Thursday, May 30, 2024

#LTHEChat 296: Synthesised Model of Reflection (SMOR)

jameswyoudale

May 30

With Iain Wilson

The teaching, learning and assessment of reflection – is it time for change?

Over the last 18 months, I have been developing, applying and evaluating work around the learning, teaching and assessment of reflection. Specifically, I have developed the Synthesised Model of Reflection (Wilson, 2023) to change the way reflection is approached.

So why is reflection important to focus upon?

It is widely recognised that reflection contributes to a variety of positive outcomes, such as improved emotional intelligence (e.g., Gill, 2014), developing skills (e.g., Harvey, Walkerden, Semple, McLachlan and Lloyd, 2019), and the ability to transfer knowledge across situations (Perkins and Salomon, 1992), to name a few. It is also being recognised as a method to support learning for employability (Cole and Coulson, 2022) which in turn is hoped to improve metrics such as the Graduate Outcomes Survey.

So far so good, but why do we need a new approach?

Yes, there are already plenty of models out there which can be used to structure reflection (e.g., Rolfe, Freshwater and Jasper, 2001; Gibbs, 1988), however, these are not without their problems. For example, Maguire, Evans and Dvans (2001) highlighted that reflective assessments are often written to please the marker and therefore are not authentic. In addition, Thompson and Pascal (2012) discussed their experiences of marking and moderating reflective assessments and expressed concern for the amount which were descriptive and not critically reflective. Furthermore, reflection is a westernised concept, and international students, such as those from parts of Africa, may struggle to engage in reflection in the way that we teach and assess reflective practice (Mugumbate, Nyoni and Maushe, 2021).

These are mostly old citations, are they still relevant?

Unfortunately so. I have marked a lot of reflective assessments in my time and I have observed these issues, despite trying to change my teaching practices. I have also heard anecdotes from colleagues expressing similar concerns with their students in different disciplines and varying levels of experience too.

So what do you suggest?

Despite teaching practices changing and improving over time, issues like those described above are frequently seen and reported. The thing that doesn't change though is how reflections are assessed – 20-40 year old models dominate reflective assessment domain (e.g., Rolfe et al., 2001; Gibbs, 1988). Whilst these have their value, I asked the question "are they enough?".

This has led me to developing the Synthesised Model of Reflection (SMoR; Wilson 2023) as a potential solution. Unlike other models, which focus on how to reflect, the SMoR provides a process for selecting meaningful experiences to engage learners in the practice of reflection. This proactive approach requires teachers to facilitate reflections over time, as recommended by Corker and Holland (2015). There are 4 main stages – see Figure 1 (examples based on Wilson, 2023a):

Self-evaluation – examine baseline strengths, identify development needs and use these to inform development goals. For example, examining your strengths and gaps in practice against the Professional Standards Framework 2023 (PSF2023).
Appropriate experiences – engage in multiple experiences which will address the development goals appropriately. Such as, selecting specific, targeted experiences, to evidence how you are effectively supporting the use of technologies to support learning (K4).
Synthesised analyses – two stages of analysing the experiences. First reflect on the self – the activities that you have completed which have influenced others' practice. Second, reflect on the context – this could be considerations including how the Department and/or Institute has supported your practice; staff workload to understand uptake; etc. These will help synthesise learnings across the experiences and how the learner interacts with their context because experience does not occur in a vacuum.
Re-evaluate the self – revisit the baseline evaluation to examine the progression, based on the experiences. The development goals may or may not have been achieved but progression can still be observed. New strengths and development needs inform new development goals to start the process again. This would involve revisiting the criteria from the PSF2023 to demonstrate how you are a leader across all areas of activity. As reflection is a continuous process, gaining an award is not the end and practice can be considered for continuous improvement,

A Diagram of the Synthesised Model of Reflection (SMoR). Stage 1 A rectangle labelled self-evaluation. Prompts - Knowledge. Intra/interpersonal learning. Experiential learning. Identity. Arrow leading from the self-evaluation to "Goals". Arrow leading from "Goals" to three separate experiences in Stage 2. Stage 2 There are three rectangles labelled "Experience 1", "Experience 2" and "Experience 3". Each rectangle is surrounded by three questions: What? So What? What next? Arrows point from each question to the next forming a circle. This is to indicate the reflection of each experience. Dotted arrows point from each experience to Stage 4, passing through Stage 3. Stage 3. The dotted arrows pass through a box stating "What was influenced by me and my role? What have I learned about myself?". The box and arrows are captured by a large circle which states "What was influenced by context?". The arrows passing through Stage 3 indicate the evaluative process which occurs between Stages 2 and 4, synthesising the experiences together. Stage 4. A rectangle labelled re-evaluation. Prompts - Knowledge. Intra/interpersonal learning. Experiential learning. Identity. Finally, an arrow leads from this rectangle back to goals to indicate that this is a cyclic process.

