Table Of ContentKaren Weller Swanson, Ed.D., Editor
Mercer University
Atlanta, Georgia
2011 • Volume 35 • Number 1 ISSN 1940-4476
Problem Solving and Critical Inquiry in the Written and Oral Reflections
of Middle School Preservice Teachers’ Classroom Experiences
Ann Marie Smith
Sean Lennon
Valdosta State University
Valdosta, GA
Introduction students will benefit, especially if these teachers model
such reflective and metacognitive skills to them.
Preparing teachers for critical and reflective teaching
in public school education is necessary in a political Research exploring reflection as a method for
and cultural climate that reinforces that teachers must preparing student teachers is limited in terms of
prepare students to pass state tests based on state- the effectiveness and role reflection plays in student
mandated learning goals. Teacher reflection, as both development. Variance in the length of time or
practice and theory, has been suggested as a way to scope of reflective practice that exists in preservice
empower teachers to think critically (Schon, 1990). programs poses questions in terms of what truly
Research has focused on the “processes of teacher determines reflective thinking and what is the best
reflection and the relationships between these thinking form to elucidate the kind of cognition desired (Ash
processes and teacher development” (Zeichner, 1995, & Clayton, 2004). For many educators, the use of
p. 16). There is issue, however, in the ambiguity of meaningful reflective practice is indiscriminate with
what constitutes reflective thinking and how it can little to no effective assessment of its effectiveness
be assessed as being beneficial or even effectively (Isikoglu, 2007). A deeper understanding of these
incorporated (Ash & Clayton, 2004). Yet, if effectively issues, as well as those discussed later in this article,
implemented, in teacher preparation reflection may may help researchers and teacher educators ascertain
help preservice teachers understand and apply their the limitations and benefits of reflective practices
own epistemologies, increasing or enhancing higher (Campbell-Evans & Maloney, 1998). The goal was
empathetic and critical reasoning (Langone, 2008). to determine the effectiveness of reflective exercises
Also, if preservice teachers are able to gather valuable for preservice teachers within an apprenticeship
insight about their practices from reflection, their future component of a middle grades education program.
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 1
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
Rationale to as reflective action. As Denos and Case (2006)
explain, “Critical thinking involves thinking through
The purpose of this action research study was problematic situations about what to believe or how to
to investigate undergraduate preservice student- act where the thinker makes reasoned judgments that
teachers’ interpretations of written reflections and embody the qualities of a competent thinker” (p. 73).
how these written reflections impacted their thoughts Schon’s (1990) thinking-in-action processes are both
about teaching practices. A second question was to critical and systematic. It is difficult to accomplish
investigate how preservice teachers talked about their both during one college semester, as in the case of
processes of reflection beyond the assigned written preservice, apprenticeship teachers who experience
reflections. The oral reflections emerged from class classroom teaching for one month during the semester.
discussions concerning student perceptions, both
before and after the students’ field experiences. We Critically reflective thinking about educational theory
then compared written reflections with reflections and practices may not occur in much of the reflective
communicated through oral classroom discussions. practice exercises that are used in teacher education
programs (Yost, Senter, & Florlenza-Bailey, 2000),
Research questions: although it was the goal for our preservice teachers.
We were also concerned that individual reflective
1. How do the preservice teachers interpret
activities did not achieve the desired outcomes because
purposes of written reflections?
reflections were evaluated by university supervisors
2. How do the preservice teachers’ written rather than the faculty teaching the course (Johnston,
reflections illustrate their understanding of 2001; Isikoglu, 2007). The process of reflection is
theory and practice? described as occurring in three stages of cognitive
development: technical or basic rationality, practical
3. How do the preservice teachers’ communicate action, and critical reflection (Isikoglu, 2007). However,
their understanding of theory and practice research supports the idea that preservice teachers
through classroom discussions of previous demonstrate only the first two, technical and practical
reflections and experiences? action, neither of which reflects higher-level, cognitive
thinking (Isikoglu, 2007). Critical, higher-level thinking
The educational purpose of written reflections for
in reflective activities can be encouraged by including
preservice teachers was to create a bridge between
specific guidelines, clearly defined expectations or
theory and practice (Bannink & van Dam, 2007). In
direct and explicit questions that can help students
the field of teacher preparation, preservice teachers’
in focusing their reflections toward critical thinking
perceptions of how they used these reflections, or will
(Johnston, 2001). The problem is that students may
use these reflections for future teaching, have not been
write what they believe is expected.rather than genuine
researched in detail. How students practically apply
reactions and processing (Phillips & Carr, 2007).
