AE510 LITERATURE REVIEW1
Reflective Practice that transforms a clinical nursing expert into a learner-centered educator
AE510 Literature Review
Linda Cavanaugh
St. Francis Xavier University
May 20, 2014
Adult Education 510
Table of Contents
Page
Introduction3
Foundations in Adult Education4
Critical Reflection and Transformative Learning
Foundations of reflective thought5
Critical reflection7
Transformative Learning9
Reflective Practice 12
Reflective Practice and Professional learning 16
Teaching and Facilitating Learning22
Learner Centered Teaching24
Teaching for Transformation29
Authenticity31
Self- Study Research34
Improving teaching practice through self-study35
Reflective practice and transformation through self-study36
Self-study methodology37
Summary40
References41
Introduction
Nurse educators are trained to be nurses. Does their clinical experience qualify them to be educators of future generations of nurses? That answer isn’t as obvious as one might think. They come as content experts. If anyone knows nursing, it is nurses. Does that make them good educators? The majority of nurse educators have a nursing background not an education background. In fact, of the current nursing faculty in Canadian universities, only 22% have advanced degrees in disciplines other than nursing (CNA, 2008).Which of those “other” degrees are in education is not known, but if numbers are similar to the US,it would bebetween 2 and4%(NLN, 2002;Schoening, 2013).
How then do we support nurse educators when they move from being clinical experts to novice educators? Evidence suggests the transition is not easy(Weideman,2013; Spencer, 2013) and lack of teaching preparation is a large part of that reason(Anderson, 2009; Roberts, Chrisman & Flowers, 2013).While there arerecommendations to support novice educators with mentorship programs and better orientations (Anderson, 2009; Spencer, 2013; Reid et al, 2013) the fact is most new faculty are left to learn their new role in informal and self-directed ways Duffy, 2013;Roberts et al, 2013; Foley et al, 2003).
The field of adult learning has much to offer novice educators as adult education has long supported the concepts of informal and self-directed learning as part of professional development and workplace learning(Knowles, 1980; Merriam and Caffarella, 1991; Hrimech, 2005). The purpose of this literature review is to synthesizethe literature around adult learning concepts that have supported my transition from clinical nursing expert to learner-centered educator. The specific concepts of reflective practice, transformative learning and authenticity will be summarized for their potential to impact and facilitate learner centered teaching environments, with learner centered teaching environments being the hallmark of “good” educators(Fitzmaurice, 2008; Terry, 2008; Weimer, 2002).The literature around learner centered teaching environments will be synthesized and self-study as a research methodology will be discussed as a way to investigate the inter-relationship of these concepts.
Foundations in adult education
“Over the decades since Lindemann’s (1926) The Meaning of Adult Education was published, adult learning has evolved into a complex, multifaceted set of theoretical perspectives. Early adult educators (Moses Coady, Myles Horton, and Paulo Freire, for example) focused on emancipatory learning and achieving freedom from oppression, but when humanism became the prevailing philosophy underlying education in the 1960’s, many theorists turned toward understanding individual learning processes (Cranton, 2012, p. 4).
Malcolm Knowles was a major contributor to providing a construction of the adult learner through his concept of andragogy (Pratt & Nesbit, 2000, p.120; Knowles, 2005).Knowles credits learning this term from a Yugoslavian educator in the mid-sixties and first used it himself in 1968, after which it became a regular term in the literature. It was a term meant to distinguish the teaching of adults as something different from the teaching of children(Knowles, 1980, p.42).
One idea that Knowles identified as integral to the individual learning process was that of self-directed learning (Knowles, 1980, p.19; Harris, 1989, p.102). Mezirow (1985) echoed this in saying, “Self-directed learning is the goal of andragogy” and “no concept is more central to what adult education is all about then self-directed learning” (p.17) “The third contribution to adult learning that helped define what is different about learning in adulthood, is transformational learning” (Merriam, 2005, p.44).“In summary, andragogy, self-directed learning, and transformational learning have come to define much of adult learning today” (Merriam, 2005, p.45).
