rD ] o W ] } ] i o P u ] o X } u } ] i o µ } v o ] v X } u · Int. J. Educ. Teach & Learn. 2016 Kinley Seden et al., 2016 ... student-oriented learning and expects active participation

E-Mail: [email protected] or [email protected]

ISSN : 2455-9164Vol. 1, No. 1, May 2016

Website: www.trpubonline.com

1

This article can be downloaded from http://www.trpubonline.com/journals.php

Int. J. Educ. Teach & Learn. 2016 Kinley Seden et al., 2016

Enhancing Reflective Writing Skills of Pre-ServiceB.Ed Secondary Science Student-Teachers:

An Action Research Study in Bhutan

Kinley Seden1*, T W Maxwell2 and Sonam Rinchen1

*Corresponding Author: Kinley Seden,[email protected]

Sixteen B.Ed final year science student-teachers needed to improve their critical reflection as it wasfound through their writings and interactions in the class that they could not reflect critically. Therefore,this study examined critical reflection of these student-teachers through reflective writing. Reflectivewriting is important because it can assist these new professionals to learn reflection, even criticalreflection, knowledge and skills. A range of intervention strategies such as Moon’s stages of reflection,RAP (read, ask and put), discussion, questioning, and constructive feedback were identif ied to achievethese. Data were triangulated and gathered over time in an action research study. The study revealedthat there was marked improvement in student reflective writing skills and classroom participationand teacher skills. Before the intervent ion, the student-teachers were shy and quiet. After theintervention strategies, the class atmosphere became lively, excit ing and rich during classroomparticipation. Student-teachers were also able to contribute more constructive ideas in the classroomdiscussion on the journal articles. Further, the early reflective papers they submitted were merelyduplications of ideas and very few incorporated their experiences related to the article. The reflectivepapers they wrote after the intervention was very encouraging. The papers had their experiencesshared and metaphors and analogies drawn. Moon’s (1999) model of reflection was a useful scaffold.

Keywords:Reflective writing, Action research, Bhutan, Pre-service science student-teacher

ISSN 2455-9164 www.trpubonline.comVol. 1, No. 1, May 2016

© 2016 Thomson & Ryberg Publications. All Rights Reserved

Int. J. Educ. Teach & Learn. 2016

1 Samtse College of Education, Royal University of Bhutan, Samtse, Bhutan, India.2 School of Education, University of New England, Armidale, Australia.

IntroductionBhutan’s developmental philosophy is GrossNational Happiness (GNH). Education,being one of the nine domains of GNH, theonus of providing quality teacher education

rests on the two Colleges of Education,Samtse and Paro. The primary and middlesecondary (B.Ed) and secondary (PgDipEd)qualifications are taught there. Teachers andothers often talk about students not being

2



reflective and about their languagecompetency declining. In Kuensel, the oldestnewspaper, much has been said and debatedabout the decline in the quality of educationand the qualities of teachers were alsoquestioned. The National Assembly (e.g.,Kuensel, June 17, 2006) really heated up thisdiscussion. To achieve the desired qualityeducation quality teachers and qualitycurriculum are needed and eventually thiswill help in achieving the four pillars ofGNH.

There are studies that posit as educatorswe need to facilitate critical reflection toenable students to move beyond a superficialunderstanding of their world (Colley et al.,2012). Although the colleges encouragestudent-oriented learning and expects activeparticipation from the students, there is astrong history of teacher-centred learning toovercome (Maxwell, 2008). Althoughmaximum participation in class discussioncan be achieved in the right circumstances,historically pre-service students are passiveconsistent with their secondary schoolingprocesses and they prefer rote-learning ratherthan making meaning out of their learning(Maxwell, 2008). Present university teachingand learning processes are largely teacher-centred (Gyamtso and Maxwell, 2013).Additionally, the students are not reflectiveor critical in their assignments.

Improvement in this situation rests withthe teacher educators. Yet there aredifficulties that they face in Bhutan inaddition to the custom and practice ofstudent passivity and teacher-centeredness.Firstly, many lecturers are burdened withhigh teaching loads which are exacerbated

with inadequate resources such as poorlibrary and ICT facilities. No or little accessto online journals creates difficulties whenlibrary resources are lacking. The lack ofclassroom space has resulted in over 50students in a workshop class making itdifficult for students to get the opportunityto share their views. As a result they becomemere receivers of knowledge (Rinchen,2009). In addition, Rinchen (2009) asserts thatstudent writings were descriptive and hadduplication of ideas with constantgrammatical errors. Secondly, lecturers oftenfail to return assignments with timely qualityfeedback (see Hattie, 2009). One of theconsequences is that the students assumewhat they have submitted is good enoughand secondly without feedback from thetutor they cannot reflect and improve.

