A Corpus-based Investigation of Critical Reflective Practice and Context in Early Career Teacher Settings

Keywords: reflective practice, corpus linguistics, teaching and learning contexts, early career teachers

1 Introduction Since the 1980s, reflective practice has become an important trend in teacher

education, playing a central role in the preparation and professional development of

both new and experienced teachers worldwide (Schön 1983, 1987; Calderhead 1987;

Hoover 1994; Jay and Johnson 2002; Urzúa and Vásquez 2008; Bolton 2010; Riordan

and Murray 2010; Farrell 2011; Farr and Riordan 2012, Mann and Walsh 2013). To

date, reflective practice has been looked at in terms of content (Zeichner 1994),

processes of reflection or, as Jay and Johnson (2002: 73) highlight, how teachers think

about their practice (Richert 1991), as well as programmatic features of reflection in

the context of various programmes (Ross 1990). More recently, however, an interest

in the discourse of reflective practice has begun to emerge. Urzúa and Vásquez

(2008), for instance, have emphasised the importance of discourse in reflective

practice highlighting that reflection is observable in discourse since reflective practice

demands not only ‘a conscious awareness of the craft of practice but also an ability to

articulate that knowledge’. Research from a discourse perspective (Riordan and

Murray 2010; Farr and Riordan 2012; Mann and Walsh 2013) also illustrates the

importance of investigating the language of reflective practice by using large bodies

of (spoken and written) reflective data which facilitate data-led studies across

different contexts as opposed to heavily theoretical accounts which, in the past, have

been the norm (Farrell 2007).

Against this background, I investigate two small corpora of written reflective

practice, which have been taken from two different teaching and learning settings in a

UK Higher Education context, and which are part of a larger Corpus of Reflective

Practice (CoRP). The study uses corpus-based tools and methodologies to explore the

discourse of (critical) reflection by focusing on the most frequently used reflective

forms, and how they are used in context. Drawing on corpus linguistics as well as

insights from discourse analysis (Gee, 2010), this paper presents two case studies, on

1

two different groups of early career teachers, which address two main questions: (i)

what do the language patterns used by both groups of early career teachers reveal

about how they reflect (critically)? and (ii) to what extent do the teaching and learning

contexts play a part in shaping their reflective process?

2 Reflective Practice in Educational ContextsSince the time of Dewey (1933) and Schön (1983, 1987), an interest in reflective

practice has been reignited across a range of disciplines from health (Mann, Gordon &

MacLeod, 2009) and business studies (Rich, 2010) to teacher educational contexts

(Farrell, 2011). The origins of reflective practice lie with Dewey (1933: 9) who

claimed that reflection involves ‘active, persistent and careful consideration of any

belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the grounds that support it’. He

added that it involves more than just logical and rational problem-solving processes

and also highlighted three attributes associated with the reflective practitioner: open-

mindedness, responsibility and whole-heartedness. Valli (1997: 70) captures Dewey’s

definition of reflection as referring to what goes on in the minds of teachers who

‘...look back on events, make judgements about them and alter their teaching

behaviours in light of craft, research and ethical knowledge’. In a revival of the

theoretical framework for development, Schön (1983, 1987) continued stating that in

reflection, practitioners learn to frame experiments by imposing a kind of coherence

on a ‘messy’ situation (Clarke 1995: 245) and, as a result, come to new

understandings of situations and new possibilities for action through a spiralling

process of framing and reframing. Through the effects of a particular action, the

situation ‘talks back’ which leads to new meanings and further reframing and plans

for future action. Such a cycle of ‘appreciation, action and re-appreciation’ is a

process which Schön (1983, 1987) claims is essential to the artistry of practice, and is

one which is grounded in the notion that knowledge is personally constructed, socially

mediated and inherently situated. Zeichner and Liston (1996) draw on Dewey (1933)

and Schön (1983, 1987) by stating that it is essential to explore the processes involved

so as to provide a more detailed understanding of reflection. They claim that the

processes include describing the situation, surfacing and questioning initial

understandings and assumptions, and persisting, with an attitude of open-mindedness,

responsibility, and whole-heartedness. Against this background, critical reflection, as

opposed to mere reflection, emerges and refers to how through this process, teachers

2

learn to challenge their own practice, assumptions and teaching beliefs by means of

critical self-analysis (for example, questioning and debate) in order to raise awareness

and trigger positive development, as well as to facilitate a deeper understanding of

themselves and their students (Liou 2001). Schön (1983, 1987) highlights two kinds

of reflective practice: i) reflection-in-action which involves the practitioner engaging

in reflection while addressing a problem, and ii) reflection-on-action which means the

practitioner reflecting after the event (Schön, 1983), which is what this paper is

concerned with.

Although there are many interpretations of what reflection is (Kwo 1996;

Francis 1997), in this paper, a working understanding of reflective practice will be put

forward which draws on Dewey (1933) and Schön’s (1983, 1987) work, as well as

insights provided by Zeichner and Liston (1987, 1996) and Jay and Johnson (2002).

Reflective practice will be seen as a dynamic process, in which teachers interact with

their classroom experiences in ways which require them to evaluate, re-evaluate and

re-assess, question, as well as re-frame past, present and future actions in a bid to

trigger positive developments, although not necessarily change, in practice. This

paper will focus in particular on reflection-on-action (Schön 1983, 1987) (see Section

3 for a full account).