A key component in each of these concepts is reflection. Knowles (1980) stated, “A growing andragogical practice is to build into the early phases of a course, workshop, conference, institute, or other sequential educational activity an “unfreezing” experience, in which the adults are helped to be able to look at themselves more objectively and free their minds from preconceptions” (p.51).
Harris argued that reflection is the key element in self-directed learning (Harris, 1989, p.102). And Pilling-Cormick(1997) connects all three when she says, “In self-directed learning, learners determine, investigate, and evaluate their needs. When considering needs, the learner must reflect on his or her learning processes. When this reflection moves beyond simple questioning and becomes more critical, the potential for transformative learning exists (p.76).
It becomes clear then that a key component of individual learning is the process of reflective practice.
Foundations of Reflective Thought
Before one can define and come to an understanding of the many different faces and mechanics of reflective practice, one must understand the foundations that support it. To do that, it is best to start at the beginning. And many authors, including Chapman & Shaw Anderson (2005), Rodgers (2002), and Finlay (2008), agree the beginning was the work of John Dewey.
Rodgers (2002) argues that “Dewey is mentioned consistently in books, and articles written on reflection, teacher education, and student learning, but an extensive examination of what he actually meant by reflection is missing from the contemporary literature” (p. 843).
John Dewey was a philosopher and educator in the early 20th century who first defined reflective thought in his text“How We Think” originally published in 1910 and updated in 1933. He defines reflective thought as “Active,persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it and the further conclusions to which it tends…” (Dewey, 1933, p.9).
In Dewey’s work we can find the foundation of much of today’s writing on reflective practice, critical reflection, and reflection for transformation.
Of reflective thinking he said, “…it emancipates us from merely impulsive and merely routine activity…” it “…enables us to direct our activities with foresight and to plan according to ends-in-view, or purposes of which we are aware” (Dewey, 1933, p.17).This serves as a foundation of Schon’s work.
Schon is credited with bringing reflective practice to the forefront of professional practice. “…it is Donald Schon who drew wide-spread attention to it (reflective practice) in the 1980s, long after some had put it aside (Lyons, 2010, p. 13). In his book, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action, Schon was concerned that the impact of routine and repetitive action in our professional lives would result in action without thought. “…as a practice becomes more repetitive and routine, and as knowing-in-practice becomes increasingly tacit and spontaneous, the practitioner may miss important opportunities to think about what he is doing” (Schon, 1983, p.61). Schon was interested in using reflective practice to improveprofessional practice “by understanding how to apply wisdom, artistry and personal practical knowledge gained through experience, as well as professional, academic knowledge” (Chapman & Shaw Anderson, p. 543).Schon spoke of reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action. Smith (2001) does a good job of explaining Schon’s thinking in regards to these terms. “The former is sometimes described as ‘thinking on our feet’….We can link this process of thinking on our feet with reflection-on-action. This is done later-after the encounter…The act of reflecting-on-action enables us to spend time exploring why we acted as we did, what was happening in a group and so on. In doing so we develop sets of questions and ideas about our activities and practice” (Reflective practitioner section, para.2). In other words Schon was concerned with outcomes (Duffy, 2007).
This is one goal of reflection (Chapman & Shaw Anderson, 2005; Lyons, 2010) but there are others. The second goal of reflective practice is “…improving practice through the use of more critical techniques, that is, by better understanding the workings of power and ideology in institutions, practices and structures of work and thus aiming for more equitable and less oppressive conditions” (Chapman & Shaw Anderson, 2005, p.543). This is also known as critical reflection.
Critical Reflection
Brookfield (1995) says that “critical reflection is one particular aspect of the larger process of reflection” (p.1), He states that “reflection becomes critical when it has two distinctive purposes. The first is to understand how considerations of power undergird, frame and distort so many educational processes and interactions. The second is to question assumptions and practices that seem to make our teaching lives easier but that actually end up working against our own best long term interests-in other words, those that are hegemonic“(Brookfield, 2005, P.3).Dewey (1933) quotes Bacon and Locke in making the same point.