From the authors’ experience students dolack curiosity to learn and probe further.Most of the modules offered in pre-serviceteacher education in Bhutan have 50% of theassessment devoted to reflective practicessuch as classroom presentation, journalreflection, lesson analysis report and critiqueof an article. Notwithstanding theimportance attached to student-teachers’reflective skills, improving reflective writingskills of student-teachers is difficult underthese circumstances (see Rinchen, 2009). Theabove factors have made the first author thinkabout her own ability and her own rolemodelling. Was she a good reflection rolemodel? Does she set the kind of questionsthat make her students think and answeranalytically and critically? There are studiesthat signify importance of thinkingcritically/ability to think critically as an

3



important trait of all members of society.They also assert that thinking critically anddeveloping lifelong learning must be a focusof higher education in order to provide theintellectual trainings for its students toparticipate in this world (Brockbank andMcGill, 1998; and Colley et al., 2012). Thuswith this, the first author decided to promotecritical reflection through student writing toimprove her own practice and her students’learning.

Literature ReviewThere are myriad of literatures on improvingreflection through students’ writing and theyare discussed below.

Dewey’s (1933) definition of reflection hasbeen the benchmark: reflection is “an active,persistent and careful consideration of anybelief or supposed form of knowledge in thelight of the grounds that support it and thefurther conclusions to which it tends” (p. 9).A more recent, if less robust but intuitivelysensible, definition is from Hatcher andBringle (2010): “reflection is about using aprocess of self-questioning, reviewing andanalyzing” (p. 23). Reflection has also beendefined as a “journey of self-inquiry andtransformation” (Johns, 2006, p. 36) thatperpetuates continuous movement andleads to new insights (McAllister, 2003; andJohns, 2006).

The definitions above are a useful startingpoint. Several models of reflection have beendeveloped (e.g., Hatton and Smith, 1995; andWard and McCotter, 2004). One model isfrom a study on measuring reflective skillsin writing reflective journals (Kember et al.,2000). Kember et al. used Mezirow’s (1991)

four scales to develop the protocol forassessing the level of reflection in journalwriting such as habitual action,understanding, reflection and criticalreflection. These four scales are describedbriefly below:

• Habitual action refers to a task performedfrequently that later becomes a habit. Forinstance, use of a computer keyboard.

• Understanding refers to a type of thinkingor learning that calls for thoughtful action.

• Reflection pertains to validating a contentor process of problem solving.

• Critical reflection refers to recognition ofhigher level of thinking that calls forprofound level of reflection (Mezirow,1991).

To us reflection is reflecting beyonddescribing using anecdote, experiences,examples and metaphors. A tutor/academicshould be able to write a good reflectivepaper and reflect openly on her/his practiceas she/he should role model well, and alsomotivate and scaffold to generateparticipation as well as provide timelyconstructive feedback.

Hoover (1994) contends that tomorrow’steachers should not merely be a technicianswho carry a cookbook approach of patinstructional strategies. Rather they shouldact as decision makers who constructknowledge through process of inquiry thattakes into the consideration of context thatshape practice. This is consistent with Beeby(1966) who also points out that students tooare more comfortable with what they know.Acknowledging this, Maxwell (2013) argued,along with many others (e.g., Hatton and

4



Smith, 1995) following Schon (1987), thatreflection was essential in professional pre-service education. There are two majorreasons: (1) reflection assists learning (Jonesand Maxwell, 2008; and Jones, 2012)especially when complexity of judgment isrequired; and (2) reflection, once learned,assists life-long learning, i.e., theprofessional grows with experience. Notsurprisingly some attention has been paidto methods for assessing whether studentsengage in reflective practices or not (e.g.,Rieman, 1999). There are many papers thatpromote reflection upon practice andseveral which explain how this might beachieved (Hatton and Smith, 1995; Ward andMcCotter, 2004; and Maxwell, 2013). Onlyone other study on the development ofreflection in Bhutan has been found(Rinchen, 2009).

In a large scale study (n = 303), Mezirow’sfour scales were found to be effective andreliable. However, for the purposes of thisstudy, Moon’s (1999) model of reflection willbe used. It has seven stages that are readilyunderstandable by pre-service teachers. Thefirst three stages are introduced as the basicsteps required for later reflection:

• Purpose - an understanding of thepurpose of the reflective activity;

• Basic Observations;

• Additional Information - the addition offurther observations, new information etc;

• Revisiting - review of reflection bymulling over issues and problems, so anissue can be viewed from different pointof view;

• Standing Back - taking the reflection to a

new level as experiments and actions aretested and results discussed;

• Moving on - realising that something hasbeen learned and achieved; and

• More resolution and reflection.

