[bek4h4llen94]

Hi all, I’ve enjoyed reading your thoughts on reflective practise. I have also been researching and studying this topic and thought I’d share of my thoughts too!

Of the theorists I researched (David Kolb, Graham Gibbs, and Donald Schon) I found that, whilst all of their theories are slightly different, they all revolve around a similar premise. This premise is the professional development is a process or a cycle that requires at least the following stages:
• An actual experience, something that happens
• A time of reflection about what was good/bad about what happened, and what the practitioner did well/could improve on next time. This stage should also involve thinking of ideas of how to improve in the future.
• The implementation of a plan, which attempts to puts the improvements thought of at stage 2 into practise.

To go into a bit more detail on the specifics of the various theorists, I will describe what I understand of each of their particular theories.

Kolb’s experiential learning cycle states that development in a professional capacity is about a cycle of events, reflection and practise, which repeats over and over again, and that this is how effective learning happens. The cycle consists of four stages:
• Concrete experience – A practitioner does something. In an early years setting, this could be sounding out the letters at the start of various fruits.
• Reflective observation – Practitioners review and reflect on the experience. What parts of the activity went well, and which did not work so well?
• Abstract conceptualisation – Practitioners use the results of reflections to develop new ideas. This could be by engaging a child’s particular learning style or interest i.e. you could make up and teach a song about the letters of the alphabet (jolly phonics songs are good for this).
• Active experimentation – Practitioners implement the activity, including the new ideas.

Gibbs’ reflective cycle is more useful for if an incident or particular event has happened in the setting, and a practitioner wishes to reflect on the role they played in the event. Similarly to Kolb’s theory, the cycle begins with something happening. Practitioners then follow a set of structured steps to inform and improve their practise should a similar event happen in the future. Practitioners ask:
• How was I feeling/what was I thinking at the time?
• What was good about the situation? What was bad?
• On reflection, what seemed to be happening during the incident? What was the cause? What can I learn about how and why the situation arose?
• What else could I have done in the situation? What could I have done differently?
Once a practitioner has asked these questions of themselves, they can collate the information gleaned into an action plan, of what they would do if a similar situation arose in the future.

Schon’s process of continuous learning highlights two different ways in which practitioners can be successfully reflective in their practise, as an everyday norm. Firstly, reflecting-in-action, whereby practitioners think about what they are doing well, and what about the activity they are currently involved in is successful/not so successful. Secondly, reflecting-on-action; when practitioners take time after an event or an activity to consider how it went, and what they could do differently in the future, and ideally recording their thoughts somewhere for future reference.

Thanks, Bekah