaching episode without evaluation. Second, the reflecting person focuses on identifying a theme that may keep coming up, such as a concern with how to group learners. Then the reflecting person interprets what is going on and evaluates whether something needs to be changed. For example, a teacher might decide that not all of the learners are working in the groups she has formed because she has not established clear roles for the learners. She decides she needs to do something about it. Finally, she makes detailed plans to bring about change, for example, she will do more group building by teaching learners various roles to play in the groups. When applied over a period of times, say several weeks, the heuristic yields important benefits in identifying needed changes and doing something about them. It can be applied to more than the technical aspects of teaching. It is helpful in the moral and ethical domains as well. Reflection and Structured Curriculum Some educators approach learner-centred education only in terms of curriculum (instructional activities, methods and materials). Learner-centredness must be about helping teachers "be" better with their learners as well. The style of curriculum is not important to reflection. Less-structured materials are not necessarily any better than structured ones when it comes to helping the teacher reflect. Structured materials are very useful for beginning teachers and even for experienced teachers learning a new approach. For example, in the Basic Education Support Project, we are developing structured lessons. Our audience is teachers in the Northern rural areas who have not had strong teacher training. Our Structured Instructional Materials (SIMs) have been viewed by some as inimical to learner-centredness. This really is a spurious position. All of us, when we are challenged with learning something new, something that is complex, with much at stake, require more structure. I realised this when I learned to scuba dive in Hawaii; I was not interested in constructing my own method of surviving under 10 metres of water. I was happy to follow the step-by-step instruction of my young Marine Corps sergeant. I would have thought him irresponsible to try a non-structured approach to teaching me in this situation. We often need to be directed in learning something new. We need to see at least one good way to do something to learn how to do it. This does not mean we are compelled to do that way. When we become more familiar with the territory and confident in what we are doing, then we feel quite free to find our own way. Sometimes unstructured materials are really not developmentally appropriate. They do not provide adequate scaffolding for the naive learner or for a learner trying to do something in a different way. Responding to the moral demand from the learner There is another important point to make about curriculum methods and reflection. It is not the purpose of this paper to explore this issue in detail, only to mention it. In our Western world view we are caught up with "Enlightenment" thinking (See figure 1). We place great reliance on knowledge. If we can just get the right "method" then our learners progress. To those persons familiar with post-enlightenment thinking, many forms of knowledge and representational systems are being brought into question. To these thinkers much knowledge we have previously believed to be sacrosanct is now seen as being socially constructed, including much of science. The project of science, at least until recently, has been the project of increasing and

Page 3 of 8

Reform Forum: Journal for Educational Reform in Namibia, Volume 8 (September 1998)

perfecting "knowledge". In enlightenment thinking, we assume that we must first "know" the right, and then we can act correctly. This view of knowledge and ethics has come under attack by post-modern thinkers during the last 60 years. This paper cannot go into their arguments, but their critique has radical implications for traditional, positivist theorists and researchers because it has undercut these assumptions (see for example, Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Honer & Hunt, 1987, p. 45; Heidegger, 1962; Heidegger, 1966; Heidegger, 1977; Faulconer and Williams, 1990; Gadamer, 1982). Levinas (1987) a post-modern, French philosopher, struggling with the limitations of Enlightenment thinking, proposed that what is before knowledge are human relations and the temporal situation in which the knower is found (See figure 2). Knowledge is vital, but it does not exist before human relationships and activity. It is not too strong to say that our knowledge and belief systems can do violence to others if they are inflicted without recognition of the individual needs and desires of the other. As applied to teaching, teachers who are driven by doctrinaire attitudes toward school curriculum will not be responsive in a learner-centred way. We can fall victim to being doctrinaire even about inflicting so-called learner-centred methods on our learners. Marie Montessori put it this way: We all have a tendency to sleep through things, yet, with the coming of a child, there is a new being who awakens us and keeps us awake with means which are not ours, a being who operates in a way different from our way and who appears every morning as if to say, "Look, there is another life; you can live better than you do." (Montessori, M., quoted in van Manen, 1977, p. 13). What to Do What are some immediate things that can be done? Ways may be sought to foster reflective thinking among teachers. First, teachers may be given a set of questions to think about on their own that may help focus on the ethical demand they feel for their learners. Such questions as these may be useful: What is the responsibility I feel in the presence of the child? What does the child need from me? How can I give the child what he or she needs? Can I differentiate what the child needs from what he or she wants? How can I act responsibility to serve this child? What teaching methods do I have at my disposal that may be of help? How can I make certain the method does not get in the way of truly responding to the child? Am I willing to make the sacrifice to respond to the child? Am I willing to change my habitual way of doing things to respond to the child?