Despite the current research, there is still much to explore in reflective practice

(Zeichner and Liston 2011). One of the main concerns of this paper is to provide

insights into how new teachers (critically) reflect on their practice. While much has

been written about new teachers as reflective practitioners, reports of success

surrounding critical reflection, in the past, have been limited (Dinkelman 2000: 195).

Cochran-Smith (1991) states that critical reflection can only be learned by new

teachers in collaboration with experienced teachers who value it, while Calderhead

(1992) questions whether the desire for critical reflection in the preservice teacher is,

in fact, a realistic aim at all. Berliner (1988), among others, suggests that it is beyond

the new teachers’ development and is best thought of as a trait that is acquired by

teachers who have several years of classroom experience. While research has since

moved on (Mann and Walsh 2013) with accounts of reflection considering more than

experience (Mattheoudakis 2007), claims remain regarding new teachers’ levels of

critical reflection, with Walsh (2006) stating that teachers are still functioning on a

surface level which prevents them from accessing any real level of depth of

3

understanding and keeps them in the ‘here and now’. This paper will investigate this

in more detail.

A second focus, of this paper, is to consider the role of context on the

teachers’ use of (critical) reflection (Fairbanks and Meritt 1998). Context is defined in

line with Boud and Walker (1998) who emphasise the cultural, social and political

(institutional) aspects of the wider reflective setting (see Spiro and Wickens 2011)

which is mirrored in and, in turn, modified by particular local settings within which

learning occurs: the classroom, the course and the institution. They add that context

influences teachers and learners in a variety of ways in their everyday interaction as

well as in their learning outcomes and processes and underline the need to

acknowledge these influences. Lave and Wenger (1991) highlight that ‘there is no

activity that is not situated’ and hence ‘no learning that is not situated’ and emphasise

that not only does context influence learning but individuals’ actions also construct

context. As the data-sets in this study feature two different educational programmes,

as well as teachers who own different levels of experience in the classroom in

different cultural contexts, the study seeks to investigate whether the individual

contexts come to bear, in any way, on their reflective engagement. Gu and

Schweisfurth (2006), for instance, recognise that patterns of classroom interactions

are underpinned by a whole range of interrelated values and perceptions, which are

shaped by past and present cultural contexts of the teaching and learning environment,

and this will be taken into account, especially in relation to CoRP-ELT which incudes

Chinese, Taiwanese, Japanese, and Korean teachers. Although assumptions exist that

reflective practice is flexible enough to work across [political], social and cultural

differences, there remains a need for further exploration (White, Fook and Gardner,

2006).

3 Data and Methodology

3.1 The Reflective Journal This study explores written reflective journals from two specific contexts in a UK

Higher Education setting. Reflective journals have been cornerstones of reflective

practice and critical reflexivity (Bolton 2010: 128) facilitating the uncovering of deep-

seated beliefs about the learning/teaching process (Hoover 1994: 84), clarifying ideas

and experiences’ in order to define and develop professional knowledge (Holly 1989:

4

9) and propelling thinking forward to conceptual understanding (Reiman 1999). As a

result, they serve as a useful means of ‘catching…the fleeting moment’ (Bolin 1988)

in teacher education contexts.

However, the reflective journal has also been subject to some criticism with

Hobbs (2007: 406-7) highlighting that the use of the journal provoked a negative

reaction from students, which limited its usefulness, and resulted in the students

faking reflection. She also noted that it led to feelings of perceived enforced

disclosure which resulted in students experiencing discomfort or pressure (Bolton

2010), and when used in assessment, it produced a ‘strategic’ type of reflection’.

3.2 The CorpusThis paper refers to the written component of a 214, 717-word Corpus of Reflective

Practice (CoRP), collected in a UK higher education setting (see Table 1). The written

component consists of 47, 208 words and was chosen to explore insights into critical

reflection across two teaching and learning contexts:

a) CoRP-PGDE (Postgraduate Diploma in Education) includes 10 long journals

from 10 Science/Geography teachers which total at 20, 275 words;

b) CoRP-ELT (English Language Teaching) consists of 52 short journal entries

from 16 English language teachers, which total at 26, 933 words.

Table 1 Description of the Corpus of Reflective Practice (CoRP)

Corpus Subject area Type of reflection Teachers Word count

CoRP-PGDE Science//Geography 10 written (long) 10 20, 275

CoRP-ELT-W English language 52 written (short) 16 26, 933

Total 62 journals 26 47, 208

CoRP – ELT -S English language 60 dialogues 36 167, 509

Total 60 dialogues 36 214, 717

While the written corpus is considered small at 47, 208 words, it is nevertheless useful

in providing a snapshot into a very particular and specialised genre. O’Keeffe (2007:

5

198) states that small specialised corpora, such as this one, do not need to be as large

as more general corpora to yield reliable results, while Koester (2010) adds that many

of the limitations of such a corpus, which emerge naturally, can be counterbalanced

by reference to the context which provides useful contextual clues and background

data, which, in turn, can lead to more meaningful and nuanced descriptions.

