Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response JournalsFostering Preservice Reflection through...
Transcript of Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response JournalsFostering Preservice Reflection through...
Icy Lee
117
Teacher Education Quarterly, Winter 2008
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
By Icy Lee
Introduction Researchonteachers’knowledge,beliefs,andthoughtshasshownthatteachercandidatesapproachteachingwithaplethoraofinitialbeliefsandideasaboutteach-ing.Theirknowledge,however,tendstobebasedonsimplisticviewsofteachingandlearningintheclassroom,andhencemaynotbe“welladaptedtoteaching”(Calderhead,1991,p.532).Itisonlywhentheyreflectupontheirknowledgecriticallythattheycantransferwhattheyhavelearnedininitialteacherpreparationprogramsasstudentstotherealclassroomsituationsasteachers.Reflectionenablesteachercandidatestoconstructknowledgethroughaskingquestions,critiquing,evaluat-ing,etc.,helpingthembridgethegapbetweenimaginedviewsandtherealitiesofteaching.Itisimportant,therefore,toprepareteachercandidatesforteachingbyfosteringprofessionallearningthatfocusesoncriticalthinkingandreflection,sothattheirknowledgeandbeliefsinteractwiththeteachereducationprogram,
Icy Lee is an assistant professor with the Faculty of Education of the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, China.
includingfieldexperiences,tofacilitatedevelopmentofmoresophisticatedconceptionsoftheteachingandlearningprocess. Anumberofapproacheshavebeenusedinteachereducationtopromotereflectivity,oneofwhichisjournalwriting.Journalscanactivateteachercandidates’think-ingandfacilitatemeaningmakingduringthelearningprocess(Cole,Raffier,Rogan,&Schleicher,1998),help
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
118
themidentifyvariablesthatareimportanttothem,serveasameansofgeneratingquestionsandhypothesesaboutteachingandlearning(Richards&Ho,1998),andincreasetheirawarenessaboutthewayateacherteachesandthewayastudentlearns(Burton&Carroll,2001).Inwritingreflections,learnersactivelyconstructknowledge,whilepersonalizingthelearningprocess.Throughquestioningtheirownassumptions,teachercandidatesraisetheirawarenessofteachingissuesanddevelopasenseofownershipoftheirfuturework(Daloglu,2001).Journalscanalsoprovideopportunities for teachercandidates toanalyze theirown learningandseekstrategiestoimprovetheirlearning(Vickers&Morgan,2003).SummedupbyFarrisandFuhler(1996),journalsare“abirthplaceforcreativeandcriticalthinking”(p.26).Asteachercandidatesengageinjournalwriting,theyareabletodevelopahabitofreflection(Yost,Sentner,&Forlenza-Bailey,2000). Insecondlanguageteachereducation,journalwritinghasbeguntoreceivemoreattentioninrecentyears.However,muchoftheresearchhasfocusedontheuse of journals among practicing teachers and teacher candidates to reflect onclassroomteaching(seee.g.,Brinton,Holten,&Goodwin,1993;Daloglu,2001;Richards&Ho,1998;Todd,Mills,Palard,&Khamcharoen,2001;Tsang&Wong,1996;Woodfield&Lazarus,1998).Littlehasbeendonetofindouthowjournalscanbeexploitedaspartofthecourseworkofinitialteacherpreparationprogramstofosterreflectionamongteachercandidates.InHongKong,journalsareunder-usedininitialteacherpreparation(seeLee,2004).HongKonglearners,includingadvancedlearnersinteacherpreparationprograms,areusedtoapassivemodeoflearning.Inrecentyears,however,EnglishlanguageeducationreforminHongKonghasputahighpremiumonconstructivistlearning(CDC,2004). Journalwritingisakindofreflectivewritingthatrequiresprospectiveteacherstoconstructknowledgethroughquestioningtheirownassumptionsaboutteachingandlearning,andhenceinlinewiththegeneraldirectionofeducationreforminHongKong.ThisarticledescribesastudythatusesresponsejournalsasatoolforfosteringreflectioninaninitialteacherpreparationprograminHongKong.Thesubjectsare13prospectiveEnglishteacherswhoreceivedtrainingtoteachEnglish(asasecondlanguage)insecondaryschoolsinHongKong.TheresearcherseekstoinvestigatetheuseofjournalswiththeseprospectiveEnglishteacherstofindoutwhattheywriteabout,whethertheirjournalsdisplaysignsofreflectivity,andhowtheyreacttothejournalwritingexperience.