These stages can be used to enhancereflection writing skills of the sixteen B.Edfinal year science student-teachers. For Moon(1999), an understanding of why the activityis being conducted, reflecting on it and thenputting it into practice is emphasized, forexample, in reflective writing which isappropriate for this study on enhancingreflective writing.

Many teacher educators believe thatreflective writing can promote reflectivethinking (Ross, 1990; King and Kitchener,1994; and Spalding and Wilson, 2002). Thus,many teacher training programmes utilisejournals as a vehicle for systematic reflectionand self-analytic thinking (Hoover, 1994).However, we distinguish between reflectivewriting (McDonald and Dominguez, 2009;Sen, 2009; and Kennison, 2012) and reflectivejournal writing (Francis, 1995; Cisero, 2004;and Chitpin, 2006). We think of reflectivewriting is a one-off task usually controlledby the teacher and often assessed. Such tasksmight be done each week but there is not asense of “putting them together” to make asingle product. According to Farrah (2012),students can use reflective writing toestablish connections between newinformation and the things they alreadyknow. Reflective journal writing is a muchmore sustained effort consisting of more thanone, usually many, pieces of writing overtime to produce a single piece. Reflective

5



journals are often evaluated and may beassessed. The student usually has control ofthe writing. Our work in reflective writingis ultimately to improve pre-service teachers’ability to reflect so as to take these skills intothe profession to facilitate life-long learning(Maxwell, 2013).

Writing is certainly one but not the onlyway of encouraging student learning. It isan individual activity but learning alsooccurs through participation in activities(Wilson and Taggart, 1998). One suchactivity is discussion. According to Larson(1997) discussion is an effective way topromote higher level thinking and developstudent attitudes. The demand that speaking(and writing) makes is that the speakers haveto construct their own forms of words aboutthe ideas they are learning and madeavailable to others

Other learning strategies are useful. Thegenerative strategy, Read, Ask and Put intopractice or action (RAP Marfo et al., 1991),can be very effective in conjunction with theuse of textual inputs. Writing is a means ofcatching, exploring, and fixing the fleetingmoment (Hoover, 1994, p. 249). Effectivequestioning (Wilson and Taggart, 1998) canbe important. Heathcote (1980) suggestedseveral guidelines for effective questioning:they must be real; they help practitionersto focus on where they are, what they aredoing and why; they lead the practitionersto wonder about and seek out newinformation and move practitioners toreflect on the significance of the action.Finally, Hattie (1999) has describedfeedback as the most powerful singlemoderator that enhances achievement.

Constructive, timely and meaningfulfeedback helps students to:

• Think critically about their work andreflect on what they need to do to improveit;

• See their learning in new ways and gainsatisfaction from it; and

• Promote dialogue between staff andstudents (Baume, 2008).

All of these strategies contribute to anactive learning process which contributesto the development of reflective writingknowledge and skills. Hence the researchquestion for this study is: How do I ascourse tutor, use reflection to facilitatestudents’ learning and their thinking? Thisresearch question immediately implies anaction research design as Hagevik, Aydenizand Rowell (2012) posit that conductingaction research allows enquiry into theirown teaching practices, reflect anddetermine ways to change their practicesand promotes critical reflection throughcollaborative learning environment.Maxwell (2003) advised a thoroughreconnaissance prior to embarking on thestudy. The reconnaissance here also has thepurpose of contextualizing the presentstudy.

ReconnaissanceAs noted above, teacher-centred learningdominates instruction in secondary andtertiary education in Bhutan. Rinchen’s (2009)study, at the same college, pointed outstudents’ lack of initiatives and curiosity, aswell as their failing to think critically. Moreparticularly, their reflection papers were

6



description of events or stories rather thanbeing analytical.

In addition, Brockbank and McGill (1998)said that learning is enhanced by criticalreflection, which involves the “creation ofmeaning and conceptualization fromexperience” (p. 56). Thus, the first author feltthe importance of critical reflection, so shedecided to promote reflection to facilitatelearning in her students through students’writing. The participants in this ActionResearch were her 16 B.Ed final yearsecondary science student-teachers whichincluded seven females. They were initiallyselected through B.Ed entrance examinationsto be enrolled into teacher EducationCollege. Their age ranged from 20-23 andEnglish was the language of instruction inher class. Physics and Maths were theirmajors. These students were well behavedbut they were quiet and lacked reflectionskills, especially critical reflection skillsthough they had subtle pre-existingknowledge about reflection. The moduledirectly involved was a curriculum studywhich is a requirement for students. Thus,as future teachers, these students needed todevelop their habit of reflection. Whetherthey reflect on class proceedings or on ajournal article, they need to engage in bothreflection-on-action and reflection-in-action(Schon, 1984).