3.2.1 CoRP-PGDE

This corpus consists of teachers studying for a PGDE who were involved in two six-

week periods of teaching practice. The teachers (see Table 2) had no prior teaching

experience and were quite new to the classroom. All 10 teachers were British and

volunteered 10 reflective journals, which had an average length of approximately

2000 words and were directly assessed as part of their programme. The students were

not provided with a list of criteria or guidelines for writing their reflections. Instead,

given the nature of their programme, they received input throughout the year, which

addressed issues relating to reflective practice: the reflective cycle, and understanding

critical reflection as a skill. They also observed qualified teachers in the classroom as

part of their programme. CoRP-PGDE consists of 20, 275 words, accounting for

approximately 42 per cent, almost half of the total number of words included in the

written corpus (see Table 2).

Table 2 PGDE Corpus: Teacher Profile

Student Nationality Subject area Gender Reflection Word count

1 British Science M Placement 1 28922 British Geography F Placement 1 24353 British Geography M Placement 1 22374 British Geography F Placement 1 31755 British Geography F Placement 1 24136 British Science M Placement 2 24527 British Science M Placement 3 26718 British Geography F Placement 2 10059 British Geography F Placement 3 56910 British Science F Placement 2 426

SUB-TOTAL 20, 275

6

3.2.2 CoRP-ELT

CoRP-ELT included English language teachers who, at the time of the study, had

finished the taught components of their MSc TESOL and had chosen to take part in a

professional development diploma course to gain experience and practice in teaching.

Access to the course was dependent on successful completion of one of their core 11-

week MSc courses ‘TESOL Methodology’. During teaching practice, the teachers

taught 5 classes over 12 weeks: four were at level B2 of the Common European

Framework (CEFR) while the final lesson was at CEFR level C1. They observed at

least five hours of teaching by their peers. The teachers represented 7 countries: UK,

US, Canada, China, Japan, Taiwan and Korea and ranged in age from 21—30 years’

old. 14 of the teachers were female and 2 were male (see Table 3). All of the teachers

had, on average, two years teaching experience in comparison to the PGDE teachers

who had no prior experience. Over the course of the programme, the teachers wrote

five entries each on completion of their lessons, although not all of the five entries

were submitted to this project. The reflections formed part of the teachers’ teaching

portfolios but were not directly assessed, unlike the PGDE students. The average

length of each entry was approximately 472 words, which was considerably shorter

than the PGDE teachers’ reflections and unlike the PGDE context, the ELT teachers

were provided with specific guidelines:

a) Reflect on your beliefs and practices as a teacher and how these come

through or not in your lesson;

b) Identify key strengths and weaknesses and think of the positive and

negative effects of these on your learners;

c) Identify the possible reasons for these strengths and weaknesses and

possible action for the development of your teaching in response to the

weaknesses you have identified;

d) Select approaches, techniques, procedures or materials that will allow you

to develop your teaching skills and enhance learners’ experiences.1

A total of 26, 933 words were collected from the language teachers, which accounted

for 57 per cent of the total written corpus. 1 Based on the University of Cambridge (ESOL Examinations) DELTA teaching (observation) specifications (with some minor additions). March 2011.

7

Table 3 ELT Corpus: Teacher Profile

Student

Nationality Subject area Gender Written reflections

Word count

1 UK English language F Placements 1-4 27142 Canadian English language F Placements 1-4 27863 American English language F Placements 1-3 13484 Taiwanese English language F Placements 1-5 54635 Chinese English language F Placements 1-4 15436 Chinese English language F Placements 1-5 20267 Chinese English language F Placement 1 4758 Japanese English language M Placement 1-5 19049 Chinese English language F Placements 1-5 241410 Chinese English language F Placements 1-5 138711 Chinese English language M Placement 1 40412 Chinese English language F Placements 1-2 68513 Japanese English language F Placements 1-2 95814 Chinese English language F Placements 1-2 139515 Chinese English language F Placements 1-2 88916 Korean English language F Placement 1 542

SUB-TOTAL 26, 933

In this paper, given the different nature of the teaching contexts, this study explores

each context separately to investigate how the teachers reflect while also considering

to what extent, if any, their teaching and learning contexts may impact on the nature

of their reflection. Both corpora will be explored using corpus-based tools and

methodologies such as frequency lists and concordance lines, which will be generated

using WordSmith Tools (Scott 2012) and will draw on insights from discourse

analysis. Given the differences between both corpora, it does not aim to compare

them in any way.

4 Exploring Reflective Practice in CoRP-PGDE: Case Study 1

The first case study will provide insights into the nature of reflective practice in a

PGDE context. It will (i) investigate reflective practice by looking at language

patterns in the data, and (ii) consider to what extent the patterns reveal insights into

the impact of the teaching and learning context on the data.

8

4.1 Indicators of Reflective Practice in CoRP-PGDE To gain initial insights into reflection in the corpus, a list of the top 12 most

frequently occurring reflective forms was generated (see Table 4), categorised

according to word class, and explored in context.

Table 4 Top 12 most common reflective indicators in CoRP-PGDE

Verbs Nouns Adverbs Adjectives Pronouns1 think class well good I2 see week very well my3 feel lesson more first them4 need school quite better they5 improve pupils now interesting me6 know time just different their7 observe day only great we8 try year really new myself9 realise behaviour slightly clear he10 help teacher mainly confident its11 notice classroom differently difficult our12 find needs hopefully aware us

Verbs

An initial investigation of the verbs in Table 4 shows that they appear illustrative of

skills, commonly employed in reflection, such as thinking, feeling, observing,

realising and noticing (Farrell, 2011). A closer exploration of the top 3 verbs (Figure

1) shows that they are mainly used to positively evaluate and assess the teachers’ own

view of their professional development.