oral and written reflections to their plans for improving
teaching methods can help researchers and teacher Critical praxis is the process of critiquing both
educators determine the kinds of reflections that are individual practices and school as social constructions
most useful for preservice teachers (Zeichner, 1995). (Yost et al., 2000). Dialogue allows education students
the opportunity to examine theoretical frameworks,
Theoretical Framework
analyze their usefulness, and apply them to their own
practices. Critical questioning of one’s own beliefs
Reflections about teaching practices and theories can be
is necessary, and when this component of reflection
an effective means for preservice teachers to evaluate
is absent, students’ ideas and beliefs may remain
their instructional results with students. Reflection can
biased, ineffective, or steeped in stereotypes or flawed
also be a valuable, cognitive process that enhances
perceptions (Ash & Clayton, 2004). We set out to
deeper understanding of multiple nuances of situation,
determine the usefulness of written reflections and
contexts, and meaning (Ash & Clayton, 2004; Shoffner,
post-apprenticeship class discussions for preservice
2008; Zeichner, 1995). Dewey’s (1916) early conception
middle school teachers.
of critical reflection provided the groundwork for
later research on teacher reflection. Critics argue that Class discussions, not often labeled as reflection, is
reflection as a cornerstone of thinking is incomplete personal reflection influenced by an audience with a
unless the thought is successfully turned into action, moderator or teacher. A critically reflection audience
representing a higher level of cognition referred can diminish students simply telling what they think
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 2
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
without immediate feedback or criticism (Schon,1990). Classroom discussions and the placement of the
The audience helps avoid self-reflective isolation. Self- apprenticeship program within the university’s teacher
reflective isolation was problemetized by Schon (1990), education program informed our interest in teacher
who wrote, “When inquiry into learning remains private, reflection and data choices. Preservice teachers were
it is also likely to remain tacit. Free of the need to make invited to comment during data collection, and
our ideas explicit to someone else, we are less likely to we discussed findings with them. The interpretive
make them explicit to ourselves” (p. 300). Preservice ethnographic traditions were used to best answer
teachers who reflect solely through written forms may the research questions (Lareau & Schulz, 1996; Van
not have many of their assumptions, ideas and/or beliefs Manen, 1994). The general purpose was to interpret the
challenged. The causal role of the audience and the preservice teachers’ and faculty perceptions as teacher
immediate feedback may be the influential factor in educators of the purposes and usefulness of both written
limiting or removing self-reflective isolation. and oral reflections during and after the apprenticeship
program. To enhance validity, data was collected from
Methods three potential sources: student notebooks, pre- and
post-apprenticeship questions, and observation of the
Methods and Data Collection
classroom discussion. Research questions and the
A collaborative action framework was used to analyze
data sources are included in Table 1. Data sources are
the ways preservice teachers responded to reflection
described following the table.
activities and assignments. According to Johnson
(2005), “Action research can be defined as the process Participants and Program Design
of studying a real school or classroom situation to The 28 participants were undergraduate students
understand and improve the quality of actions or in a middle grades preparation program during fall
instruction” (p. 21). We were interested in examining 2008. The education program, located at a regional
the usefulness of the written reflection assignments to university in the southeastern United States, involved
enhance teacher preparation for preservice teachers. As an apprenticeship block semester directly before the
Stringer (2008) recommended, the process began with student teaching semester. During the apprenticeship
a narrow focus on written reflections. We expanded semester, middle grades undergraduate students are
our definition of reflection to include the reflective immersed into a public school, middle grades classroom
dialogue that occurred during post-apprenticeship class (grades 6–8) for four weeks or 20 consecutive days. The
discussion (Ash & Clayton, 2004; Yost et al., 2000). apprenticeship block is a mandatory component of the
Table 1
Research Questions and Their Data Sources
Research Questions Data Sources
Pre- and post-class responses to written
1. How did the students interpret purposes of written
questions, apprenticeship written
reflections?
reflections, class discussion notes
2. How did students’ written reflections illustrate students’ Pre- and post-class responses to written
understanding of theory and practice? questions, apprenticeship written reflections
3. How did the students communicate their understanding
of theory and practice through classroom discussions of Class discussion notes
previous reflections and experiences?
