REFLECTIVE WRITING AS A PART OF QUALITY LEARNING

1. REFLECTIVE WRITING AS A PART OF QUALITY LEARNING STUDENTS’ PERCEPTIONS OF REFLECTIVE WRITING TASK

2. REFLECTION IN LEARNING • Theoretical foundations: Dewey (1933): conscious reflective activity in learning Boud, Keogh & Walker (1985): only reflected experience leads to learning, personal foundation of experience, intent, interrelation of cognition and emotion Kolb (1984): experiential learning theory, two dimensions of grasping and transforming experiences, four learning modes in the four-stage experiential learning cycle, one of them being reflective observation • Current issues & research: effectiveness of reflection regarding the learning outcomes

3. Definition Reflection has been defined as “those intellectual and affective activities in which individuals engage to explore their experiences in order to lead to new understandings and appreciations” (Boud et al., 1985, p. 19).

4. Evidencing reflection • Writing • journals • learning logs • protocols • etc. • Conversation • supervision • students’ dialogues • group sessions • etc. Reflective activity can be more or less structured. It can be individual or group activity. Occasions to reflect: before, during or after the event.

5. The course “Experiential learning” • Objectives (two of four): • students are able to plan and implement specific typical EL methods in different (normal and limited) circumstances; • students evaluate the extent of applicability of EL in work with students, teachers and parents. • Course design

6. Research aims • To examine the students’ perceptions of some of the characteristics of the written reflection task. • To evaluate the written reflection task in the course design according to the course objectives.

7. Students’ perceptions of the reflective writing task participants: • 37 female students of the course “Experiential learning” aged 23 to 29; • 19 reported having the experience of reflective writing earlier in their studying, 18 not; • 3 regularly write their personal journals, 16 used to do it, 4 do it from time to time and 14 do not write journals. procedure: • the questionnaires (semantic differential) were given after the course implementation • the personal reflections were analyzed according to the adapted typology by Jay and Johnson (2002)

8. Students’ perceptions of the reflective writing task:some results Students’ evaluations of the reflective writing tasks on the 5-point scale. *stat. significant difference (p=0.002)

9. Students’ perceptions of the reflective writing task:some results Open ended question yielded some affirmation of the overall positive perceptions of the written reflection task, of 12 students who wrote commentary: • 9 wrote remarks with clear positive connotation (e.g. very interesting, should be more of it in other courses, it was not easy, but it was useful); • 3 were not value laden (descriptions of reflective task at other courses).

10. Implications • For the course design: • change the nature (time allocation, task instruction) of the task of short reflections on the presentations of the colleagues; • change the structure of the task - two levels: one less structured (as it is) and one more structured (as for the second of the above mentioned course objectives). • For the future research • explore the factors for the differences between the two tasks (assessment, reflected event, or ?)

11. Assessment Should we assesswritten reflection?

12. Conclusions • Students perceive reflective writing in the course as meaningful and important, even though it is tiring and not pleasant. (Would they do it if it were not assessed?) • Questions for future: How does assessment affect the reflective process in learning? What are the factors determining a teacher’s decision to assess a reflection task?