Classifying the Nature of Reflective Writing During Periods of Professional Experience

Figures & data

Figure 1 Model of the likely outcomes of reflective portfolios depending upon guidance given by tutors, and a student's propensity to reflect (Roberts, 2009, p. 640)

Table 1 Categories describing focus of reflection

Project Focus	Building or project context
	Tasks undertaken and processes followed
Profession or Practice Focus	Nature of practice (identity, context, market size)
	Office/team processes (working relationships/support)
Personal Development Focus	Feelings and emotions
	What has been learned (knowledge, skills, expectations — from university, new ways of thinking)
	Nature of experience
	Student's place within the practice (role, responsibilities, freedom, sense of worth, confidence, fitting in)
	Student's learning process

Table 2 Numbers of students with paragraphs coded in each category

	Level of Reflection
Focus of Reflection	High	Medium	Low
Project	6 (7)	31 (104)	51 (345)
Profession	15 (18)	30 (61)	41 (120)
Person	13 (24)	44 (216)	43 (205)

Total number of coded paragraphs shown in brackets

Figure 2 Categorisation of the type of writing provided by students, in terms of focus and level of reflection. Level of reflection based on scale by Bain et al. (1999).

Appendix 1 Summary of the nature of students' writing in the nine categories of level and focus of reflection. A rubric for assessment

	High Reflection	Medium Reflection	Low Reflection
Project Focus	Critical Review	Explanation	Description
	Provides a critical review of the building or project.	Provides information about the project, but makes links to the reasons why things are as they are.	Describes aspects of project, for instance client requirements, schedules etc.
	Role Evaluation	Outlines what they have found challenging and why.	Outlines what they have done.
	Students evaluate their contribution towards the project.	Outlines how they contributed towards the project and interacted with others.	Outlines how things were done on the project (not necessarily what they did).
Profession or Practice Focus	Theorisation	Generalisation	Observation
	Proposes some novel theory about how practices work.	Generalises observations within their practice to wider practice. Makes comparison with other prior experience.	Observes nature of individual's practice/office.
	Critically evaluates process.		Describes context.
	Improves process. Expresses an opinion on success or failure, and gives reasoning.		Describes process observed within practice.
Personal Development focus	Transformation	Self Evaluation	Response
	Highlights new insights.	Reflects on how they have developed.	Expresses a simple emotion (like, dislike). Describes difficulty encountered, a challenging task.
	Evaluates success in meeting challenges.	Shows emotions — but explains why these occur.	Lists what has been learned or needs to have been learned.
	Sees their experience in a new way.	Explains how they have improved. Extracts skills rather than broad aspects.	Lists things they need to do based on standard pre-conception, range of experience within plan of work etc.
	Overall evaluation of impact of placement, very much generalised.	Links practice and theory.
	Shows high degree of introspection in terms of understanding how they learn.	Evaluates benefit of experience and highlights carefully areas for improvement. What would they do better next time? Generally project/task specific.
		Outlines what has helped them to learn.

Roberts A. (2009). Encouraging reflective practice in periods of professional workplace experience: The development of a conceptual model. Reflective Practice, 10 (5), 633-644.

 Google Scholar

Bain J. D., Ballantyne R., Packer J. & Mills C. (1999). Using journal writing to enhance student teachers' reflectivity during field experience placements. Teachers and Teaching, 5 (1), 51‱73.

 Google Scholar