Page 4 of 8

Reform Forum: Journal for Educational Reform in Namibia, Volume 8 (September 1998)

Am I willing to give up a cherished idea about how to teach and move to a new one to serve the child?

Another way to encourage reflection is through reflective conferencing. Advisory teachers and principals may encourage reflection as they interact with teachers. To help teachers reflect, a non authoritarian atmosphere is needed where a relationship is established that is level and collegial rather than vertical and authoritarian. After a visit to a classroom the advisory teacher or principal, acting as a helping person, may conduct a post-observation, reflective conference. It is important to know how to help in these relationships. An important factor to keep in mind in being helpful is the developmental level of the teacher. In a literature review on teacher reflection, I found limited discussion of developmental stages and the disposition or ability of teachers to reflect (Cook, 1993). Most of the literature on reflection deals with adults in inservice settings. It may be assumed that developmental stages are not critical with adult learners. This is not correct. Developmental level should be considered not only in understanding children, or even beginning teachers, but whenever a teacher learns something new. Identifying the developmental stage of the teacher is a key to carrying out an effective supervision style using reflective conferencing. Using ideas from Piaget, Ivey (1988) suggests four levels of development in mastering life skills. It is essential to understand that every person is actually in a mixture of many stages depending on what is the skill or trait we are talking about. For example, one person may possess highly developed skills in knowing how to manage children effectively, but be a beginner when it comes to using "whole language" methods to teach children to read. Ivey proposes that the term "development" implies movement and change according to a specific situation or set of circumstances. A helping person, however, is most effective in promoting growth when the level of development is accurately met with the right approach for that level in the helping relationship. I cite his work to show how such a view is useful. The following is a very brief summary of the four developmental levels identified by Ivy: Level D-1: Preoperational. The individual has few alternatives, or at best, a limited range. Skills are lacking and often this individual needs to be told what to do. The person may participate in irrational or magical thinking, and is usually not able to operate on their environments in effective ways. Examples of persons at this stage may include: a new employee with very limited experience or a student learning a new subject field. Level D-2: Concrete operations. Individuals show some degree of design; There may be understanding of some incongruities but total unawareness of others. The person may have skills but lack the ability to use them. An example of such an individual is an employee with a new job, only part of which he understands or has experienced before. Another example is a person who functions well in general but has difficulty in a particular area or aspect of their work. Level D-3: Self-directed formal operations. At this level the person can design ways to operate which Ivey calls intentionality, but the ability is not developed fully. A person at this level can separate himself from the situation and think about actions and thoughts. This is in contrast to the person at the concrete or preoperational level who is so embedded with their problems that all they
Page 5 of 8

Reform Forum: Journal for Educational Reform in Namibia, Volume 8 (September 1998)