Types of Journals Fourkindsofjournalsarecommonlyusedininitialteacherpreparation:dialoguejournals,responsejournals,teachingjournals,andcollaborative/interactivegroupjournals.Dialogue journalsinvolveteachersandstudentswritingandexchangingtheirwritinginmutualresponse,andarefoundtocarrybenefitslikepromotingautonomouslearning,enhancingconfidence,andhelpingstudentsconnectcoursecontentandteaching(Porter,Goldstein,Leatherman,&Conrad,1990).Response
Icy Lee
119
journals involvestudentsinrecording“theirpersonalreactionsto,questionsabout,andreflectionsonwhattheyread,write,observe,listento,discuss,do,andthink”(Parsons,1994,p.12).Teaching journals serveasimilarpurposebuttheyarewrittenreflectionsbasedonteachingexperiencesthatteachercandidateskeepduringthepracticum(Richards&Lockhart,1996).Collaborative/Interactive group journals involveteachercandidatesinwritingandexchangingjournals(Coleetal.,1998). Comparedwithdialoguejournals,responseandteachingjournalsputagreateronusontheteachercandidatesthemselvesinthereflectiveprocess,astheyengageinaself-dialoguethatresultsinpromotionofself-understandingandreflectivity.Collaborative/Interactivegroupjournals,ontheotherhand,focusongroupdynamicsandsynergycreatedbytheteachercandidates,requiringthemtotakeresponsibil-ityforlearningbysharingideasanddevelopinginsightsamongthemselves,nottomentionconsideringavarietyofviewpointsamongcolleagues,askillthatwillbenefitthemthroughouttheircareers.
Benefits of Journal Writing Theresearchliteratureonjournalstudieshasindicatedthebenefitsofjournalsinpromotingreflectivityamongteacherlearners.DialoguejournalstudiesbyBeauandZulich (1989),Garmon (1998), andGarmon (2001) haveproducedpositivefindingstoshowthatbothteachereducatorsandteacherlearnersfavortheuseofdialoguejournalsasatoolfordevelopingreflectivity.ResponsejournalstudiesbyParsons(1994),FarrisandFuhler(1996),andGoodandWhang(2002),aswellasteachingjournalstudiesbyHoandRichards(1993),TsangandWong(1996),andWoodfieldandLazarus(1998)have,similarly,indicatedthebenefitsofjournalingasapedagogicaltoolforencouragingreflection.Interactivejournalstudieshaveshownthatteachercandidates’ideasmaycontributetotheteachingandlearningprocess.Interactivegroupjournalsexchangedamongteachercandidates,inparticular,canstimulateinterest,enhancemotivation,andbuildtheconfidenceofteachercandidates,aswellasenrichtheirconceptionsofalearningcommunity(Coleetal.,1998).
Content and Quality of Reflection Inadditiontothebenefitsofjournalwriting,previousresearchhasfocusedonthetopicsthatteachercandidatesreflecton,aswellasthereflectivetraitsexhibitedinjournals.Thetopicsofreflectionappeartobewide-ranging,includingtheoriesofteachingandlearning,approachesandmethodsinteaching,evaluationofteaching,perceptionsofteachercandidatesofthemselvesasteachers,questionsaboutteaching,questionsaboutstudents,tonameafew(e.g.,seeRichards&Lockhart,1996;Tsang&Wong,1996).Gaugingthequalityofreflectionbasedonthetopicsinjournals,however,isnotentirelystraightforward.Foronething,theteachereducationresearchliteratureaboundswithdefinitionsof“reflection,”makingithardtopindownitsexactmeaning.Recentframeworksofreflection,basedonDewey(1933)andSchon(1983),capturesomecommonelementsabouttheprocessofreflection.Thereare,
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
120
inparticular,attemptstodescribethedevelopmentalorhierarchicalqualitiesofreflection,distinguishinglowerfromhigherlevelsofreflection. InLee’s(2005)analyticframework,forinstance,reflectionisexaminedintermsofthedepthofthethinkingprocessinvolved.Threelevelsofdepthareidentified.Thefirstlevelisthe“recall”level,whereonedescribes,recallsandinterpretsanissue/situ-ation/experiencebasedonone’sownperceptionofexperience,withoutlookingforalternativeexplanations,andattemptstoimitatethewaysonehasobservedorbeentaught.Thesecondlevelisthe“rationalization”level,whereonesearchesforrelation-shipsbetweendifferentbitsofexperiences,interpretingthesituationwithreasons,andgeneralizingexperiencesorcomingupwithguidingprinciples.Thethirdlevelisthe“reflectivity”level,whereoneapproachesone’sownexperienceswithaviewtochanging/improvinginthefuture,analyzinganissue/situation/experiencefromvariousperspectives,andbeingawareoftheinfluencesofthesediverseperspectivesonone’senhancedunderstandingoftheissueorsituation. InLee’sdefinitionofreflectivethinking,thelowestlevelofreflectionisdistin-guishedfromahigherlevelofreflectionbyadeeperthinkingprocessthatinvolvesactiveinterpretationofanissue/situationandtheabilitytoaskthewhyquestion,whereoneexploresdifferentreasons/alternativestoanissue.Thehighestlevelofreflectivethinkingischaracterizedbytheabilitytoasknotonlythe“why”butalsothe“sowhat”question,withaviewtobringingchangeorimprovementtoone’spractice,aswellasaheightenedawarenessoftheinfluencesofvariousperspectivesonone’swayofthinking. Inasimilarvein,HattonandSmith(1995)identifyfourlevelsofreflectivityin teacher candidates’ journal writing.The lowest level, descriptive writing, isnotreflectiveatall,butinvolvesapuredescriptionofanevent,asituationoranissue.Descriptivereflectionprovidesreasonsfortheevents,situationsorissuesdescribed, based on personal judgment, experience, and/or teacher candidates’interpretationsofclassroominputorreadings.Higheruptheplaneofreflectivityisdialogicreflection,whichischaracterizedbyanexplorationandconsiderationofdifferingreasons.Finally,criticalreflectionincludesnotonlypossiblereasonsbutalsoconsiderationofthebroaderhistorical,socialandpoliticalcontextsofthereasoning.HattonandSmith’sapproachissimilartothatofLee,inwhichthedepthofreflectioniscaptured.Althoughdifferenttermsareusedintheirframeworks,similarattemptsaremadetocapturedifferentdegreesofreflectivityonthebasisofone’sabilitytoputthingsintoperspective. VanManen’s(1977)viewofreflectionisalsobasedonstagesofreflection.Thefirststageinvolvesreflectionatthetechnicallevel,i.e.,applicationofskillsandknowledgeintheclassroom.Thesecondstageentailsreflectionabouttheassump-tionsofthetechnicalitiesofteachingandtheconsequencesonstudentlearning.Thethirdstageinvolvesacriticalanalysisorquestioningofthemoralandethicaldimensionsofthetechnicalitiesofteaching.ThesestagesofreflectionparallelthedepthofreflectivityputforwardbyHattonandSmith(1995)andLee(2005),in
Icy Lee
121
whichthelowestlevelofreflectioninvolvesdescriptivereflection,interpretation,orapplicationwithoutquestioning,whereasthehighestlevelofreflectionentailsreasoningbasedondiverseperspectivesplacedinabroadercontext.
Research Questions Giventhatjournalwritingisunder-exploredininitialteacherpreparationinHongKong,itwouldbeinterestingtofindoutwhatteachercandidateswriteaboutintheirjournalswhenthecourseworkrequiresthemtoengageinjournalwriting,whethertheirjournalentriesdemonstratetraitsofreflectivity,andhowtheyreacttothejournalwritingexperience.Researchquestionsthatgovernedthestudyare:
1.Whatdidtheteachercandidateswriteaboutintheirresponsejournals?Didtheirjournalentriesshowsignsofdevelopingreflectivity?
2. What were the teacher candidates’ reactions to the journal writingexperience?
The Study
Method Teacher candidates in this study are 13 female Cantonese-speaking EnglishmajorundergraduatesatHongKongBaptistUniversity,aged20-21.TheyalltooktheA-LevelUseofEnglishexaminationbeforeentryintotheuniversity,andtheirgradesrangedfromCtoE(Ebeingequivalenttoascoreof515onTOEFL).TheywereenrolledinaDiplomainEducationprogramattheUniversity.TheDiplomainEducationprogramisbasedonanewmodelofteachereducationpioneeredbytheUniversity(knownasthe2+2model),whichprovidesundergraduateswithteachertrainingattheendoftheirsecondyearofundergraduatestudyalongsidetheirEng-lishmajorstudy.WhileaBAinEnglishnormallytakes3yearstocomplete,the2+2studentswouldtake4yearstocompleteaBAinEnglishplusaDiplomainEducation(majoringinEnglish),graduatingwithtwoqualificationsthatenablethemtopracticeEnglishlanguageteaching(ELT)asaprofessionallyqualifiedEnglishteacherinsec-ondaryschoolsinHongKong.1All13studentsaspiredtobecomeEnglishlanguageteachers,andthuscouldbeconsideredreasonablymotivatedteacherlearners. Theresponsejournalstheseteachercandidateswereaskedtodowerepartofthecourseworkofthe“SubjectInstruction”courseintheDiplomainEducationprogram,whichisacompulsorycourseaimedtoequipteachercandidateswithknowledgeandskillsofEnglishlanguageteaching.Althoughthepromotionofreflectionisoneofthestatedaimsoftheteachereducationprogram,norequiredsubjectintheprogramaddressesthetopicofreflectionspecifically.Theresearcher,beingtheinstructorofthe“SubjectInstruction”course,deemeditaperfectoppor-tunitytointroducetheteachercandidatestotheideaofreflectionthroughjournalwriting.Asaqualitativeresearcher,thepastexperienceoftheteacher-researcher
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
122
hadadirectimpactontheapproachtothestudy.Havinguseddialoguejournalswith teacher candidates fromanother teacher educationcourseand found that,indialoguejournalwriting,theteacherscandidateshadatendencytorelyontheteachereducator’sfeedbackasamainincentiveforreflection(seeLee,2004),itwasdecidedthatresponsejournalsthatfocusmoreonself-reflectionwouldbeused,sothattheteachercandidates’relianceontheteachereducatorcouldbereduced.Interactivegroupjournals,itwasfelt,couldbeusedatalaterstagewhentheteachercandidateshadbecomemoreaccustomedtotheideaofjournalwriting. On thefirstdayof thecourse, teachercandidateswere told that theywereexpectedtowriteresponsejournalsthroughoutthecourse.AsjournalwritingisseldomusedinsecondaryschoolsinHongKong,aguidingsheetwasprovidedtomakesurethatexpectationsandrequirementswerecommunicatedclearly(seeAppendix).Specifically,teachercandidatesweretoldtowritetheirresponsestosalientissuesraisedinclass,whichwasheldonceaweekfor10weeksinthefirstand second semesters respectively.2Teacher candidates were told to keep theirjournalentriesinaportfolioandturnintheentriesonspecificdates(threetimesinthefirstsemesterandtwotimesinthesecondsemester)thatwereassignedatthebeginningofeachsemester.Eachtimethejournalsweresubmitted,theinstructorreadthroughthemcarefully.Insteadofawardinggrades,theinstructorprovidedgeneralresponsestostudents’entries,answeredquestions,askedfurtherquestionstostimulatethinking,andprovidedfurtherinsightsonissuesraised.Theteachercandidateswereawarethattheirjournalswouldnotbeassessed.Topreventunduerelianceoninstructorfeedback,delayedresponsesweremadetotheteachercandi-dates’journals,unlikeindialoguejournalwritingwheretheteachereducatorandteachercandidatesexchangejournalsonaregularbasis.Attheendofthesecondsemester,studentsstartedtheir6-weekteachingpracticuminsecondaryschools,wheretheytookupteachingofEnglishindependentlywiththesupportofateachermentor.Theywereencouragedtocontinuewiththehabitofjournalwriting,thoughthiswasnolongerarequirementofthecourse. Toenhancethevalidityofthestudy,triangulationisusedinthequalitativedatacollectionandanalysisprocedures.First,datatriangulationinvolvesdatasourcesfrom (1) the teacher candidates’ response journals gathered from two teachingsemesters, and (2) individual interviewswith all the 13 teacher candidates.Tomoderate the potential biases inherent in teacher-research, the interviews wereconducted(inCantonese)byaresearchassistant(withatranslationmajorandaPostgraduateDiplomainEducationmajoringinEnglish)—afterthegradeswerepostedsoastoencouragefreeexpressionofopinionsfromtheteachercandidates.Theinterviews,whichweresemi-structured,werebasedonaninterviewguidethatfocusedonfourareaspertainingtothesecondresearchquestion:(1)howjournalwritingwasreceivedbytheteachercandidates;(2)perceivedbenefitsanddifficul-ties,ifany;(3)roleoftheinstructors’feedback;and(4)impactofjournalwritingondevelopmentofreflectivity.