…social conditions tend to instigate and confirm wrong habits of thinking by authority, by conscious instruction, and by the even more insidious half-conscious influences of language, imitation, sympathy, and suggestion. Education has accordingly not only to safeguard an individual against the besetting erroneous tendencies of his own mind its rashness, presumption, and preference of what chimer, with self-interest to objective evidence- but also to undermine and destroy the accumulated and self-perpetuating prejudices of long ages (p.25).
It was not Brookfield who first made this distinction between reflection and critical reflection. It was Paulo Freire. “Freire’s book, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, was first published in 1970. It has come to influence the idea of reflection to incorporate this notion of critical reflection (Lyons, 2010, p. 16).Freireknew that education could not be separated from the society and power structures that supported it. And while he believed that liberation came from education, education was often a perpetuator of the very oppression it was meant to overcome. “Education as the exercise of domination stimulates the credulity of students with the ideological intent (often not perceived by educators) of indoctrinating them to adapt to the world of oppression” (Freire, 2002,p.78).The key then to liberation came through reflection that led to action…”liberation is praxis: the actions and reflections of men and women upon their world in order to transform it” (Freire, 2002, p. 78).
Speaking of Freire, Lyons (2010) said, “He made it apparent that neutral, uncommitted, apolitical education practice does not exist. Now contexts of living and learning had to come under scrutiny, including political, social and cultural contexts” (17). And Freire believed that uncovering and questioning such power relationships was the first step in changing them (Lyons, 2010, p.18).
Brookfield adds to Freire’s ideas of critical reflection when he explains the importance of uncovering our personal assumptions.
So much of what we think, say and do in the context of adult life is based on assumptions about how the world should work, and what counts as appropriate, moral action within it that we have developed in childhood and adolescence. Yet, frequently these assumptions are not recognized for the provisional understandings that they really are. Ideas and actions that we regard as common conventional wisdoms are often based on assumptions regarding the credibility of authority sources. Some person, institution, or authority that we either trust or fear has told us that “this is the way things are,” and we accept their judgement unquestioningly(Brookfield, 2010, p.217).
Brookfield (1995) states that, “…the most distinctive feature of the reflective process is its focus on hunting assumptions” (p.2) and “central to the reflective process is this attempt to see things from a variety of viewpoints” (p.7). He believes this allows for better teaching as well as life relations. “Becoming alert to the oppressive dimensions of our practice (many of which reflect an unquestioned acceptance of values, norms and practices defined for us by others) is often the first step in working more democratically and cooperatively with students and colleagues” (p.9). “Critical reflection urges us to create conditions under which each person is respected, valued and heard” (p.27). And finally, “…critical reflection involves us recognizing and researching the assumptions that undergird our thoughts and actions within relationships, at work, in community involvements, in avocational pursuits, and as citizens” (Brookfield, 2010, p. 216).Both Freire and Brookfield’s works seem integral to the third goal of reflection.
Transformative Learning
That third goal of reflection is transformation (Lyons, 2010) or transformational learning and perspective shifts (Chapman & Shaw Anderson, 2005).
Transformational educators believe that the primary aim of critically reflective practice should be to emancipate the learner from outmoded, un-useful, and possibly destructive, perspectives and assumptions acquired during childhood in a frequently unjust society, and that transformation has not occurred unless the learner is able to move the transformed perspective into identifiable action (Chapman & Shaw Anderson, 2005, p. 544).
We can also see this underlying theme in Dewey’s work. “The distinction between information and wisdom is old, and yet requires constantly to be redrawn. Information is knowledge which is merely acquired and stored up; wisdom is knowledge operating in the direction of powers to the better living of life” (Dewey, 1933, p.63).
Further evidence of reflection for transformation is found in his caution around understanding the forces that influence thinking, including; superstition, the tribe, the market place, the cave and the theatre (Dewey, 1933, p. 23).
