Comparing and Contrasting Reflection Models.

As we delve further into this semester, we are asked to reflect on how we reflect and the models that people use. The purpose of this post is to compare and contrast Graham Gibbs’ reflective cycle and John Driscoll’s. Now what? model ultimately choosing one to use to reflect on an experience, and then connecting that experience to a teacher competency. Both Gibbs and Driscoll’s models are widely used frameworks designed to support professional reflection and foster a growth mindset, leading to continuous improvement. However, they differ slightly in structure and depth. The Gibbs cycle is a six-stage process that guides users through description, emotional response, evaluation, analysis, conclusion, and action planning. This approach encourages deeper thinking about a subject and allows space for some emotional awareness. However, some of the questions are similar, and unless one is reflecting on a particularly complex issue, you might find that you’re repeating yourself.

A Reflection on Practice through Driscoll’s Model

What?

For my assessment class, I was tasked with completing two lessons with a partner. Each lesson, my partner and I would complete two assessments, then compare the data with relevant peer-reviewed research and our own impressions of how it went. Laurenn (my partner) and I chose to do an ELA lesson on point of view. The goal was to teach a mini Lesson that incorporated some review, then play a matching game, and finally move on to the assessment piece. We were initially hesitant about the lesson. While we planned effectively, scheduling was difficult, and there would be a teacher on call (TOC) in the class that day. Initially, the lesson went well, and Laurenn and I kept the students engaged in the material; however, we were doing most of the heavy lifting. We also found several areas that could use improvement: we didn’t use the doc cam to model effectively, students didn’t have opportunities to share their work, and we didn’t consider how quickly some students would finish. Overall, I would give the lesson a 6/10. While the assessment portion of the lesson was promising and many students now demonstrated understanding of perspective, it just didn’t feel like a home run. Thankfully, Laurenn and I would have the opportunity to try again later that day in another class. Laurenn and I met in the staff room and used this reflection model informally to discuss our experience; we made the following changes. We would enter the classroom more excited, use student examples, and have students write their own ideas for brainstorming on the board. We would also use sticky notes for students to create and share their own examples of perspective, which they could post on the whiteboard for others to see. We would also clearly state our learning intention and how we would assess the students. The next lesson was a home run. Students were engaged, understood what they were doing and why, offered great ideas, and when we asked them to share personal examples and their perspective, almost every hand in the class shot up. It was incredibly rewarding to see such fast results from a few dynamic changes.

So what?

Coming into the first lesson, I felt prepared. Laurenn is a great teacher candidate, and we had done our homework, but as Mike Tyson says, “everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face.” While our lesson was good, it needed refinement and student feedback to identify gaps so it could be molded into something more dynamic and engaging for students. This experience taught me a lot about the way I work. While I need planning and prep to build confidence walking into the classroom, my strength is my ability not to take things personally and to review, rework, and revise my ideas with my colleagues to make something great.

Now what?

This experience will change my approach to future lessons. While I will continue to be prepared for insitu experiences, I want to take more risks. There is comfort in playing it safe, but now is the time to learn, to try new things, revise ideas, and really get a sense of my style in the classroom, as well as what students connect with. I can accept that every once in a while, I might have a lesson that flops. However, I don’t think a bad lesson, or two, makes a teacher incompetent. I believe it’s how they chose to react to those moments. The professional teacher sees this as an opportunity to reflect on practice and actively make changes by listening to and interpreting what will work for students.

Teacher Competency

This experience connects with UVIC teacher competency number seven, “practise working collaboratively and collegially as well as independently.” Laurenn and I did this lesson and made the changes together. Although we both took half an hour think about it on our own, the lesson ideas and execution were a shared endeavor. When we came back together, we discussed ideas and asked for constructive feedback on areas that we could both improve. Furthermore, after the first lesson, the teacher on call provided some great feedback and suggestions, which we accepted graciously. Teaching is a collaborative field; it always requires at least two people: one to teach and one to learn. Those roles are not static; they shift, constantly evolving and fluid.