Icy Lee
123
Data Analysis Toanswerthefirstresearchquestion(i.e.,whattheteachercandidateswroteaboutandsignsofdevelopingreflectivity),boththecontentanddepthofreflectionasexhibitedintheresponsejournalswereanalyzed.ThecontentanalysisisadaptedfromLee(2004),whoinvestigatesthethemesofdialoguejournalswrittenby18teachercandidates.Aftermyfirstreadingoftheresponsejournaldata,itwasfoundthatwhilemostofthe10themesinLee(2004)arerelevanttothestudy,someofthethemescouldhavebeencombinedtoyieldasmallernumberofcategories—henceahigherlevelofabstraction—andtofacilitatecommunicationofthefindingsaswell(Merriam,1998).Sincethejournaldatawouldbefurtheranalyzedforthelevelofreflectivity,withreferencetothethemes,asmallernumberofthemeswouldfacilitatedatainterpretationandhencesuitthepurposeoftheresearchbetter.Fivethemesweredevelopedforthestudy,whichwasaresultofcombinationofsomeofthethemesinLee(2004)andrephrasingafterwards.Forexample,thethemesthatinvolveinteractionwiththeinstructor(e.g.,“relationship-building”and“seekingadvice”)arecombinedandphrasedas“interactingwithinstructor.”Thethemesthatrelatetoself-development(i.e.,“drawinguponpersonalhistory,”“expressingpreserviceteacherthoughtsandconcerns,”and“commentingoncognitivechanges”)arecombinedandreferredtoas“extrapolating/expressingpersonalvoice.”Thethemesrelatingtoevaluation(i.e. ,“commentsonthecourse”and“self-evalua-tion”)arebroadenedandrephrasedas“evaluating.”Theotherthemesthatpertaintolowerandhigherlevelsofthinking(i.e.,“sharingideasaboutEnglishlanguageresources,”“askingquestions/seekingclarification,”and“discussingprofessionalissues”)arerephrasedas“describingandrecalling”and“interpreting,analyzingandinquiring”respectively.Thefivethemesaredefinedasfollows:
1.Describing and recalling:Describingandrecallingteaching/learningissuespresentedinclass;sharinglanguagelearningexperiences.
2. Interpreting, analyzing and inquiring: Discussing issues related totopicscoveredinclass/otherprofessionalissues;askingquestionsaboutELT/professionalissues.
3. Evaluating: Evaluating oneself, peers or different aspects of thecourse.
4.Extrapolating/Expressing personal voice:Extrapolatingwhathasbeenlearned—makingresolutions;personalizingandsharinginsights;express-ingfeelingsandconcerns;assertingbeliefs.
5.Interacting with instructor:Seekingadviceregardingpersonal/profes-sionaldevelopment;respondingtoinstructor’sfeedback.
Afterthepreliminaryanalyticframeworkwassetup,theresearcherandresearchassistantcategorizedabout20%ofthejournaldataindependentlyandcomparedtheir
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
124
analysestofindoutthelevelofagreement,whichturnedouttobeashighas95%.Therestofthejournalentrieswerethenreadandcategorizedbytheresearchassistant. Asregardsthenatureofreflection,sincethepurposeofthestudyistoexplorethetraitsofreflectivityintheteachercandidates’journals,ananalyticalframeworkthatdescribes thedevelopmentalqualitiesof reflection isdeemedsuitable.TheframeworksproposedbyLee(2005)andHattonandSmith(1995),whichcharacterizereflectionintermsofthedepthofreflectivethinking,arecombinedasfollows:
Level 1: Non-reflection / pure description level, which involves mererecall/description.
Level2:Descriptivereflection/recalllevel,whichisthelowestlevelofreflection,involvingdescription/recallaswellasanattemptatsimpleexplanation.
Level3:Dialogicreflection/rationalizationlevel,whichisahigherlevelofreflection,involvingexplorationofalternativeexplanationsfromdif-ferentperspectives.
Level4:Criticalreflection/reflectivitylevel,whichisthehighestlevelofreflection,involvingacriticalanalysisthatsituatesreasoningwithinabroaderhistorical,social,culturalorpoliticalcontext,withaviewtochangingorimprovinginthefuture.
Allthejournalsegmentsthatfallunderthefivethemesaretabulatedandreadbytheresearcherandresearchassistanttogethertodiscussanddecideonthelevelofreflection.Analysisoftheentriesshowsthatthefirsttheme“Describingandre-calling”exclusivelyillustratesLevel1ofreflection.Itisoftenfollowedbytheotherthemesthatexhibithigherlevelsofreflection,suchas“Interpreting,analyzingandinquiring,”“Evaluating”and“Extrapolating/Expressingpersonalvoice.”Thelasttheme“Interactingwithinstructor”doesnotfallunderanylevelofreflection.Instead,theteachercandidates’attemptstointeractwiththeinstructorareseentoemanatefromtheirdescription,discussionorreflectionthatbelongstooneofthefourlevelsofreflection.Table1belowsummarizesthethemesandtheirlevelsofreflection. Asfortheinterviewdata,theyweretranslatedandtranscribedbytheresearchassistant.Theinterviewtranscriptsweresubjectedtomemberchecking(Brown&Rodgers,2002)—i.e.,havingtheteachercandidatesreadandverifytheirtruthful-ness.Theinterviewdatawerethencodedandsummarizedaccordingtothefourareasoffocus—i.e.,howjournalwritingwasreceivedbytheteachercandidates,perceivedbenefitsanddifficulties,roleoftheinstructor’sfeedback,anddevelop-mentofreflectivity.