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 3
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
middle grades education program. During this time, • W hat did you learn from your reflections?
the undergraduate, preservice teachers do not attend
• W hat were the benefits and problems of the written
educational classes in order to integrate into a public
reflections as assigned for apprenticeship?
school classroom under the tutelage of an experienced
mentor teacher. University collaboration and assistance
The class spent two-thirds of the discussion
is provided by faculty members within the middle and
(approximately two hours) discussing the above
secondary department, who must visit and critique the
questions using their classroom apprenticeship
student three times during their apprenticeship period.
experiences as examples.
The program allows preservice teachers to experience
Pre- and Post-apprenticeship Written Reflections
the practical realities of the classroom environment
Preservice teachers’ written responses to the following
while still experiencing support from the continual
questions were collected both before and after their one-
presence of the mentor teacher. The programmatic
month apprenticeship experiences:
design is for preservice teachers to experience the
theoretical and research-driven applications at work in • What constitutes good teaching?
a practical, real-world setting Preservice teachers were
able to integrate theory into practice while in a safe • W hat, in your mind, is a good classroom management
setting before beginning their final student teaching plan? How do you plan on managing students?
semester. Students graduating from the middle school
• W hat is the biggest or most critical problem you see
program have been successful in their school systems
in yourself as a teacher (weakness)?
and many have been rewarded teacher of the year as
well as other, equally significant honors.
Preservice teachers were asked to write answers to the
three questions individually. After the apprenticeship
Halfway through the semester the preservice teachers
experience, preservice teachers were asked the same
are released from block classes to begin their
questions without reference to their original responses.
apprenticeship in local schools for their required 20
Once they were finished (the second time), initial
days. They are placed with known, proficient mentor
answers were handed back for comparison. The
teachers who help preservice teachers incorporate
preservice teachers were then asked about any possible
theory into practice. The immersion is gradual,
changes in their responses during class discussions.
with preservice teachers observing before teaching
a lesson or assignment. For successful completion
Written Apprenticeship Reflections
of this component, the preservice teachers need to
Each preservice teacher was required to write a one-
adequately teach two classes, one with the mentor’s
page reflection for each day of their apprenticeship
lesson plans and the other with their own lesson
experience in their notebook, which was collected and
designs. Both lessons are rated by the university
graded by the supervising professor at the end of the
supervisor and mentor teacher. Preservice teachers
semester. The requirements were given to the preservice
are also required to build a comprehensive notebook
teachers as a handout before the apprenticeship
compiled of lessons, activities, and daily reflections.
(Appendix). They were also required to rate each day
After completing the four-week internship, preservice
on a scale from one to ten, in terms of their satisfaction
teachers return to the university setting for the final
with the profession of teaching.
few weeks of their semester, which is referred to in the
next section as post-apprenticeship. Data Analysis
Class Discussion Notes Coding of Data
During the post-apprenticeship discussion in the Compilation of the data went through several steps as
block class, one of the authors led the class discussion the authors analyzed the written responses, transcripts,
while the other author took notes and audiotaped the and oral reflections. During the first round of coding,
responses. Both authors occasionally asked follow-up the authors used In-vivo codes, defined by Corbin and
questions. The three initial questions asked during the Strauss (2008) as “concepts using the actual words
discussion were: of research participants” (p. 65). We investigated the
ways preservice teachers interpreted their teaching
• H ow did you change your thinking and teaching
through their written reflections and in-class dialogue,
practices (if at all) throughout your process of
developing concepts such as classroom management or
reflecting before and after your apprenticeship
re-teaching. Three sets of data (described above)
teaching experiences?