One finds evidence of these same ideas in Mezirow’s thoughts on meaning perspectives. As early as 1978 he said, “We learn to become critically aware of the cultural and psychological assumptions that have influenced the way we see ourselves and our relationships and the way we pattern our lives” (Mezirow, 1978, p.101). He sees challenging these assumptions as key to critical reflection and necessary for transformation to occur (Mezirow,1990, p.8). Patricia Cranton echoes these thoughts. “Transformative learning occurs when, through critical self-reflection, an individual revises old or develops new assumptions, beliefs or ways of seeing the world” (Cranton, 2006, p.4).
Mezirow was the first to define transformational learning in 1991 (Baumgartner, 2012; Cranton, 2002; Mezirow, 2000). He believed that “formulating more dependable beliefs about our experience, assessing their contexts, seeking informed agreement on their meaning and justification, and making decisions on the resulting insights are central to the adult learning process” (Mezirow, 2000, p.4) and that “transformation theory attempts to explain this process” (p.4).
He saw the focus of transformation theory as learning to act on our own purposes, values and meanings instead of those uncritically assimilated from others with the result being more democratic individuals and societies. He believed the way to do this was through reflective discourse (Mezirow, 2000,p.8). Baumgartner (2012) explained the integral elements of his theory included: taking the perspectives of others, making a critical appraisal of the assumptions underlying our roles, priorities and beliefs, and deciding whether to act on new perspectives (p.102).
Mezirow first began to formulate his theory after working with women re-entering the work force in 1978 (Mezirow, 2000; Baumgartner, 2012). It has been strongly influenced by the field of adult education (Cranton, 2012; Baumgartner, 2012) and Mezirow doesn’t hesitate to include Kuhn (1962), Freire (1970), Gould (1978) and Habermas (1984) as major influences on his work (Mezirow, 2000).
It is also equally true that his theory has been integral to the field of adult education. Taylor (2000) offers that “in the twenty years since transformative learning emerged as an area of study in adult education it has received more attention than any other adult learning theory…” (p.285). It is a theory that has been “assessed and reassessed by colleagues in professional journals, through correspondence, in national conferences, and through the participation of Jack Mezirow and others in scores of conferences and seminars dealing with transformative learning…”( Aalsburg Wiessner, Mezirow & Smith, 2000, p.345).
This attention has led to the continued evolution of transformative learning theory over the last 35 years. Baumgartner (2012) highlights this is in large part due to several critiques of his theory that it focused solely on the individual and not society (Collard and Law, 1989), that it didn’t account for the influence of power on perspectives (Brookfield, 1991), or account for gender, class and culture (Clark and Wilson, 1991) to name a few of those critiques. However, Cranton (2012) points out that all of these perspectives can co-exist. “The outcome is the same or similar-a deep shift in perspective leading to a more open, more permeable, and better justified meaning perspectives (Mezirow, 1978)-but the ways of getting there can differ depending on the person or people and the context of the situation” (p.3).
In responding to the many different perspectives and criticisms of his work, Mezirow has been a living example of his own work. “Only time will tell how Mezirow’s transformative learning theory will evolve. What is certain that over the past thirty-five years, Mezirow’s transformative learning theory has become more inclusive and integrative. Colleagues’ critiques have caused Mezirow to expand the theory” (Baumgartner, 2012, p. 112).
But at its core, Cranton (2002) argues that transformative learning theory is elegantly simple. It involves becoming aware that one is holding a limiting or distorting view, critically examining that view, exposing that view to alternatives and changing the way we see things. This means we have transformed some part of how we make meaning out of the world (p.64).
This brings us to the “how” of reflection. Mezirow said, “Critical reflection is not concerned with the how or the how-to of action, but with the why, the reasons for and the consequences of what we do” (Mezirow, 1990, p.9).
Reflective Practice
This implies that there is a process of “how to”.How does one “operationalise” reflection? What does that process look like?How does one engage in reflective practice?Can anyone do it? Are there required attributes or characteristics?
Dewey believed that reflective thought wasn’t automatic or easy. “Dewey reminds us that reflection is a complex, rigorous, intellectual, and emotional enterprise that takes time to do well” (Rodgers, 2002, p. 844).