Journal Data Thissectionaddressesthefirstresearchquestion—i.e.,What did the teacher
Icy Lee
125
candidates write about in their response journals? Did their journal entries show signs of reflectivity?Inthefollowing,selectedsegmentsfromtheteachercandidates’responsejournalsareusedtodemonstratethefivethemesdelineatedintheanalyticframeworkinTable1,eachwithreferencetothelevel(s)ofreflectivityevidentinthejournaldata.Thejournalsegmentsarepresentedverbatim,andpseudonymsareusedthroughout.
Describing and Recalling: Level 1 of Reflection Thefirsttheme,describing and recalling,canbeconsideredtobetheprecursortoreflectivity,formingthebasisonwhichfurtherreflectionsaremade.Whiletheteachercandidatesaredescribingand/orrecallinganissueorexperience,theystayatLevel1ofreflection,i.e.,non-reflection/puredescriptionlevel.InoneofKitty’sjournalentries,shesummarizedwhathadbeencoveredinclassbydescribing a teaching/learning issue:
OnWednesday,duringthelecturetime,wetalkedaboutlanguagecompetence,namely linguisticscompetence,pragmaticcompetence,discoursecompetence,andstrategiccompetence…
InLucy’ssegment,sheshared the experienceofateacherfriend,tryingtoshowhowdisrespectfulstudentscanbe:
Thatday, she taught students touseChinesedictionary.Her studentswere socuriousthattheytriedtoturntosomeotherpagesfilledwithpictures.Andsud-denly,oneofherstudentsaskedhersomethingaboutapictureshowinganancientcontainer.Sheactuallydidn’tprepareherselfforthiskindofquestionandshejustrepliedfranklybysaying,“Sorry,Idon’tknoweither.Wouldyouliketofindussomethingaboutitlater?”However,herstudentresponded,“You,asourteacher,don’tknoweither;thenhowcouldIknowit?”inaplayfultone.
Bothsegmentsdemonstrateanon-reflectivetrait,astheyinvolvemeredescriptionand/orrecall.
Table 1. Themes of Journal Entries and Levels of Reflection.
Theme LevelofReflection
1. Describingandrecalling Level1
2. Interpreting,analyzingandinquiring Level2/3/4
3. Evaluating Level2/3/4
4. Extrapolating/Expressingpersonalvoice Level2/3/4
5. Interactingwithinstructor Notapplicable
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
126
Interpreting, Analyzing and Inquiring: Level 2/3/4 of Reflection Inthejournals,descriptionandrecallwereoftenfollowedbydiscussionand/orquestioning,wheretheteachercandidatesengagedin interpreting, analyzing and in-quiring,whichisthesecondthemethatemergedfromthedata.Thisthemeillustrateshigherlevelsofreflection,includingLevels2,3and4.Whenengagedinthediscussion of teaching and learning issues raised in class,NatalieattemptedtoexplainwhymostteachersinHongKongfocusondevelopingstudents’linguisticcompetence:
Whatarethedifficultiesinteachinglanguagecompetence?...afterthetask-basedapproachin1999Englishlanguagesyllabushasbeenproposed,notmanyteacherspayeffortevenlytoteachgrammaticalitem,andlanguageneededfordifferentsituationsandcommunication.Ithinkthemainproblemistheschoolteachersareboundbythetextbook.Theywilljustteachwhatthetextbookhasandteachallthechaptersinarushinordertolettheirstudentstohavealookofallthechapterswhichareinthescopeofexamination....Astheseexamina-tionsaremainlyfocusonlinguisticcompetence,teachersmayjustconcentrateonteachingmoreaboutlinguisticknowledgeinordertolettheirstudenthaveagoodmarkinthepublicexam.
The above segment demonstrates Level 2 of reflection (i.e., descriptive reflec-tion/recalllevel),wheretheteachercandidateattemptedtoexplainwhyEnglishteachersinHongKongdonotadopttask-basedlanguageteachingbutinsteadrelyheavilyonthetextbooktohelpstudentspassexaminations. Asking questions about ELT/professional issuesalsoprovidedopportunitiesfor teacher candidates to engage in ahigher levelof reflection. Inher journal,Kittybeganbyaskingaseriesofquestionsaboutlanguagecompetenceandthenbroadenedherdiscussiontoincludeotheraspectsofcompetence,highlightingtheimportanceofcriticalthinkinginthelanguageclassroom:
So, thequestion leftnow ishowmuchshouldwe teach inelementaryeduca-tion?Howcanwebalancethebasiclinguisticknowledgeandtheotheressentialcompetenceinlanguageteaching?...Criticalthinkingissomuchemphasizednowadays,butIusedtodoubtthathowcanthisbetaughtinallsubjects?...NowIbelieveteachersinallsubjectscandoitasyouhaveprovedthisinyourteaching.Iguessteacherscantrainstudents’criticalthinkingskillsbyaskingthemmoreopenquestionsoraskingthemtocommentorjudgment.Teachersshouldalsotellstudentsnottoaccepteverythingblindlywithoutreallythinkingaboutthem.