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 4
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
were analyzed using constant comparison analysis (All student names are pseudonyms)
(Corbin & Strauss, 2008). The expressed goal was to
John: W hen I ignored the questions, I wrote better
look at how preservice teachers viewed the written and
reflections—I could see my thinking. … I didn’t
oral reflections (Lather, 1991).
know who I was writing to. I wanted to write
Next, the constant comparison method was used as these for myself.
data was analyzed across students’ written reflections
Laura: T he questions didn’t really allow us to reflect
and tape transcriptions from the oral class discussions
on our teaching methods.
about the students’ written responses and about their
apprenticeship experiences. The authors next discussed
Dr. Lennon: S o, what do you think you should have
the In-vivo codes, using theoretical comparisons
been able to write about? What would
(Corbin & Strauss, 2008) to produce conceptual themes.
have made these reflections better?
The authors also went through a process of “member
checking” by sharing their analysis of the data and Karen: I felt that I was being limited by the questions.
checking themes with each other and the preservice It should have been a tool of learning for us—
teachers during class. From an analysis of the codes, that’s what it’s supposed to be anyway—it
the authors wrote final theme statements to reflect class should have been a place where we could
discussions and the preservice teachers’ written and oral look back, then write, ‘looking back at this, I
reflections about their apprenticeship experiences. could have done …’ instead of just answering
someone else’s questions.
Results
Cheryl: If I could have just reflected on how my
Students’ Purposes for Written Reflections
day went, …
To answer the first research question, “How do the
preservice teachers interpret purposes of written John: I focused on the positive—I wasn’t sure who
reflections?”, the tape transcriptions, written would be reading them … and grading them.
apprenticeship reflections, and written responses to
This conversation suggests that these preservice
questions were analyzed for dominant themes. Two
teachers valued the process of reflecting on their
themes emerged as central to the oral discussions
apprenticeship experience, but they recognized that
about purposes of reflections: (1) to whom it may
this was an “assignment” that would be graded as
concern and (2) problem solving. The theme to
part of their required notebook after they completed
whom it may concern developed from data in
their apprenticeship experiences and their block
which preservice teachers stated in class that they
semester. The majority of the class agreed that there
were confused about who would be reading their
were too many teachers or supervisors involved in
reflections and why they were writing the written
the evaluation process; we all concurred with this
reflections for their apprenticeship. This theme also
statement. Some of the apprenticeship supervisors
became evident through the written apprenticeship
were not teaching the block classes, so there were
reflections in the students’ notebooks. All of the
additional professors involved in the grading process,
students’ reflections seemed to be directed generally
which caused confusion for both students and
to “professor-educators,” without a specific audience
professors who were new to the college of education.
in mind. While some of the students briefly answered
the assigned apprenticeship questions (see Appendix),
From an examination of the written apprenticeship
others wrote the reflections as a method of problem
reflections, the authors agreed that the preservice
solving, which emerged as the second theme in
teachers’ written reflections lacked a clear voice that
response to the first research question. These themes
would demonstrate teaching identity or illustrate their
are explicated in the next section.
processes of developing teaching identities (Alsup,
2006). The tone was often detached, with use of passive
To whom it may concern. Confusion about audience
voice, such as, “If a teacher would explain the rules,
and purpose was consistent throughout the class as
the students would know what to do.” However, when
the preservice teachers discussed the usefulness of the
the preservice teachers focused on the second part of
written reflections in the apprenticeship notebook. The
Question Three “The most important thing I learned
following class conversation illustrates the preservice
today was …” The preservice teachers responded
teachers’ confusion about the audience and purpose of
with a more purposeful sense of their teaching. For
the written reflections.
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 5
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
example, Joseph wrote, “The most important thing Trevor explained in a class discussion that his
I learned today was that I need to continue to work problem-solving strategies needed to be immediate,
on my classroom management skills and on being and the writing process did not help him to think
more flexible when it comes to class discussion. I felt about his teaching:
like today some of classes would have really had an
I reflected while I was teaching—I would talk to my
engaging discussion, but I was more worried about
mentor teacher about what I felt I needed to work on
time.” Guiding questions for written reflections may
as soon as the students left, then I would work on the
or may not be necessary, but this particular question
problems the next period. Going back at the end of the
seemed to resonate with these preservice teachers.
day felt unnatural.
Teacher educators will need to think carefully about
how to guide education students to reflect in ways
Recognizing that apprentices may need the advice of
that benefit them as future teachers. Simply requiring
their mentor teachers immediately after teaching a
reflections without department agreement about
lesson, frequent reflections discussed or written during
purpose appeared to be problematic for the students and
the school day may work better for some apprentices
may limit the effectiveness of written self-reflections.
and student teachers than for others (Schon, 1990).
The preservice teachers’ overwhelming confusion about
reflective goals caused us as teacher-educators to think Students’ Understanding of Theory and Practice
further about the purposes for written reflections. When examining responses to question two about
preservice teachers’ connections between theory and
Although the preservice teachers were told that their
practice, we had looked for evidence concerning how
supervisors would read and grade their notebooks
preservice teachers reflected on their conceptions of
and reflections, they knew that their block class
theory. We also looked for how theory was disconnected
professors would also be grading them for their entire
or connected to the practices they observed or the
semester of work in the classes. The purpose of the
methods they used while teaching. Perhaps due to
reflection section of the notebook was not apparent,
the scripted questions or for other possible unknown
so the preservice teachers’ confusion was warranted.
reasons, preservice teachers did not directly write
Schon (1990) suggested that apprentices need to reflect
about connections between theory and practice. As
toward a specific audience. Both preservice teachers
illustrated in Britzman (1991), student teachers and
and classroom teachers experience agency when they
beginning teachers tend to be caught up in the culture
reflect on their teaching (Philips & Carr, 2007), and,
of the school in which they practice. Beginning teachers
perhaps, preservice teachers need to have more control
may lose perspective or continuity when reflecting
over the direction reflective processes take, especially
upon the usefulness of theories and practices learned
when they have begun to teach in practicum or student
in the university program. Likewise apprentices who
teaching situations.
focused on practices, often ignored the thinking or
purpose behind the mentor teachers’ methods, or the
Problem solving. Beyond the issue of reflective
apprentices did not develop learning goals for their own
audience, some preservice teachers took initiative and
class activities. The theme survival manual emerged
used written reflections as a method of problem-solving
from written reflections, because preservice teachers
during their apprenticeship experiences. In other
depended on their mentor teachers to assist with
words, they wrote about problems they were having
classroom management strategies. When the preservice
with classroom management or teaching methods,
teachers began teaching a few classes alone, problems
then, in some cases, interpreted the causes for these
with management and other issues led them to think
issues. Every preservice teacher reflected on at least
about alternatives, especially if they did not agree with
one teaching problem he or she experienced. For
their mentor teachers’ practices or philosophies.
example, Tim, Laura, Robert, and Yvonne wrote about
the problem of what to do with students who finish
Survival manual. Most of the preservice teachers
taking tests before other students in a class. Laura and
explored or conceptualized their thinking about
Robert described activities and puzzles they used as
teaching methods and classroom management as
solutions for students who completed tests early. Those
a means of survival in the classroom. Evident in
apprentices who reflected about problems independently
some of the reflections were the preservice teachers’
and then incorporated solutions in their teaching
views of their teaching personality. For example,
seemed to benefit from the writing process and were
they reflected on how much or how little control over
able to arrive at their own resolutions. Others asked their
the classroom environment they were comfortable
mentor teachers for solutions or clarification.