Figure 1 Concordance lines: the top 3 most common verbs in CoRP-PGDE

1 so far it seems to be okay and I think I have been doing quite well. The lessons2 viour management techniques. I think this is due to my growing confidence3 hard concept to understand but I think I managed. There are a few pupils with ASN4 Placement. On reflection I can see that I have developed a lot5 From all three placements I can see I’ve done well this year.6 priate pace in my lessons and I feel I am learning more about this with time7 To go through work in class. I feel I understand a bit more of how to8 Have been very useful and I feel I am constantly learning more about9 That may be misunderstood. I feel I have improved in this over the10 after experiments. This week I feel has been very successful. Everyone

The teachers appear aware of their progress and the fact that they feel they have

learned and understood more about teaching. What is interesting is although the

9

statements appear to be descriptive in nature (‘I feel I understand more’, ‘I feel I have

improved’), the fact that they are noticing progress, and feel they have acquired more

understanding and knowledge would seem to suggest that they may be comparing past

and present moments of their professional journey and are engaging in some kind of

critical processing, which goes beyond mere description.

Adverbs

Insights into ‘more’ as an adverb further illustrate this positive trend in the teachers’

reflections and again provide evidence of awareness, on the teachers’ part, of

increased levels of professional and personal understanding and development (see

Figure 2).

Figure 2 Concordance lines: ‘more’ in CoRP-PGDE

1 and this week I was able to learn more about support for learning guidance2 nd I feel I am constantly learning more about the profession and how to improve3 day also I feel I understand a lot more about what teaching involves and4 after taking a few classes I am more aware of ways I can improve as a teacher5 o time lessons well and how to be more assertive, be aware of all the pupils in the6 a lot more to learn I feel like I am more confident in front of a class, more relaxed7 In class I feel I understand a bit more of how to know whether the class is struggl8 nd I feel this makes me feel much more confident than I did9 and everything feels much more relaxed. They are certainly enjoying it10 and it escalates I have become more certain of myself11 teaching I still need to be a bit more forceful with one of my second year

The patterns reveal insights into their emergent professional identity which involves

feeling more relaxed, confident, assertive, and acquiring more knowledge about

teaching. The use of ‘much’ and ‘a lot’ before ‘more’ further emphasises the positive

nature of the statements. Concordance line 11 also shows how they are turning their

attention towards gaps in their practice. The statements provide further evidence to

support the view that some kind of critical processing must have taken place, back-

stage, in order for the teachers to be aware of how much experience and knowledge,

they feel, has been acquired and again suggests that they are engaged in more than

simple description.

Adjectives and nouns

10

Insights into the top adjectives and nouns provide further evidence for the emergent

trends. Figure 3 shows how adjectives: ‘great’, ‘better’ and ‘well’ are used to

communicate positive evaluations of the teachers’ lessons. Comparative forms such as

‘clearer’ and ‘better’ are used suggesting that some kind of comparison with previous

practice is being drawn on. The ‘class’ and the teacher’s ‘week’ are also seen in a

positive light and in terms of progress and improvement.

Figure 3 Concordance lines: top adjectives and nouns in CoRP-PGDE

1 has been useful. I have learnt a great deal here2 I did a great lesson with my S3 class3 My lesson feels clearer and better structured and I feel more comfortable4 Placement. The lesson went better than I had expected5 It went surprisingly well and I was pleased with the results6 in Senior school. I made myself aware of the additional support needs7 oving because I am getting the class to settle more quickly when they ha8 week has been by far the best week of the course. I love being in the clas

Pronouns

Finally, an exploration of the top n-grams surrounding the pronoun ‘I’ further

illustrates the emergent patterns. The positive evaluative nature of the patterns, in

indicating development and increased expertise, again suggests that they are engaging

in some kind of comparison or noticing process which considers where they have

been against their current status suggesting they are engaging, to some extent, on

some kind of critical level.

Figure 4 N-grams for I am and I feel I in CoRP-PGDE

1 my teaching and evaluations. I am building up more of an idea of how I2 son in the past week and feel I am improving in this area. Instead of sta3 taking a few more classes. I am becoming more aware of ways I can4 a lot of time to improve on. I am keen to keep improving on this duri5 school feeling confident that I am making progress and confident that6 speaking to the class teachers I am confident that I am improving in so7 and some observation I am beginning to see real progress in my8 lessons are going well and I am progressing steadily through9 the room and when they leave I am beginning to establish them as my cl10 to go through work in class I feel I understand a bit more of how to kn11 pace in my lessons and I I feel I I am learning more about this with e

11

12 I have a lot more to learn I feel I am more confident in front of a cla13 have been very useful and I feel I am constantly learning more about