Because the teacher is central to thelearning process, an analysis of teachercompetence is warranted (Maxwell, 2013).The first author has been a teacher, and nowa teacher educator. In the course of her nineyears teaching at the College, the first authorhas tried to promote reflective thinking in

her students. She believes that reflectionthrough reflective writing is an effectivelearning process with long term benefits.Additionally, she has found that studentpassivity in class was a continuing problem.This meant that her knowledge and skillsneeded to be improved. She wanted toenhance student reflection skills by usingreflective writing tasks.

Research Design andMethodologyThe research methodology used in thisstudy is action research (Maxwell, 2013). Toensure effective results of our study, weused a multi method approach to datacollection and analysis to support theirlearning such as they were introduced todifferent teaching strategies and thus wereable to triangulate findings. Data werecollected over time. A baseline set of datawas first gathered followed by data overtime providing trend data in order to see ifimprovements have occurred. Specificmethodology details are set out in theplanning sub-section below.

PlanningThis involves plans for (1) the data gatheringand analysis, and (2) the actions to beundertaken.

Data Gathering and AnalysisPlanningData address the action research question.There were three timings in data gatheringand analysis related to the actions forimprovement: before, during and at the end.These are set out in a matrix (Table 1).Analysis was undertaken during the actions

7



in order to monitor improvements and tomake changes if required. Specificdescriptions of strategies follow.

The critical friend, who was well knownto the students, observed and recordedstudents’ participation in the classroomwhile they discussed articles. He used aschedule with criteria with which she wasvery familiar: questions raised,clarifications sought, ideas shared andpresented during classroom interaction andinteraction with the teacher (Rinchen, 2009).The notes from the schedule werethematically analysed across the three datagathering episodes.

Student-teachers were asked to completea reflective writing task, i.e., to criticallyanalyse, ask questions and then put theirreflections into practice by writing a shortpiece in class. Specifically designedassessment criteria were:

• Ability to understand article and relateinformation with past experiences;

• Ability to raise questions and participatein the discussion;

• Ability to analyse reactions/feelingswhile writing reflection; and

• Presentation and organisation of thoughts

Three writing tasks were assessed andmarks awarded.

The action researcher’s diary recordedreflections on what had happened in classes.Main times of journaling were before, during(early September) and at the end of theintervention. The notes were thematicallyanalysed.

The purpose of the questionnaire was tofind out students’ knowledge of and interestin reflection and reflective writing. Ways ofassisting their learning were also queried.The questionnaire was administered at thebeginning and toward the end of the study.Soon after each administration, thequantitative data were tabulated andqualitative data were thematically analysed.

Planned ActionsOne of the first strategies intended was tointroduce the Moon’s seven stage model ofreflection and why it was useful. This wasthen linked to an example of effectivereflective writing which the students could

Methods of DataCollection

When will Ido this?

CorrespondingMethods of Data

Analysis

When will I dothis?

Thematic analysis 2nd

of August, 4th

week of November

Quantitative2

nd of August, 4

th

week of November

Observation:Researcher

maintains diary

3rd week of

August, 1st

week ofSeptember

and 1st week

of October

Thematic analysis

3rd

week of August,

1st week of

September and 1st

week of October

Critical friendobservation

2nd

and 4th

week of

August, 4th

week ofSeptember

Thematic analysis2nd& 4th week of

August and 4th week

of September

How can the reflective writing skills of B.Ed Final Year SecondaryScience Student-teachers at SCE be improved?

Questionnaire2

nd of August,

4th

week ofNovember

Reflective writingon the articles by

the studentteachers

3rd week of

August, 1st

week ofSeptember

and 3rd weekof September

Thematic analysis

3rd

week of August,

1st week of

September and 3rdweek of September

3rd week of August,

1st week of

September and 1st

week of October

Quantitative(Marks scored onreflective writing)

Table 1: Action Plan Matrix

8



use a model for their own writing (Dunne,2000). They were encouraged to use Moon’sseven stages of reflection while writing theirreflective writing. Consistent with customand practice, the students were required toread an article each week at home and eachweek they were discussed in class. Studentswere encouraged to ask questions, shareideas and experiences related to each articleand then asked to put into their ideas intowriting based on the RAP strategy and themodel of reflective writing. Such discussionand writing was facilitated by effectivequestioning (Heathcote, 1980; and Wilsonand Taggart, 1998) as well as constructivefeedback (Hattie, 1999). Together thesestrategies should make the classroom moreactive and at the same time enhance student-teachers’ reflection through reflective writingskills. The classroom environment was asconducive as possible.