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 6
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
having. Questions about the comfort level of their the focus on ensuring that students retained content
students working in groups became apparent, or learned was evident only in the post-apprenticeship
and questions emerged about whether or not the response to this same question. In the pre-responses,
apprentices wanted their students to raise their hands four preservice teachers mentioned that a good teacher
when they had a question or response during class. “encourages creativity” or “makes sure students enjoy
learning,” but the language changed to a focus on
Preservice teachers also reflected on methods they
learning content in their post-apprenticeship responses.
could use for making connections to students’ personal
lives as a means to further reinforce learning and The authors suspect the focus on making sure that
involvement. For example, Laura wrote about a rap all students “learn the content” is a result of the No
she sang to help students remember the scientific Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act and the subsequent
classification levels in a seventh grade science class. “I examinations implemented by state boards or offices.
heard kids singing it through the halls.” Laura talked Once immersed in a test-taking culture, the apprentices
about the rap during class discussion also, explaining focused on test-preparation mandated by the school
that the rap worked well to help students remember administration and adopted their mentor teachers’
content. Marilyn, Amanda, and Heather described how responsibilities for ensuring student success on the
they used questioning techniques that they had learned state exams. Once the apprentices left the field and
in methods classes to keep the students involved when returned to their classrooms, critiques about schools,
they were presenting information or teaching content teaching practices and theories occurred in the post-
directly. While they did not mention the reading and apprenticeship class discussions, which are addressed in
memory theories that inform practices of teaching the following section.
pre-reading and activating prior knowledge skills to
The third research question, “How did the preservice
students, these apprentices seemed to be aware that
teachers communicate their understanding of theory
these were theory-driven practices that would help
and practice through classroom discussions of previous
their students remember the content. Although the
reflections and experiences?” allowed us to explore
apprentices generally did not make explicit connections
the apprentices’ understanding of their own reflection
between theory and practice, the authors read evidence
processes, along with critiques of school cultures,
in their reflections that they had applied effective
teaching practices, and classroom management
teaching practices to improve their students’ content
techniques. Perhaps because of the dialectic nature of
knowledge. Keeping in mind that many of these
classroom discussions, the apprentices were able to
preservice teachers were spending their first moments in
verbalize the thinking behind their practices, which was
charge of a classroom of students, the focus on practice
interpreted as indirect connections to theory thus the
over theory in their written reflections is not surprising.
theme critical inquiry emerged from the transcripts of
Student outcome emphasis. A close reading of the the in-class discussions.
preservice teachers’ responses to the before-and-after
Critical inquiry. In class discussions, the apprentices
questions led us to the theme of student outcome
described their awareness of potential problems with
emphasis. The emphasis on how well the students
the school cultures that over-prioritized testing. For
performed on tests was evident in the reflections written
example, Karen was dismayed at her mentor teacher’s
during the apprenticeship. Also, the shift in focus from
re-teaching strategies:
teacher performance to student performance was even
more evident in the before-and-after questions that
Karen: M y mentor teacher would teach the same
served as the foundation for class discussions. Of the 27
thing in the same way. She lowered her
apprentices who responded in writing to the before-and-
expectations for the students who were
after questions, 19 emphasized the importance of making
performing well, which bothered me. I would
sure students understand the content. All 19 preservice
have figured out a different way to teach the
teachers mentioned students’ content knowledge only
students who weren’t getting it, then move on.
in the “after” responses to the question, “What makes a
good teacher?” These responses were stated in a variety Joseph: M y mentor teacher was doing the same
of ways, such as “making sure all students understand worksheets with types of sentences. I had my
the content” and “engage[ing] students with a variety of students write their own sentences, which
teaching strategies.” In the pre-responses to this same worked better and was less boring.
question, the apprentices emphasized the idea of the
importance of the teacher knowing the content; however,
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 7
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
Amanda: I taught my students how to work in groups are representative of other students in middle grades
because some of them learned math better education programs. Second, data was not collected
this way because they could help each other. from students during their student teaching semester.
My mentor teacher didn’t use groups. These limitations can develop into future work by
expanding data collection to include more cohorts.
In this conversation, the apprentices demonstrated
their knowledge of teaching strategies, applying these In spite of the limitations, the processes of oral and
strategies because they theorized that students have written reflections for preservice teachers in middle
different learning styles. Joseph initiated more writing grades education may need to be explored further. The
practice to replace the grammar drill worksheets, lack of immediate feedback on preservice teachers’
recognizing the need for students to learn grammar written reflections in the apprenticeship notebook may
and sentence skills in context instead of as the practice have contributed to the preservice teachers’ confusion
of isolated skills. concerning the purposes for the written reflections.