TheabovesegmentillustratesLevel3ofreflection(i.e.,dialogicreflection/ratio-nalizationlevel),showingevidenceoftheteachercandidate’sattempttosearchforrelationshipsbetweendifferentpiecesofexperienceandtodevelopsomegeneralprinciplesforteachingcriticalthinking. Inanotherexample,Sandra’sattempttodiscuss professional issues (i.e.,in-novation)providedherwithanopportunitytoengageincriticalreflection:
Veryoften,peopletendtosupport‘new’ideasblindly.Theythinkthateverything
Icy Lee
127
‘new’is‘creative,’‘up-to-date,’and‘better.’However,thisisabsolutelynottrue.Istronglybelievethattheexistinglanguageteachingmethodologycouldbeim-proved.Butthisdoesnotmeanthatanychangeoranynewmethodologywouldhelp....Wehavetothinkcarefullyifthenewmethodologyisbetterthantheexistingoneornot....Thenit’stheideaofsuitability.Whenthisideaisfromthewest,itmaynotsuittheculturalbackgroundofHongKongstudents.Andweshouldnotoverlookthisculturalthing.LearningEnglishisnotjustlearningalanguagebutlearningadifferentculture.AndwhydosomanystudentsdislikelearningEnglish?It’sbecausetheydon’tlikethefeelingofbeingimposedwithadifferentthing.Therefore,weshouldalsoconsiderthefeelingortheattitudeofstudents.Asafterall,thischangeisnotonlyfortheEnglishlanguageteachers,butalsothestudents.
Inthissegment,Level4ofreflection(i.e.,criticalreflection/reflectivitylevel)isevident,whereSandraexaminedthequestionof“innovation”inrelationtoELTmethodology.Inreflectingontheissue,sheconsideredthewidercontextincludingtheculturalandtheaffectivefactorsinlanguageteachingandlearning.
Evaluating: Level 2/3/4 of Reflection Inthethirdtheme,evaluation,higherlevelsofreflectionarealsoevident.Inthejournals,theteachercandidatesgavetheirevaluations of different aspects of the course,includingtheinstructor’steachingstyle.Catherinecommented:
...whenIamhavingyourlesson,Ifeelgoodthatyoualwaysaskusquestions.Thiscanraiseourinterestandatthesametime,payingmoreattentiontowhatyouteach.Ithinkinthesupervisedteachingpractice,Iwillaskmoregenuinequestionstoelicitmystudentstospeakup.Actually,Ithinkduringalesson,ifstudentscanparticipateandgetinvolved,thefeelingisquitegood.
ThissegmentdemonstratesLevel2ofreflection,wheretheteachercandidateana-lyzedtheteachereducator’steachingstyleandstatedherintentiontoimitatesuchastyleinherownteachingpractice. Inanotherexample,Level3ofreflectionisevidentasBeatriceevaluatedoneofherpeers’microteachingperformance:
TodayIwasimpressedbyIvy’smicroteachingonlistening.WhatIappreciatewasthatsheexposedstudentstodifferentmaterials.Forexample,theEnglishversionoftheMulanpoemandthethemesongofthemovie....Ithinkagoodteachershouldnotonlyexposestudentstoacademicknowledgebutalsothingsaroundusandaroundtheworld.Besides,ifIcandesignlessonsasinterestingasthatone,studentswouldbeeagertoattendlessonsbecauseeachtimetheyknowthattheycanlearnsomeinterestingthingsfromthelesson.