From this initial exploration of the data, one of the most obvious emergent

trends is the PGDE teachers’ conceptualisation of reflective practice, which seems to

focus on positive evaluations of progress and development. One reason for this may

be linked to the teachers’ profile as they are new to teaching, have no prior experience

and appear to recognise, willingly accept (Dewey 1933) and document any new

insights as markers of achievement. As half of the reflections volunteered by the

teachers come from Placement 1, this may also be somewhat responsible for the level

of positivity coming through. Another possible interpretation is that as the journals are

assessed (Hobbs 2007), they ultimately count towards the award of degree from the

institution and therefore it is likely that the teachers will want to showcase their

progress in a positive way to avoid any weaknesses, which may signal failure or a

poor performance or reflect badly on them. Central to this, there may well be cultural

factors at play, which centre around politeness and discretion (Brown and Levinson

1987). For instance, the teachers may wish to avoid discussing any negative aspects of

their teaching or placement, which may threaten their face or the face (Brown and

Levinson 1987) of the examining tutor or the institution where the placement took

place. They may also wish to be discrete when it comes to any issues surrounding the

school they taught in or the students. The paper emphasises the potential impact of the

cultural, social and institutional context on the kind of reflection produced by the

teachers and raises awareness of the need to highlight, in early career contexts, how

local contextual factors may impact on conceptualisations of reflective practice and

risk colouring their judgement.

A second observation, from the data, relates to the earlier discussion above

that the new teachers’ reflections are often criticised for being descriptive, shallow

and superficial (Calderhead 1987). However, on closer investigation of the emergent

patterns in Figures 1-4, I suggest that they are not merely empty surface-level

statements but are loaded with insights into the cognitive processing, engaged in by

the new teachers, which appears to take place backstage, and gives rise to statements

of evaluation, progress and development, as seen above. The teachers are not simply

describing their practice but appear to be assessing and evaluating their progress by

comparing, contrasting, noticing, observing, and tracking where they have been

12

against where they are. To do this, the teachers must have some kind of blueprint or

understanding of what is involved which they are using to help evaluate their practice.

For example, Peter states ‘I have now noticed I could be making better use of the

board’. Although he does not reveal what has triggered this awareness, it is clear that

he is drawing on skills, which go beyond what is involved in pure description and

which is, indeed, illustrative of engagement on some kind of critical level. Sarah

claims that she has improved and provides an example of how she has altered her

practice, which also suggests that some kind of off-record critical processing was

involved:

Sarah: I am improving in this area. Instead of standing at the front...

explaining things to pupils, I am constantly trying to question them and

get them to think through concepts…themselves, although this is

harder than I thought it would be...I am more confident, more relaxed

and able to communicate more effectively and understand more about

the pace...

This study supports the need to be cautious when writing off early career teachers’

reflection as being overly descriptive (Dinkelmann 2000), as often their statements

contain evidence to support the fact that they are engaging more deeply than it would

seem, and that they are functioning on some kind of level of critical reflection which

is indicative of their stage as an early reflective practitioner. This study suggests the

need to recognise such engagement as being appropriate in this early developmental

stage of reflection and to place value on how such engagement provides a window

into the kind of processing the teacher is involved in, at a particular point, and what it

reveals about them and their stage on their reflective journey. This could be likened to

a beginner’s level language learner who produces a level of interlanguage, which is

reflective of that particular stage. Nobody expects this student to use language like a

more advanced student then why should we expect immediate expertise in terms of

critical engagement from the early reflective practitioner, when in fact research has

shown that reflection is a process which benefits from both time and space

(Mattheoudakis 2007). As teacher educators, we often fail to value what early

reflective practitioners produce as being indicative of their place on their reflective

journey, which is very enlightening (see Figures 1-4), and expect them to run before

13

they can walk, which can place pressure as well as a heavy cognitive load of

expectation on the early career teacher. This study calls for a more staged approach to

the reflective journey which values, recognises and marks moments in the early

practitioner’s reflective trajectory, as opposed to an ‘all or nothing’ approach, which

is often what we expect.

5 Exploring Reflective Practice in CoRP-ELT: Case Study 2

5.1 Indicators of Reflective Practice in CoRP-ELT

The second study showcases reflective practice in a different context where the

teachers mainly come from an Asian educational setting, have, at least, 2 years’

experience, and have been given guidelines to support their journal writing, which is

not directly assessed. As in Section 4, the analysis (i) explores language patterns to

provide insights into how the teachers conceptualise reflective practice and (ii)

considers to what extent the language patterns may be influenced by their teaching

and learning contexts. The investigation begins, as above, with a list of the top

reflective verbs, nouns, adverbs, adjectives and pronouns (see Table 5).

Table 5 Top 10 most common reflective indicators in CoRP-ELT

Verbs Nouns Adverbs Adjectives Pronouns1 think students more well I2 feel lesson well first it3 need time very good my4 try learners quite new they5 know class much different them6 improve teaching really better their7 check listening only clear me8 understand task always possible themselves9 believe language several interesting we10 find teacher usually difficult you

Verbs

An initial exploration of the most common verbs supports the view that the ELT

teachers are engaging in reflection. Similar to the PGDE setting, the verbs seem

indicative of reflective skills such as thinking, knowing, feeling, and believing (Table

14

5). However, a closer investigation of the top verbs in context reveals that the teachers

appear to show a lack of contentment with their practice and to focus mainly on

inadequacies and criticism of themselves and their teaching as well as gaps in their

knowledge and practice.