ActionThe study was largely carried out asscheduled in the action plan (Table 1) apartfrom minor interruptions. Three rounds ofstudent reflective writing exercise wereconducted preceded by the classroomdiscussion on the given articles. Earlypractices of discussion followed by writingindicated greater attention needed to begiven to reflection itself by focusing moreon the criteria. It was difficult to make themlink with analogies, examples and theirexperiences. Therefore, we again revisitedon the intervention strategies such as Moon’sstages of reflection besides Reading, Askingand Practice (RAP) and questioning duringdiscussion were rigorously emphasized.Further, though a majority of them

participated in the end, early discussionconsisted of their understanding of thearticle. Overall, the plan was executed as perthe schedule.

ResultsThe results allow a comparison betweenbaseline data and those data that werecollected during and at the end of theinterventions.

Baseline ResultsFrom the questionnaire, the student-teachers’indicated that reflection assisted them to:

• Share ideas and experiences leading to apossible cross fertilisation of ideas;

• Read and enhance knowledge;

• Enhance participation and/orcollaborative learning;

• Add reflection into discussions; and

• Heighten thoughtfulness and analysis.

So they understood the importance ofreflection. All students also pointed out thata model on reflection writing would helpthem to write their reflection better. Theresponse from the questionnaire alsoindicated that 80% of the students felt libraryresources inadequate and the lack of goodICT hampered their writing. The studentsalso thought that use of Moon’s model ofreflection and strategies such as reading,discussion, questioning and constructivefeedback, etc., would help them to writereflectively.

Observations were the primary source ofdata. During the first session, the classroomatmosphere turned out to be quiet and calm.

9



There was lukewarm participation from thestudents in the discussion (critical friend’snotes, 16th August, 2013) and also none ofthem raised questions or soughtclarifications in the classroom discussion.They acted as if they understood everything.Perhaps this was because it was the initialclass with the first author and this made themuncertain. They interacted only when sheasked them to participate. They were passivelisteners. This strong history of teachercenteredness and passivity were anchallenge that needed to be tackled as alsoargued by Maxwell (2008) in his study. As aresult, very few students (20%) participatedin the discussion.

They were then asked to submit a firstreflective paper. Though they were aware ofwhat a reflective writing is, however, onanalysis, no analogies or examples weredrawn as required. Shell and Black (1997)posit that “reflection strategies aremaximized when co-learners are encouragedto make connections between theory andpractice” (p. 23). We also agree with them,however, the first author pointed out that herstudents failed to bring that connection intheir write up. Further, they failed tointegrate ideas and link how these ideaswould benefit them in the future. Thesentences were not structured properly andthere were some spelling errors thus givingan indication that they had not reflected uponwhat they had written. Their reflective paperwas a mere description of theirunderstanding of the article provided tothem and they failed to critically analyzeusing experiences, examples and anecdotes.The reflective writing pieces were marked

based on the criteria set and the class averagewas below 60%. Many of the student-teachershad failed to consider all aspects of themarking rubrics even though the criteria hadbeen provided beforehand.

Data During the InterventionAs the intervention proceeded, the students’participation rate increased from the baseline data of only 20% to 50%. Improvementwas also seen in the reflective writing of 13of the students. Midway through thesemester, several student-teachers didmanage to relate the article to theirexperiences and quoted very goodanalogies and examples.

However, the critical friend noted thatmost discussions continued to be recitationsof the article content and were neitherreflective nor analytical (critical friend’snotes 30th August, 2013). Never-the-less, thecriteria were re-visited and Moon’s stages ofreflection were again discussed at length.

Data Over TimeThe data before, during and at the end of theintervention are included here to provide acomparison of the data over time. These dataare presented by data type to address theaction research question: “How do I as coursetutor, use reflection to facilitate students’learning and their thinking? How can thereflective writing skills of B.Ed Final YearSecondary Science Students at SCE beimproved?”

We assumed that active participation indiscussion, for example, of the journal articlein question, would improve reflection abilityrecorded in reflective writing. From the

10



critical friend’s data, initially, the student-teachers exhibited reserved and shybehavior. They seldom took part in the classdiscussion unless asked by the teacher. Butafter the implementation of the action planimprovements were seen in the waystudents were speaking and interacting. Thenumbers that participated were alsoincreasing to all the class at the end (Figure1). For instance, Figure 1 reveals that beforeintervention only three students participatedin the discussion but the number went up to16, an increase by 5 folds in the postintervention. The classes also became verylively and the quality of participation alsoimproved. They generated ideas andexperiences on the journal article and wereable to draw analogies. They became morecritical reflectors than mere descriptors.Unlike at the beginning, most students

willingly volunteered and the teacher didnot need to call out names. They started toopen up. What surprised us was studentscompeting to get an opportunity toparticipate in the class discussion. This is notusual in Bhutanese university classes.Complementing this, the researcher’s diary(19th September, 2013) also showed thatstudents’ and teacher confidence had beenimproved.