For apprentices, reflections in the form of oral class
The apprentices also critiqued the classroom
discussions initiated criticism of school policies,
management and discipline rules established by many
teaching strategies, and classroom management.
of their schools and/or mentor teachers. When the rules
Although the written reflections were beneficial,
in place did not work for them, apprentices needed to
reflections may have been more effective if the purposes
develop problem-solving strategies. Janet explained,
and audiences of written reflections were clarified by
“My school’s discipline system didn’t work because
the supervising professors, and the preservice teachers
students who misbehaved ended up in a detention room
were able to receive feedback on written reflections
with their friends who also got in trouble. I started using
from peers and supervising professors during the period
some assertive discipline with rewards.” Other students
of apprenticeship.
mentioned a variety of disciplinary systems and routines
that their schools sanctioned. Rhonda and Trevor, who The form or kind of reflections should be connected to
were apprentices in the same school, explained that the overall goals of a specific teacher education program
they gave each other advice and talked to each other’s and to the field experiences each program requires
students about their behaviors in class. “The boys (Yost et al., 2000). It is up to the teacher-educators to
listened to Rhonda,” Trevor explained, “and I talked communicate these goals to the students. Department
to a couple of girls one time who were acting out in goals were ambiguous and individual teacher-educators
Rhonda’s class.” The apprentices seemed to benefit from interpreted the requirements according to their
these discussions of classroom management, learning own understanding of the apprenticeship reflection
a variety of techniques that worked as they listened to assignments. Consistent with other researchers in the
each others experiences. field, we found that preservice teachers would have
benefited from continuous guidance regarding the nature
In the end, the apprentices learned from both the
and purpose of the written reflections (Isikoglu, 2007;
written reflections and class discussions. As the
Johnston, 2001). Before supervisors and teacher educators
preservice teachers discussed and learned from each
can direct preservice teachers to reflect in meaningful
other in class, they gained an awareness of teaching
ways, a general definition of effective reflection should be
strategies and solutions that they would not have been
communicated. Students also need to be provided with
able to derive on their own. The oral conversations
examples of reflections that move beyond technical and
about teaching also initiated cultural criticism
practical thinking about their teaching (Isikoglu, 2007).
about the emphasis on testing in the schools. The
apprentices’ mentor teachers’ methods of working Further research is also needed on the context and
with and against the state assessments also elicited applications of both verbal and written forms of
discussion and critique during class discussions. This reflection, including that of potential limitations.
was not evidenced in the written reflections. Which of these two forms of reflection (dialogue
or written) works best and under what specific
Limitations and Implications conditions? What type or level of reflection is desired
as an outcome? Although written forms of reflection
This study has a number of limitations. First, data
have been emphasized in current educational
were collected on a small number of participants at one
research, oral discussions of reflections should also
university. Although participants were from preservice
be investigated in terms of their possible benefit for
teachers during one semester and in one cohort, they
preservice teachers. Research producing quantifiable
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 8
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
data on the effectiveness of oral versus written • Design questions that engage preservice teachers
reflection is also recommended. in reflecting about the relationship between
theory and practice.
Although previous researchers have determined
that preservice teachers are unable to verbalize Regardless of the discrepancies between results
connections between theory and practice (Ash & of oral and written reflection evident in the study,
Clayton, 2004), we found that preservice teachers it appeared that individual reflection, in general,
were able to discuss theory in dialogue with others. incorporated without specific guidelines or
Their reasons were not always stated in terms of direction, was not viewed by preservice teachers
specific theoretical frameworks, but they were able to as particularly beneficial. Both Dewey (1916) and
verbally defend reasons for their teaching decisions Schon (1990) affirmed the need for purposeful,
using language of constructive teaching, such as reflection for teachers. To ascertain critical thinking,
scaffolding and prior knowledge. reflective practices must be incorporated with care
and foresight, and preservice teachers must be
The positive results of classroom discussions on
encouraged to contemplate the connections between
preservice teachers’ verbal reflections suggest that
theory and practice.
some preservice teachers better process experiences
through dialogue or thinking aloud. Yost and
associates’ (2000) review of reflection research
suggested that most seminars do not include
substantial class time for discussing changes in
thinking and teaching methods.
