The Pedagogical Practicum is the common thread running through the first year of the Bachelor’s programme in Pedagogical Sciences. Students learn to analyse pedagogical issues of partner organisations and incorporate the outcomes into an evidence-based advisory report. This project aims to improve students’ reflection skills within the Pedagogical Practicum.

Background information & aims

In the earlier form of the reflection line within the Pedagogical Practicum, students were asked to reflect on their own role within the collaboration (what do I do, how do I do it and how can it be done differently). What was missing was for students to reflect throughout the year on actions that drive collaboration with the partner: to what, why and when. Reflection took place mainly in one of the last phases of the project and was also tested summatively. The aim of this project was to revise the reflection curriculum, in which reflection was no longer seen as an end in itself, but as a means to achieve other learning objectives.

Project description

To improve reflection learning, the project started with a literature review. The learning efficiency in CEL largely depends on the way reflection takes place. Reflection should aim to translate the experiences gained in practice into fundamental knowledge to be integrated in students. By (critical) reflection we mean encouraging students to apply theoretical knowledge in practice, to see the complexity of social problems and solutions, to compare varied perspectives, to explore and understand causality, and to ask even more challenging questions and to question presuppositions (Jacoby, 2014). The DEAL model (Ash & Clayton, 2009) served as inspiration for the redesign of activities in the Pedagogical Practicum by focusing on reflection on the issue itself, reflection on collaboration with stakeholders and reflection on the student’s professional attitude. In addition to the literature review, lecturer and student evaluations were analysed and several evaluation interviews were conducted with students, lecturers and coordinators of the courses involved. From these evaluations, we got back that many students struggle to make their advice useful for the specific pedagogical practice organisation they are linked to. In the initial phase of the project, learning activities were designed to engage students, practice partners and year supervisors in joint reflection on the process. However, obstacles such as limited hours and the desire of year supervisors to set up their own contact moments made introducing moments of joint reflection challenging. Nevertheless, efforts were made to promote interaction between working group teachers and year supervisors to improve student supervision between blocks.

Results and conclusion

Reflection is now applied in multiple ways in the Pedagogical Practicum:

• Reflection on the issue students are working on in the Pedagogical Practicum.
• Reflection on collaboration and own professional attitude with attention to autonomy, equal learning and collaborative learning in a safe environment.
• Reflection on scientific evidence and practical applicability.

Students reflect on the following (new) activities:

• Role-play in which interests, perspectives and preconditions of different stakeholders are scrutinised.
• Theme activity that students organise independently, interacting with the target group to gain a better understanding of the issue. Students reflect on this through a vlog. Verbal reflection is important to make the connection between theory and practice (Hondagneu-Sotelo & Raskoff, 1994).
• Tripartite discussion between teachers, students and practice partners. Students reflect on learning experiences in writing and discuss this orally with the working group teacher during a walk-in session.

Lessons learned

Unfortunately, it was challenging to collaborate with practice partners, lecturers, and students to collectively brainstorm the redesign of the reflection line. Nonetheless, adopting an iterative approach to course redesign, where initial changes are implemented gradually and refined based on ongoing feedback and evaluation, could facilitate more manageable timeframes. Breaking down the redesign process into smaller, manageable steps allows for adjustments along the way, mitigating the risk of time overruns while still achieving the desired outcomes.

References

• Ash, S. L., & Clayton, P. H. (2009). Generating, deepening, and documenting learning: The power of critical reflection in applied learning.
• Hondagneu-Sotelo, P., & Raskoff, S. (1994). Community service-learning: Promises and problems. Teaching Sociology, 248-254.
• Jacoby, B. (2014). Service-learning essentials: Questions, answers, and lessons learned. John Wiley & Sons.