Figure 5 Top verbs in CoRP-ELT

1 I don’t feel terribly positive about my lesson or my teach2 When beginning the lesson I still feel it took too much time to get the students into3 down would suffice but I still feel like I should have double checked it4 To answer them right away I feel that I could have made better use of5 Another issue that I think I need to consider is also how to help students6 There are still lots of things I need to learn about teaching and7 right and I correct them I will try to leave any problems at the door and not mak8 Lesson plan and I will also try to create a more natural and flexible learning9 gave the answers I did not know what the most proper way to give feedback wa10 I did not teach as well as I know I can. I believe that it is very important not to let11 to forget things like that but I know I was a little apprehensive before the lesson

Adverbs

This trend continues when investigating three of the top adverbs (Figure 6). Below the

teachers focus on what they should/could have done as well as what they did not do.

The conceptualisation of reflective practice, which seems to be emerging, is one

which views reflection in terms of weaknesses and self-criticism. However, similar to

the PGDE teachers, there is evidence to support the view that they are engaged in

evaluating and assessing their practice, and draw on skills, which go beyond a

descriptive level, that is to say, in order to know something did not go well, the

teacher must be comparing it against other banks of knowledge or levels of

understanding of alternative practice.

Figure 6 Top adverbs in CoRP-ELT

1 I should have prepared more before the class, and more important useful stra2 some activities. Maybe I need more attention and practice on this since I never3 I do think I should pay more attention to the textbook4 I could have designed a more inductive activity and provided better scaffoldin5 I felt my explanations weren’t very good because I couldn’t explain6 that the game did not work very well. And I think I should have skipped7 Of any others. I didn’t make a very good job of it either. Some other8 Stage. The material was not well prepared. The strips used to offer9 whole lesson was not delivered well. In terms of the listening10 The instructions were not very well prepared which took much more time

15

Adjectives and nouns

Further evidence to support the emergent trends appears when we focus on the

adjectives and nouns. Although quite a few positive adjectives appear in Table 5, the

study finds that they are often negated (Figure 7) illustrating the teachers’ tendency to

focus on the perceived negative aspects of their teaching. Again, I argue that in order

to know that a certain action ‘was not good’, the teacher must be drawing on other

skills or accessing other information which s/he uses to make informed reflective

statements of evaluation as in Figure 7.

Figure 7 Top adjectives and noun in CoRP-ELT

1 to them. That approach was not good because they surely felt boring and not dyn2 SFG framework. It might not be good to explain this to them. And many of them3 But by doing this so, I lost a good opportunity to monitor the process of ot4 n writing in class might not be a good idea. Yet, asking them to write the letter as5 felt that my explanations weren’t good because I couldn’t explain the grammar fun6 ning the meaning. I do not do a good job. When students cannot get the right ans7 The decision was not so good as there was no time to finish the activity8 The activities were not interesting enough to engage the learners9 Negative notes: today the lesson fell flat at the very beginning because the10 Summary: the lesson failed. My students were not prepared wit11 my first lesson. When the lesson didn’t go as smoothly as I wanted12 Listening tasks. The whole lesson started sloppily. Though I began

Pronouns

Finally, the trend also extends to an exploration of the most common n-grams

surrounding the pronoun ‘I’. The top 3-word n-grams include the negative particle

‘not’ (Figure 8) and again focus around a negative assessment of the teachers’ own

classroom practice.

Figure 8 Top 3-word N-grams for ‘I’ in CoRP-ELT

1 to be more specific. I did not give the students more time for their further explan2 their lesson plan. I did not prepare any new material. I don’t think that3 Later I realised that I did not check the email in time to find out the revised4 Feel empowered but I did not notice that my instruction about this activity is not v5 lesson, as this week I did not adapt the coursebook, I think I will attempt to6 Areas in the lesson. I did not use the whiteboard to record any vocabulary7 example sentences. I did not fully exploit them to guide learners to look into the8 dicators in this lesson I did not really check learners’ replies to each other9 Was varied though I did not finish all of the tasks due to time constraints

16

10 ntinues to the present. I could not explain this sentence ‘I’ve played tennis’ possibly11 Lead into the topic as I could not imagine how long the game would take so I12 curity code however I could not well define completely although I wrote it on13 Weak control of time I could not give learners plenty of practice

From this initial exploration, one of the most obvious trends is that the teachers

appear to conceptualise reflective practice in terms of weaknesses or inadequacies.

One reason may be that they have been over-influenced by the guidelines and the

need to consider inadequacies with a view to improving practice and have, as a result,

over-emphasised this focus. Another possible interpretation is that their understanding

of the concept ‘critical’ may have been misunderstood and rather than providing a

balanced account of the merits and flaws, they have mainly focused on ‘critical’ to

mean ‘negative aspects’. Another plausible reason may be to do with the cultural

factors and attitudes towards teacher education due to the fact that 13 out of 16 of the

teachers come from Asian backgrounds, and over half (9) are Chinese. Li (1999), for

instance, states that in a Chinese context, pre-service teachers are simply seen as an

apprentice to the master teacher and continually seek perfection and are often never

satisfied with what they have done. Guo (1996) claims, that some teacher education

students believe that good teaching is innate and they will never teach well enough,

despite taking part in formal training, which may provide a solid reason for these

emergent patterns. What is apparent is that the trends above may be underpinned by a

range of interrelated values and perceptions which are shaped in the cultural context

of the particular teaching and learning environment the teachers come from (Gu and

Schweisfurth 2006). Cortazzi and Jin (2006: 9) also note that Chinese students

studying abroad are likely to frame their learning within a Chinese culture of learning

which may influence the construction of the social and educational identities on

display, and this may well serve to provide some explanation for what is happening

above, although further research with a bigger data-set would be needed to test this.

