Thoughts on the ‘Reflection’ Blogs … generic feedback on Part 2

I thought it would be helpful to discuss some observations and thoughts about some of the posts on ‘Reflection’. Some of the best posts seem to focus in on one or more of three aspects. Here are some examples of how different people have tackled these three different aspects I have observed from Blog posts on Reflection. There are plenty of other good examples so please do not see these as necessarily the only good examples:

Firstly, In this example we can se how Beth conceptualises reflection as an internalised process of learning. We can see reflection as a process of revisiting the memories we make of our experiences, trawling them to extract out new or more worthwhile conclusions.

 

Ruth discusses reflection as relational to the external world of practice. We can see reflection as locating our responses in the wider world of practice. The ‘experiences’ matter because they are located in the external world, and are mostly focused on making sense of that external world.

 

Amy discusses reflection in terms of the methods of engagement, i.e. using different technologies and tools to engage the process of reflection. If we create internal memories based on reflection upon experiences (or memories of experiences) then the different methods we use ‘to’ reflect may assist in the formation of particular types of usable, worthwhile memories.

So Reflection can be seen as a ‘method’ of learning or adaption to ‘the external world’ of practice and life that has ‘internal, personal resonance’. To make Reflection effective, this way of thinking about it (internal; external; methodological) seems to have value and utility. My overall thought on current posts is that the most useful conceptualisation uses these, or similar models and I hope this is helpful generic feedback.