PRIMARY TEACHING

Primary teaching the reflective practitioner

Everyone

Primary teaching the reflective practitioner

Everyone

Introduction

Over the past decade? the notion of teachers as reflective practitioners has permeated the discourse of teacher education. So widespread are the references to educating the reflective practitioner that it appears as if teacher educators are united in their vision of appropriate teacher preparation. Appearances? of course? may be deceptive; an apparent unity may mask a diversity of meanings and assumptions. An examination of the discourse of? so pervasive in the field today? is? therefore? in order. Discourse refers to the orderly exchange of ideas? shaped by rules which guide and frame arguments and expressions. Those rules? in turn? are bounded by contexts of time and place (Cherryholmes? 1988). But discourse is more than words.

Discourse is embodied in the language we use? but also in patterns of behavior and practices of institutions (Smith & Zantiotis? 1988? p. 100). To speak of the discourse of teacher education is to refer to the language embodied in texts? in journal articles? and in classrooms. It is also embodied in the practices of teacher education. To understand the phrase? we must scrutinize the stated theories? intentions and described practices of reflective teaching. In doing so? I have reviewed the literature of over the past decade? with attention to descriptions of? arguments for? and teaching strategies described as appropriate to . Through this review process? I found three very different sets of meanings ascribed to reflection; it is to these meanings that I now turn.

Discourses Of Reflection

Cruikshank's Reflective Teaching

For Donald Cruikshank at Ohio State University? reflective teaching is the ability to analyze one's own teaching practice (Cruikshank? 1987). Cruikshank's approach is intended to help pre-service and in-service teachers become more reflective through structured laboratory experiences in which a designated "teacher" teaches a predetermined? "content-free" lesson to a small group of his or her peers. The designated teacher assesses the extent to which the learners have learned and? through discussions with the small group and in larger groups? considers the effectiveness of his or her teaching. Since this approach is? itself? a specific strategy? a review of the literature does not reveal a fuller description of practice; rather? one finds evaluation studies of that particular strategy. In a summary of research on the effectiveness of the Cruikshank approach? Peters (1985) indicates mixed results? but overall found that students were able to think and talk more reflectively. Reflection was measured by student responses to the completion of two sentence stems: "When I think about teaching

. . . When I think about learning..." Reflection? in the Cruikshank model? is instrumental to enabling pre-service teachers to replicate teaching behaviors which empirical research has deemed effective. Propositional knowledge derived from the research literature is used for the application and analysis of practice. Reflection is based upon learner achievement; i.e. did the learners in the session achieve the goals set for the lesson? Feedback from teaching incidents is intended to provide each pre-service teacher with information needed to hone his ...