Nonetheless, the study provides some evidence for the potential role of context on the

patterns emerging: the profile of the students, their backgrounds, beliefs and

expectations as well as their cultural perceptions of teaching and learning which

influence how they engage and interact in reflection in a Western context.

A second observation is in relation to reflective practice and the fact that the ELT

teachers also appear to conceptualise reflection in terms of assessing their

17

development and practice against some kind of unwritten professional blueprint. They

tend to draw on skills such as noticing, comparing, and contrasting what they did not

do with some innate understanding of what should or could have been done. Overall,

there seems to be some kind of critical cognitive processing taking place which

informs their reflection and raises awareness of the need to avoid labelling early

career reflection as being simply shallow or superficial (Calderhead 1987) or not

sufficiently critical in favour of valuing how they negotiate reflection, in their own

way, at a particular stage in their reflective journey and within their own particular

context.

6 Conclusion

This paper explored teachers’ reflections in two reflective practice contexts in a UK

higher education setting. Both settings provided insights, which raised awareness of

the importance of context in terms of the cultural, social and institutional aspects of

the wider reflective setting (Spiro and Wickens 2011), and how they play out on a

more local level with regard to the student, classroom, course and institution (Boud

and Walker 1998). The PGDE teachers appeared to see reflection as an opportunity to

highlight positive developments and progress in their practice while the ELT teachers

seemed to conceptualise reflection in terms of negative evaluation. This paper raises

awareness of the need to consider cultural sensitivity not only in terms of international

reflective contexts (Sung-Chan and Yuen-Tsang 2006), but national as well and

questions the assumption that early career reflective practice is flexible enough to

work across cultural, social and institutional differences and influences without more

careful guidance and consideration (White, Fook and Gardner 2006).

This paper also aimed to consider to what extent early career teachers engaged

in critical reflection and revealed that while on first glance, the patterns in the

teachers’ data may appear descriptive, on closer consideration, the early-career

teachers appeared to be engaging on some kind of sub-conscious critical level. As a

result, the study raises awareness of the need to see reflective practice as a process,

which involves stages, and to acknowledge and place value on the skills employed

and the type of reflection engaged in by early reflective practitioners. The study

acknowledges that this also has implications for the typologies and frameworks of

18

reflective practice we often use and the need to allow for flexibility and fluidity in

terms of what the frameworks demand from early reflective practitioners.

References

Berliner, D. C. 1988. Implications of studies on expertise in pedagogy for teacher education and evaluation. In New directions for teacher assessment. (Proceedings of the 1988 ETS International Conference, 39 - 68). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Bolin, F.S. 1988. ‘Helping student teachers think about teaching’. Journal of Teacher Education, March-April, 48-54.

Bolton, G. 2010. Reflective Practice: writing and professional development (3rd edition). London: Sage.

Boud, D., & Walker, D. 1998. ‘Promoting Reflection in Professional Courses: the challenge of context’. Studies in Higher Education, 23 (2), 191-206.

Brown, P., & Levinson, S. (1987). Politeness: Some Universals in Language Usage. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Calderhead, J. 1992. The role of reflection in learning to teach, In I., Valli (Ed.), Reflective teacher education: cases and critiques, Albany: State University of New York Press, 139-146

Calderhead, J. 1987. ‘The quality of reflection in student teachers’ professional learning’. European Journal of Teacher Education 10, 269-278.

Clark, C. 1995. Thoughtful Teaching. London: Cassell.

Cochran-Smith, M. 1991. ‘Learning to teach against the grain’. Harvard Educational Review 61(3), 279-310.

19

Cortazzi, M. & Jin, L. 2006. ‘Changing Practices in Chinese Cultures of Learning’, Language, Culture & Curriculum, 19 (1), 5-20.

Dewey, J. 1933. How we think: Arestatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: DC Heath and Company.

Dinkelman, T. 2000. ‘An inquiry into the development of critical reflection in secondary student teachers’. Teaching and Teacher Education 16, 195-222.

Fairbanks, C. M. & Meritt, J. 1998. ‘Preservice Teachers’ Reflections and the Role of Context in Learning to Teach’. Teacher Education Quarterly, 25, 47-68.

Farr, F. and Riordan, E. 2012. ‘Students’ engagement in reflective tasks: an investigation in interactive and non-interactive discourse corpora’. Classroom Discourse 3(2), 129-146.

Farrell, T. 2007. Reflective Language Teaching: From Research to Practice. London: Continuum.

Farrell, T. 2011. ‘Exploring the professional role identities of experienced ESL teachers through reflective practice’. System 39, 54-62.

Francis, D. 1997. ‘Critical Incident Analysis: a strategy for developing reflective practice’. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 3, 169-188.

Gee, J. P. 2010. How to do Discourse Analysis: A ToolKit. Routledge.