Beyond class time for discussion on reflection, the
implementation of preservice teacher meetings
throughout the month-long apprenticeship may
encourage further reflection-in-action (Schon, 1990),
especially if preservice teachers know they will discuss
teaching practices daily or weekly with their peers and
supervisors. Further, if preservice teachers know their
reflections will be shared with peers, perhaps they will
also draw on each other’s knowledge and experience to
reflect at higher or critical cognitive levels.
Considering previous research, the results of our study
and recent classroom experiences, we recommend the
following for incorporating reflection into preservice
education seminars:
• Establish clear goals for written reflection
assignments and communicate these goals to
preservice teachers before they enter the field.
• Provide opportunities for professor and peer
feedback during the apprenticeship period; for
example, a debriefing session once a week for a
few hours to allow preservice teachers to share
reflections and dialogue about their experiences.
• Develop reflective dialogue guidelines for
mentor teachers to use in their work with
preservice teachers.
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 9
RMLE Online— Volume 35, No. 1
References Schon, D. (1990). Educating the reflective
practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Alsup, J. (2006). Teacher identity discourses. Shoffner, M. (2008). Informal reflection in preservice
Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. teacher education. Reflective Practice, 9, 123–134.
Ash, S. L., & Clayton, P. H. (2004). The articulated Stringer, E. (2008). Action research in education
learning: An approach to guided reflection and (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
assessment. Innovative Higher Education, 29(2), Van Manen, M. (1990). Researching lived experience:
137–154. Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy
Bannink. A., & van Dam, J. (2007). Bootstrapping (2nd ed.). New York, NY: State University of
reflection on classroom interactions: Discourse New York.
contexts of novice teachers’ thinking. Evaluation Yost, D., Sentner, S., & Forlenza-Bailey, A. (2000). An
and Research in Education, 20, 81–99. examination of the construct of critical reflection:
Britzman, D. (1991). Practice makes practice: A Implications for teacher education programming
critical study of learning to teach. Albany, NY: in the 21st century. Journal of Teacher Education,
State University of New York Press. 51, 39–51.
Campbell-Evans, G., & Maloney, C. (1998). An analysis Zeichner, K. M. (1995). Conceptions of reflective
framework for reflective writing. Australian Journal practice in teaching and teacher education. In
of Teacher Education, 23, 29–30. K. Harvard & P. Hodkinson (Eds.), Action and
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008) Basics of qualitative reflection in teacher education (pp. 15–34).
research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.
Denos, M., & Case, R. (2006). Teaching about historical
thinking. The Critical Thinking Consortium.
Vancouver, BC: Pacific Education Press.
Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and education. New
York, NY: Free Press.
Isikoglu, N. (2007) The Role of reflective journals
in early childhood preservice teachers’
professional development. Educational Sciences:
Theory & Practice, 7(2). Retrieved from http://
www.edam.com.tr/kuyeb/en/onceki_sayilar.
asp?act=detay&ID=31
Johnson, A. (2005). A short guide to action research.
Boston, MA: Pearson Education.
Johnston, J. (2001). Using written reflection to
identify preservice teachers’ active instructional
knowledge during mathematics mentoring. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South
Educational Research Association. East Lansing,
MI: National Center for Research on Teacher
Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. ED460120).
Langone, C. (2008). II-B: Epistemology. Cornell
University. Retrieved from http://cvlcornell.
blogspot.com/2008
Lareau, A., & Schultz, J. (1996). Introduction. In
A. Lareau & J. Schultz (Eds.), Journeys through
ethnography (pp. 1–7). Boulder, CO: Westview
Press.
Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart. New York, NY:
Routledge.
Phillips, D. K., & Carr, K. (2007, December).
Illustrations of the analytic memo as reflexivity
for preservice teachers. Educational Action
Research, 15, 561–575.
© 2011 Association for Middle Level Education 10