As mentioned above, initially theirwriting looked more like a summary of theirunderstanding of the article content.Towards the end, however, most studentscould discuss the article linking it with theirexperiences and highlighting strengths andweaknesses of the article. Some even drewanalogies with their own experiences. Theyalso committed less grammatical errors intheir reflective writing tasks and were able

Figure 1: Class Participation of Students During Journal Article Discussion

11



to address the rubrics assigned. Here is abrief example of a final piece of reflectivewriting:

Formally, education is received inschool and myself being a teacher inbecoming, I strongly agree with AshleyMontagu’s idea on education, that is, achild learns best when he/she isshowered with love and care. I stillremember the days that have left abeautiful footprint in my heart andmind forever. As every student teacherundergoes teaching practice for 6months, I too underwent teachingpractice in Phuentsholing highersecondary school with full ofexcitement and enthusiasm.

Gradually their journal writing skillsimproved and towards the end they couldcome up with a reflection like this:

Reflection on “Organize schools aroundchild development” by James P. Comer

Rabelais said, “A child is not a vaseto be filled, but a fire to be lit”, butelders don’t seem to realize that.When I was in middle school I sawmy Principal busy running theschool, teachers teaching what needsto be taught and supporting staffsminding their own business. Until Iread this article I didn’t even knowthat schools could be organized [so]as to meet the needs of the students; Ithought it was a rigid system. Ifanyone failed to adapt to the rigidsystem, they were either punished orexpelled. A thing called,‘understanding the learner’ was reallymissing in our curriculum back then.

The above views were also echoed bycritical friend when she expressed thattowards the end of the action research all the16 students became very vocal. Theyparticipated actively in the class either byraising questions or seeking clarifications.Further, the views expressed by the studentswere more reflective rather than mereduplication of others’ ideas (critical friend’snotes, 19th September, 2013). For example oneof the students shared that:

Bhutanese education talks only aboutmarks (scores) and if I reflect back, I feltI had missed out on so many things…I feel our schools are not organizedaround child development (criticalfriend’s notes, 19th Sept, 2013).

Figure 2 shows the improvements madeby most students in assessed reflectivewriting tasks. The class mean scoreimproved by 10%. The mean score was 64%in the beginning and it increased to 74% atthe end.

Unlike in the first questionnaire, the datafrom the second questionnaire show that 70%of the students revealed that constructivefeedback on written tasks contributed towriting their reflections better. The otherstrategies such as discussion, questioningand the RAP contributed to their reflectivewriting according to about 50% of students.Additionally, all pointed out that Moon’smodel of reflection contributed to theirreflective writing.

Triangulating the analysis, these datarevealed considerable improvements inactive participation (discussion, questioningand reflection) quantitatively and the

12



qualitatively leading to improvements, inmost cases, in reflective writing. From apassive start, over time they became morecompetitive, took more opportunities toexpress their views and at times they evenchallenged their friend’s opinion or askedquestions of them. Their final pieces ofreflective writing in most cases not onlyencompassed their understanding of thearticle but revealed amalgamation of theirown experiences and assessment of strengthsand weaknesses of the class proceedings andarticle as well. All the 16 participantsattributed this transformation to motivationand constructive feedback received from thetutor and to the intervention strategies usedin the class to gear up their reflective writing.

ReflectionReading, discussion, writing (RAP),modelling and questioning were used asteaching strategies to enhance learning aboutreflective writing skills of the student-

teachers. Most important was quality, timelyfeedback on written tasks. Such strategies arenot common in Bhutanese tertiary education(Gyamtso and Maxwell, 2013). As suggestedby Wilson and Taggart (1998), classroomdiscussion was used to enhanceunderstanding by exchanging information,opinions or experiences while workingtowards a common goal. The first authorobserved and encouraged the class effortsand, starting from a low base, activeparticipation developed considerably. Thiscould be because in the outset the first authorfailed to motivate her students and that in away attributed to low participation.However, gradually the first author put inmore effort to change her techniques ofteaching to improve class participation.Thereafter, the first author became moreopen, complemented them with encouragingremarks whenever they attempt to sharetheir views, and provoked them to askquestions. Due to these, the first author could

Figure 2: Individual Scores of Reflective Writing

13



finally flare up high classroom participation.Further, the student-teachers’ contribution ofideas on the discussion improved fromunderstanding of the text ideas to sharing ofexperiences and analogies. As and whenneeded, the first author also modeled wellin the class by contributing her own ideasand experiences which lead to fruitfuldiscussion and reflective writing. There werealso timely reminders to use Moon’s modelof reflection (Moon, 1999) as this would actas guide to writing better reflective pieces.Never-the-less, this study is silent aboutwhether the development of reflectivewriting in college contributes to reflectionin the professional context and this is an areathat deserves research.