Gu, Q., & Schweisfurth, M. 2006. ‘Who adapts? Beyond cultural models of 'the' Chinese learner’. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 19 (1), 74-89.

Guo, S. B. 1996. ‘Adult teaching and learning in China’. Convergence 29 (1), 21–33.

Hobbs, V. 2007. ‘Faking it or hating it: Can reflective practice be enforced?’. Reflective Practice 8(3): 405-417.

Holly, M. 1989. Writing to Grow: Keeping a Personal Professional Journal. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Hoover, L. A. 1994. Reflective writing as a window on preservice teachers’ thought processes. Teaching and Teacher Education 10(1), 83-93.

Jay, J.K. and Johnson, K. 2002. ‘Capturing complexity: a typology of reflective practice for teacher education’. Teaching and Teacher Education 18, 73-85.

Koester, A. 2010. Building a small specialized corpus. In: O’Keeffe, A. & McCarthy, M. (Eds), The Routledge Handbook of Corpus Linguistics, Routledge, 66-79.

Kwo, O. 1996. ‘Professional Learning of Teacher Educators through the Teaching Practicum’. Curriculum Forum 5(2), 31-42.

20

Lave, J. & Wenger, E. 1991. Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Li, D. F. 1999. ‘Modernization and teacher education in China’. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 179–192.

Liou, H-C. 2001. ‘Reflective practice in a pre-service teacher education program for high school English teachers in Taiwan, ROC’. System 29, 197-208.

Mann, K., Gordon, J., & MacLeod, A. 2009. ‘Reflection and reflective practice in health professions education: a systematic review’. Adv in Health Science Education 14, 595-621. http://dme.medicine.dal.ca/docs/reflective_practice__a_systematic_review.pdf

Mann S. & Walsh S. 2013. ‘RP or RIP’: A critical perspective on reflective practice. Applied Linguistics Review 4(2), 291-315.

Mattheoudakis, M. 2007. ‘Tracking changes in pre-service EFL teacher beliefs in Greece: A longitudinal study’. Teaching and Teacher Education 23, 1272-1288.

O’Keeffe, A. 2007. ‘The Pragmatics of Corpus Linguistics’, keynote paper presented at the fourth Corpus Linguistics Conference held at the University of Birmingham, Birmingham, July 2007.

Reiman, A. J. 1999. ‘The evolution of the social roletaking and guided reflection framework in teacher education: Recent theory and quantitative synthesis of research’. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15(6), 597–612.

Rich, M. 2010. ‘Embedding reflective practice in undergraduate businessand management dissertations’. International Journal of Management Education 9(1), 57-66Richert, A. E. 1991. Case methods and teacher education: Using cases to teach teacher reflection. In D. R. Tabachnich, & K. M. Zeichner (Eds.), Issues and practices in inquiry-oriented teacher education. London: The Falmer Press, 130-150.

Riordan, E. and Murray, L. 2010. ‘A corpus-based analysis of online synchronous and asynchronous modes of communication within language teacher education’. Classroom Discourse 1 (2), 181-198.

Ross, D. D. 1990. Programmatic structures for the preparation of reflective teachers. In R. T. Clift, & M. C. Pugach (Eds.), Encouraging reflective practice in education: An analysis of issues and programs. New York: Teachers College Press.

Scott, M. 2012. Wordsmith Tools. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Schön, D.A. 1983. The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

Schön, D.A. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

21

Spiro, J. and Wickens, P. 2011. Reflection in the round:  Discourses and Practices of Reflection in HE BAAL-CUP Seminar, Westminster Institute of Education, Oxford Brookes University, June 24 2011. Available https://wiki.brookes.ac.uk/display/RIR/June+24+BAAL_CUP+Seminar.

Sung-Chan, P & Yuen-Tsang A. 2006. Reflections on building a reflective practice community in China. In: White, S, Fook, J. & Gardner, F. Critical reflection in health and social care. Maidenhead: Open University, 57-72.

Urzúa, A. and Vásquez, C. 2008. ‘Reflection and professional identity in teachers’ future oriented discourse’. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24 1935-1946.

Valli, L. 1997. ‘Listening to other voices: A description of teacher reflection in the United States’. Peabody Journal of Education, 72(1), 67–88.

Walsh, S. 2006. ‘Talking the talk of the TESOL classroom’. ELT Journal 60(2), 133-141.

White, S., Fook, J. & Gardner, F. 2006. Critical reflection: a review of contemporary literature and understandings. In S. White, J. Fook & F. Gardner (Eds), Critical reflection in health and social care. Maidenhead: Open University Press, 3-20.

Zeichner, K. M. 1994. Research on teacher thinking and different views of reflective practice in teaching and teacher education. In I. Carlgren, G., Handal, & S. Vaage (Eds.), Teachers’ minds and actions: Research on teachers’ thinking and practice (pp. 9-27). London: Falmer Press.

Zeichner, K. and Liston, D. 1987. ‘Teaching student teachers to reflect’. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 23-48.

Zeichner, K. M. and Liston, D. P. 1996. Reflective teaching: An introduction. Mahway, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Zeichner, K. M. and Liston, D. P. 2011. ‘Teaching Student Teachers to Reflect’. Harvard Educational Review, 23-49.

22