SLS-9e1b - Teachers’ Perception of Reflection - The 4 Conceptual Domains of Reflection

Single quadrant subjects are concentrated in quadrants Q1 and Q3.  Q1 subjects (teachers) characterise reflection as intentional, active thinking processes, such as self-examining, finding meaning, or digging deep into impressions and feelings.   The statements indicate a conception of reflection as an activity that primarily takes place in the learner and are thus student-referent.  Q1 subjects treated emotions as springboard for deeper learning, much in line with dissonance theory.

In contrast, Q3 subjects expressed more instrumental views about reflection.  Compared to Q1 subjects, the statements made about reflection are more practical – if not pragmatic or negative. The purpose of reflection, in these cases, are closely bound to academic tasks such as supervising a course, grading, and research output.

The concentration of subjects in Q1 and Q3 suggest a positive correlation between function and content. Faculty who perceive the function of reflection as being student-referent are more likely to focus the reflective activity with a critical or transformative lens.  Likewise, subjects who perceive a teacher-referent function of reflection prefer more task-oriented foci for the content of their reflective activities.

There is also a considerable number of cross-quadrant subjects.  Subjects crossing Q1 and Q2 regard reflection as beneficial for students.  Their description of student reflection centre around service performance and emphasised individual personal or professional outcomes.  Meanwhile, Subjects crossing Q3 and Q4 describe reflection in markedly teacher-referent manner, whether as means to evaluate the service performance or program, or to gauge level of student learning. Accordingly, reflection is a way to assess students. 

The conspicuous void in Q4 suggests that the combination of reflection (a) as an assessment tool but (b) yet for critical cognition is unlikely.  That sounds reasonable. 

From the data collected and their distribution throughout the framework, for conceptual domains of reflection can be established, reflection as a process, strategy or tool for (Q1) transformative learning, (Q2) mindful practice, (Q3) evaluation exercise, and (Q4) articulated thinking.  

Q1 - Transformative learning brings together perceptions of reflection that stress its being a learning process undertaken by the student which can reach high levels of criticality with promising consequences for self and society. Such conception is consonant with what scholars of experiential pedagogy describe as transformative, critical, or emancipatory education.  

Q2 - Mindful practice is likewise a student-referent idea of reflection that is more centered on professional or academic outcomes which are honed through service work, such as being able to link or apply classroom knowledge and developing skills and attitudes that enhance competence.

Q3 - Evaluation exercise is a more instrumental approach to reflection that stresses its function as a tool for assessment or appraisal and is largely confined to being a program review. Review and assessment of student work are necessary in academic service-learning.  However, we would naturally hope for educators to go beyond immediate or practical concerns and facilitate students to move towards more far-reaching learning objectives.

Q4 - The last domain, articulated thinking, primarily treats reflection as an instrument for measuring how much or how far students draw from their experience of service. We did not have solid samples for this domain although some cross-domain subjects do come close. They tend to characterize reflection chiefly as a written task for students to demonstrate what they learned. They did not perceive reflective writing itself as a learning exercise, nor did they distinguish between levels or quality of reflection. In general, they were mistrustful or apprehensive about learning that was self-reported by students.

The details of this research has been published in a paper “Knowing where we Stand: Mapping Teachers’ Conception of Reflection in Service-Learning”, by Rina Camus, Grace Ngai, K P Kwan, Jessie Yau and Stephen Chan, in Innovative Higher Education, published online 23 January, 2021.