Figure 1: Diagram of the Synthesised Model of Reflection

In the words of Rolfe et al. (2001), "What next?"

Reflective practice is essential for students' development, not just during their academic studies, but holistically (e.g., Cole and Coulson 2022). My recommendations are:

Reflection requires explicit teaching to support students' learning.
Culture and context needs to be considered within reflection to understand learning in practice.
Models are tools – they have to be used effectively.
Reflections need to be authentic and meaningful to the learner.
Reflective assessments are assessments for learning.

To conclude, reflection should be an essential skill integrated into HE courses. Before it is, careful consideration should be taken to ensure good quality teaching is in place and an appropriate assessment has been designed. The SMoR offers a clear and systematic structure which can guide learners through the process, as well as provides a structure for staff to assess against. We have been using the similar approaches to the learning, teaching and assessment for years, and we are seeing the same issues over and over. I think that it is time for a change. I look forward to hearing your thoughts.

The development and evaluation of the SMoR was part of a Scholarship Sabbatical project which was funded by NTU Psychology in the form of 50% buy-out of workload. My thanks extend to NTU Psychology and my mentors Prof. Julie Hulme, Dr Richard Remedios and Prof. Maria Karanika-Murray. Many thanks also to my collaborators and critical friends who have also supported me, enabling this projects' success. You can find free resources on my National Teaching Repository profile, and I am happy to receive feedback and be a critical friend if you use any of these.

Biography

Dr Iain Wilson is a Senior Lecturer in Social Sciences (Learning and Teaching) and teaches on modules in NTU Psychology, at Nottingham Trent University. He is the creator of the Synthesised Model of Reflection (SMoR). Iain's current work focuses on supporting the development of learning and teaching practices across the School of Social Sciences. He leads on the support for APA/PGCert mentors and candidates, HEA fellowship applications and mapping training and development opportunities around learning and teaching in the School of Social Sciences. Iain also teaches on the MSc/PGDip Psychology Conversion course as well as the Occupational Psychology module on the BSc Psychology courses. Iain's Scholarship activities and interests focus on enhancing reflective writing and practice, capturing impact in scholarship practice.

References

Cole, D., & Coulson, B. (2022). Through and Beyond COVID-19, Promoting Whole Person, Lifelong and Life Wide Learning. Journal of Innovation in Polytechnic Education, 4(1), 45-50.

Corker, C. and Holland, S., 2015. Introducing students to employability, skills and reflection: A case study from history. Student Engagement and Experience Journal, 4(1), pp.1-16.

Dacre Pool, L. and Sewell, P., 2007. The key to employability: developing a practical model of graduate employability. Education+ Training, 49(4), pp.277-289.

Gibbs, G., 1988. Learning by Doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Further Education Unit. Oxford Polytechnic: Oxford.

Gill, G. S. (2014). The Nature of Reflective Practice and Emotional Intelligence in Tutorial Settings. Journal of Education and Learning, 3(1), 86-100.

Harvey, M., Walkerden, G., Semple, A., McLachlan, K., & Lloyd, K. (2019). What we can learn from the iReflect project: Developing a mobile app for reflection in WIL. International Journal of Work-Integrated Learning, 20(1), 55-69.

Maguire, S., Evans, S. E., & Dyans, L. (2001). Approaches to learning: A study of first year geography undergraduates. Journal of Geography in Higher Education, 25(1), 95-107.

Mugumbate, R. J., Nyoni, C. and Maushe, F. (2021). African university students' struggle with the western approach to reflection: experiences from a multilevel mentoring project at Bindura University, Zimbabwe. Journal of Development Administration (JDA), 6(2), 80-88.

Perkins, D. N., & Salomon, G. (1992). Transfer of learning. International encyclopaedia of education, 2, 6452-6457.

Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D., & Jasper, M. (2001). Critical reflection for nursing and the helping professions a user's guide. Palgrave Macmillan.

Thompson, N. and Pascal, J., 2012. Developing critically reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 13(2), pp.311-325.

Wilson, I. (2023). The Synthesised Model of Reflection in a 2 minute video (Version 1). National Teaching Repository. https://doi.org/10.25416/NTR.23642247.v1

Wilson, I. (2023a). Using the Synthesised Model of Reflection (SMoR) for my SFHEA application (Version 1). National Teaching Repository. https://doi.org/10.25416/NTR.23944509.v1