want is help to solve them. At the self-directed formal operations level, the person requires only limited help in solving problems. An example of a person at this level is a self-starting person who usually does satisfactory work but who is struggling with a particular issue or problem. An other example is an individual seeking to improve an already good performance. Ivey says an individual must at least be at the selfdirected formal operations level for the helping person to conduct a helping session using only listening or other non-directive techniques. Level D-4: Mutual or dialectic. At this level there is complete intentionality; the client can describe a wide range of choices available and widely choose from them. The person wants to engage the helper in a conversation in which both work together as co-equals to search for problem solutions. The helping person often learns as much as the person being helped. The person being helped can analyze themselves, their thinking processes and the environmental factors involved. Persons that may fall in this category include: those who may have resolved many problems but seek to further explore and examine, persons seeking self development, and those who operate well on their own but want to learn with you and from you. Persons at the lowest development level (D-1) generally require more influencing and environmental structuring. At the concrete operations level (D-2) persons benefit most by a combination of attending, for example, reflective listening, and influencing skills. Level D-3 behavior responds best to attending skills designed to help clarify their thoughts, feelings, and meanings, using only a small number of influencing skills. Mutual or dialectic clients can solve their own problems. They may seek assistance on clearly defined specific issues, often not only seeking solutions but for new problems to be addressed. Persons at every level can profit from relationshiporiented attending skills, confrontation and directives. Ivey (1988) has reported research supporting matching interviewing style with client problems, style and reasoning. Obviously, much more could be said about how to help a teacher become reflective. They could be encouraged to keep reflective journals of what is troubling, puzzling or interesting to them. They could be shown how to do structured reflections using a heuristic. Teachers could be encouraged to reflect on a common problem or topic in group sessions helped by a trainer or helping person. Teachers could be encouraged to share their reflection with another teacher to get additional support, understanding of what is happening in their teaching, and to generate ideas about how to make improvements. Trainers could give teachers the opportunity to improve their ability to "read teaching situations" by observing live teaching episodes or video-taped ones. All of us are familiar with sports broadcasters who give play-by-play descriptions of the game and interpret the game for us. Much more could be done to help teachers focus on what is "best practice" and what should be eliminated or changed by using similar methods in education. The focus of reflection should be more on the impact of teaching on the learner than on using "the" correct method. Too much inservice training is directed exclusively to getting the teacher to adopt the new correct method without observing what it does to the learner.

Page 6 of 8

Reform Forum: Journal for Educational Reform in Namibia, Volume 8 (September 1998)

Conclusion In this paper I have argued for the need to improve teacher reflection as part of a learner-centred approach to teaching. Refection is an important way to help teachers improve their teaching. There are important traits and dispositions that need to be fostered, and many specific methods for encouraging reflection. Reflection is looking back on teaching to detect patterns that are responsive or unresponsive to the learner, and that may be effective or not effective in helping the learner to learn. There is a strong moral component to reflection. When teachers pay attention to the moral demand they feel from the learner they are motivated to improve. The teacher feels they should help their learners and do no harm. Too strong a focus on specific methods, even if they are called "learner-centred", can cause harm if they are not responsive to the child in the immediate situation. The essence of learnercentredness is in the relationship between the teacher and the child more than it is a specific method.

Page 7 of 8

Reform Forum: Journal for Educational Reform in Namibia, Volume 8 (September 1998)

References Cook, P. F. (1993). Defining reflective teaching: How has it been done for research? Paper presented at the annual Association of Teacher Educators Conference in Los Angeles, California, February 16, 1993. Cook, P. F., Young, J. R., & Cutler, B. R. (1990) Teaching Students to Reflect: Does Using a Structured Thinking Approach Help or Hinder? Northern Rocky Mountain Educational Research Association Researcher, 7 (1) 30-36. Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: D. C. Health & Co. Grant, C. A. & Zeichner, K. (1984). On becoming a reflective teacher. In Grant, C. S. (Ed) Preparing for reflective teaching, 1-18. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. Faulconer, J. E., & Williams, R. N (1990). Reconsidering psychology. In J. E. Faulconer & R. N. Williams (Eds.), Reconsidering psychology: Perspective from continental philosophy, pp 9-60. Pittsburgh, PA: Duquesne University Press. Gadamer, H. G (1982). Truth and method (2nd ed.). New York: Crossroad. Heidegger, M. (1962). Being and time (J. Macquirre & E. Robinson, Trans.). New York: Harper and Row. Heidegger, M. (1966). Memorial address. In J. M. Anderson & E. H. Freud (Trans.), Discourse on thinking. New York: Harper & Row. Heidegger, M. (1977). Basic writings (D. F. Krell, Ed.). New York: Harper & Row. Honer, S. M., & Hunt, T. C. (1987). Invitation to philosophy: Issues and options (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Ivey, A. E. (1988). Intentional interviewing and counseling (2nd ed.). Pacific Grove, California: Brooks/Cole Publishing. Levinas, E. (1987). Totality and infinity. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills: Sage. van Manen, M (1977). Linking the ways of knowing with the ways of being practical. Curriculum Inquiry, 6: 205-228.

Page 8 of 8