ConclusionKnowledge is constantly evolving in today’sworld and this is a hurdle that our studentsneed to cross. For this, students need properskills that will facilitate their success in thisworld. One such skill proposed by (Colleyet al., 2012) is reflection skill. We do agreewith them as reflection can assist learningand reflection once learned can assist lifelonglearning as posit by (Schon, 1987; Hatton andSmith, 1995; and Maxwell, 2013). Thus,knowing the importance of reflection, ourcollege has included reflection as a keyassessment tool in majority of the courses asColley et al. (2012) stated that reflectionlearned in one course will be applicable inother courses.

After reflecting on the action research cycleand after examining student’s reflectionthrough students’ journal reflective writing,the first author was happy to point out that

her students were able to delve theirthoughts into writing. The improvement instudent-teachers’ ability to be reflective andanalytical was evident from the more criticalnature of their reflective writing. Student-teachers also were able to contribute moreconstructive ideas in the classroomdiscussion on the journal articles. Theclassroom discussion proved to be morelively, exciting and rich during theintervention and post intervention. Thestudents were full of rich experiences whichlead to cross fertilization of ideas and thesefound their way into the writing. However,their writing continued to have somegrammatical errors.

Overall, there was improvement in thestudents’ work. The first author was able tocreate active participation strategies for herneophyte student-teachers. She also usedmodels to scaffold their verbal and writtenwork such as the model of reflection. Thiswas one of a number of strategies shelearned to facilitate active learning. Thesesixteen weeks boosted her confidence andshe intends to undertake further actionresearch studies. In a situation wheresecondary and tertiary education isdominated by teacher-centered model,modeling active learning strategy andachieving this level of success with student-teachers is a strong outcome.

References1. Baume D (2008), “First Words: Giving

Feedback to Students”, Oxford Centrefor Staff and Learning Development,Oxford Brooks University, Oxford.

2. Beeby E C (1966), “Quality of Education

14



in Developing Countries”, HarvardUniversity Press, USA.

3. Chitpin S (2006), “The Use of ReflectiveJournal Keeping in a Teacher EducationProgram: A Popperian Analysis”,Reflective Practice: International andMultidisciplinary Perspectives, Vol. 7, pp.73-86, doi.org/10.1080/14623940500489757

4. Cisero C A (2006), “Does ReflectiveJournal Writing Improve CoursePerformance? College Teaching”, Vol.54, pp. 231-236, doi: 10.3200/CTCH.54.2.231-236.

5. Dewey J (1933), “How We Think: ARestatement of the Relation of Reflectiveto the Educative Process”, DC Heath,Boston.

6. Dewey J (1938), Experience and Education,Collier Books, New York.

7. Dunne D W (2000), “How Can TeachersHelp Shy Students?”, Retrieved fromhttp://www.education-world.com/a-curr/curr267.shtml

8. Farrah M (2012), “Reflective JournalWriting as an Effective Technique in theWriting Process”, An-Najah UniversityJournal of Research, Vol. 26, No. 4, pp. 998-1025.

9. Francis D (1995), “The ReflectiveJournal: A Window to Pre-serviceTeachers’ Practical Knowledge”,Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 11,No. 3, pp. 229-241.

10. Gyamtso D C and Maxwell T W (2013),“Teaching, Learning and PlanningPractices in Five Colleges of Royal

University of Bhutan: A Cross CaseAnalysis”, Bhutan Journal of Research andDevelopment, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp. 31-42.

11. Hagevik R, Aydeniz M and Rowell G C(2012), “Using Action Research inMiddle Level Teacher Education toEvaluate and Deepen ReflectivePractice”, Teaching and Teacher Education,Vol. 28, pp. 675-684.

12. Hatcher A J and Bingle G R (2010),“Reflection: Bridging the Gap BetweenService & Learning”, HeldrefPublications, Washington DC.

13. Hattie J (2009), “Visible Learning”,Ministry of Education, Wellington, NewZealand.

14. Hatton N and Smith D (1995), “Reflectionin Teacher Education: Towards aDefinition and Implementation”,Teaching & Teacher Education, Vol. 11,No. 1, pp. 33-49, 199 Heathcote.

15. Hoover A L (1994), “Reflective Writingas a Window on Pre-service Teachers’Thought Processes”, Great Britain.

16. Johns C (2006), “Engaging Reflection inPractice: A Narrative Approach”,Blackwell, Oxford.

17. Jones M (2012), “When Learning isLEARnT: Understanding RelationshipsBetween Prior Learning, Efficacy andAction, Reflection and Theory Makingin Bachelor of Education (Primary)Intern Teacher Learning”, UnpublishedPh.D, School of Education, University ofNew England, Australia.

18. Jones M and Maxwell T W (2008),“Scaffolded and Unscaffolded Reflection

15



on Bachelor of Education Students’Learner Self-Efficacy”, Refereed PaperPresented at the Annual Conference ofthe Australian Association for Researchin Education, November, 20 p, Perth,WA.

19. Kember D, Leung P Y D, Jones A, LokeY A, Mckay J, Sinclair K, Tse H, WebbC, Wong Y K F, Wong M and Yeung M(2000), “Developing of a Questionnaireto Measure the Level of ReflectiveThinking”, Hongkong PolytechnicUniversity, Hongkong.

20. Kenniston M (2012), “DevelopingReflective Writing as EffectivePedagogy”, Nursing EducationPerspectives, Vol. 33, No. 5, pp. 306-311.

21. King P M and Kitchener K S (1994),“Developing Reflective Judgement:Understanding and PromotingIntellectual Growth & Critical Thinkingin Adolescent and Adults”, Jossey-Brass, San Francisco.

22. Larson B (1997), “Influences on SocialStudies Teachers’ Use of ClassroomDiscussion”, A Paper Presented at theAnnual Meeting of the College andUniversity Faculty Assembly of theNational Council for Social Studies,Cincinnati, OH.

23. Marfo K, Mulcahy R F, Peat D, AndrewsJ and Cho S (1991), “Teaching CognitiveStrategies in the Classroom”, A Content-Based Instructional Model, in R F Mulcahy,R F Short, and J Andrews (Eds.),Enhancing Learning and Thinking,Praeger, New York.

24. Maxwell T W (2008), “Bhutan, theGreenwood Encyclopedia of Children’sIssues Worldwide: Asia and Oceania”,General Editor, Irving Epstein, VolumeEditor, pp. 55-77, Jyotsna Pattnaik,Greenwood Press, New York.

25. Maxwell T W (2012), “Assessment inHigher Education in the Professions:Action Research as an AuthenticAssessment Task”, Teaching in HigherEducation, Vol. 17, pp. 686-696,doi:10.1080/13562517.2012.72522.

26. McDonald J and Dominguez L (2009),“Reflective Writing: The ScienceTeacher”, March, pp. 46-49.

27. Mezirow J (1991), “TranformatiativeDimensions of Adult Learning”, JosseyBass, San Francisco, USA.

28. Moon (1999), “Reflection in Learningand Professional Development”, KoganPage, London.

29. Reiman A J (1999), “The Evolution of theSocial Role Taking and GuidedReflection Framework in TeacherEducation: Recent Theory andQuantitative Synthesis of Research”,Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 15,pp. 597-612.

30. Rinchen S (2009), “DevelopingReflective Thinking: Encouraging Pre-service Teachers to be Responsible forTheir Own Learning”, Paper Presentedat the Annual Conference of AustralianTeacher Education Association, 28 June– 1 July, Albury.

31. Schell J W and Black R S (1997),“Situated Learning: An Inductive Case

16



Study of a Collaborative LearningExperience”, Journal of Industrial TeacherEducation, Vol. 24, No. 4.

32. Schon D (1987), Educating the ReflectivePractitioner: Towards a New Design forTeaching and Learning in the Professions,2nd Edition, Josey-Bass, San Francisco.

33. Sen B A (2010), “Reflective Writing: AManagement Skill”, Library Management,Vol. 31, pp. 79-93, doi.org/10.1108/01435121011013421.

34. Smyth R and Maxwell T W (2008), “TheResearch Matrix: An Approach toSupervision of Higher DegreeResearch”, HERDSA Guide Series,Melbourne, HERDSA.

35. Spalding K and Wilson A (2002),“Demystifying Reflection: A Study of

Pedagogical Strategies that EncourageReflective Journal Writing”, TeachersCollege, Columbia University, USA.

36. UNDP (United Nations DevelopmentProgramme) (2014), “MillenniumDevelopment Goals Bhutan”, Accessedfrom http://www.bt.undp.org/c o n t e n t / b h u t a n / e n / h o m e /mdgoverview/overview/mdg2/

37. Ward J R and McCotter S S (2004),“Reflection as a Visible Outcome forPre-service Teachers”, Teachers andTeacher Education, Vol. 20, pp. 243-257.

38. Wilson P A and Taggart L G (1998),“Promoting Reflecting Thinking inTeachers”, Corwin Press, Inc.,California.

Thomson & Ryberg Publications

8-43/10/5, Near PRM School, Swaroop Nagar,Hyderabad-500 039

Website: www.trpubonline.com

Documents

rD ] o W ] } ] i o P u ] o X } u } ] i o µ } v o ] v X } u · Int. J. Educ. Teach & Learn. 2016 Kinley Seden et al., 2016 ... student-oriented learning and expects active participation