Atthislevelofreflection,Beatriceattemptedtointerpretthepeer’sperformance,explainedwhyshelikedit,andgeneralizedittootherteachingsituations. InoneofNatalie’sjournalentries,criticalreflectionisdemonstratedassheevalu-ated her own performanceinmicroteachingintheteachereducationprogram:
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
128
Irememberthatmyteachersdidn’tteachanylisteningskillsatall.TheywouldsimplyusethetapewhichisprovidedbyLongmanorOxford,etc.whatIusu-allyheardwasnotEnglishbutthesoundof‘beep.’MyclassmatesandIwereallrushingtochoosethecorrectanswersafterthebeepsound.Ifeltnotgoodanddidn’tenjoyit.AndImadeabigmistake inmymicroteaching.I’veputtoomany things in the listening comprehension exercise. I am sure thatmystudentsfeltpressuretoo!Thoughtheydidenjoythevideo,Ithinktheyalsofeltbadabouttheexercise.IstarttoknowwhyIhavepressureallthetime.ItisbecauseIseeeverythingas‘homework’andIfocustoomuchonthefinalproduct.Asaresult,Ineglecttheneedsofmystudents.Ishouldhaveabroaderperspective—that is,my job is not only toprovide interestingmaterials anddetailedworksheets,butalsotoletmystudentsenjoytheirclassandtolearnwithoutfeelingthreatened.
Reflectingonherownlanguagelearningandmicroteachingexperience,Natalierealizedtheimportanceofde-emphasizingtheproductoflearningbutemphasizinglearningforenjoymentinanon-threateninglearningenvironment.Shewasabletoexamineteachinginabroadercontextthattakesintoaccounttheteacherrole,thestudentrole,teacher-studentrelationship,andtheuseofpedagogicalmaterials.Thisjournalsegmentisagoodexampletoshowhowtheteachercandidatemovedfromalowertoahigherlevelofreflection,andintheendshewasabletoengageinLevel4ofreflection(i.e.,criticalreflection).
Extrapolating/Expressing Personal Voice: Level 2/3/4 of Reflection Inthefourththeme,teachercandidateswereseenextrapolatingfromwhattheyhadlearnt,atthesametimeexpressing a personal voice.Insodoing,theyengagedinhigher levelsof reflection.Some teacher candidatesmade resolutions in theirresponsejournals,assertingwhattheyplannedtodointheirfutureteaching,whileotherspersonalized learning and shared their insights.For instance, through thejournalwritingexperience,Kittyhaddevelopedagreatinterestinusingthistoolasaspringboardforreflection.Shedecidedtoverbalizeandrecordherthoughtsaftereachofherteachingpracticumlessons:
Iplantobringalongamp3playerwithmesothatIcanrecordmyfeelings,mycommentsandmyreflectionsoonaftertheclass.Iamsurethatthiswouldbeveryusefulformygrowthasateacher.
Sophia,afterwatchingherpeers’microteachingongrammarteaching,recalledherownexperienceasastudentandsharedherinsightabouthowgrammarcouldbestbetaughtincontext:
WhenIwasinprimaryandsecondaryschool,myteacherstaughtmegrammar,theylikedtoseparatethecontextandthetargetlanguage;therefore,wemaynothaveaclearideabouthowtousethetargetgrammar.It’saverycommonwayofteachersteachinggrammar.Studentshavetodotheexercises(separatesentences)whichcanreinforcetheformofthetargetlanguagebutnotthefunctionofthe
Icy Lee
129
language.It’sthethingthatIhavetopayattentiontowhenIamteaching....it’sagoodstarttoteachtherelationbetweenformandfunction!
BothjournalsegmentsillustrateLevel2ofreflection,wheredescriptionisaccom-paniedbysimpleexplanation. InBeatrice’sjournalsegmentbelow,shemovedfromLevel2to3andthen4ofreflection.Shefirstexpressed her feelings and concernsafteralessonthatintroducedstudentstolanguagegames.Asshedescribedherlearningexperienceandexplainedherfeelings,sheengagedinLevel2ofreflection:
Todaywelearntsometeachingskillsintheclass.Iwasimpressedbythoseteachingskills.Ididn’tthinkofteachingcanbethatmuchfun.IfIwerestillasecondarystudent,IthoughtIwouldlovethiskindofteaching.However,asaperspectiveteacher,IfeltalittlebitstressfulasIknewthatIwouldbetheonewhodesignthosefunnygamesandplaywithmystudents.Iwasafraidthatitwouldspendmesomuchtimepreparingforthosegames.
Fromthere,Beatricewentontoassert her beliefs:
AsIhavehadmorethoughtsonit,Ithoughtit’sworthwhiletospendthatmuchtimepreparingformystudentsbecausethiscanhelpcultivatetheir interest inEnglish,IfulfillmyroleasateacherbecauseEnglishisabigfieldthatonecanevenspendone’swholelifetolearnit.Inthissense,howmuchIteachthemisnotenough,buttheniftheyhavetheinterestinEnglishthemselves,theycantaketheinitiativetolearnEnglish,andIthinkit’stheonlywayforthemtoacquiregoodEnglish.
Beatrice’sfurtherthoughtsmovedheruptohigherreflectiveplanes,i.e.,Levels3and4.DespitetheworryBeatricehadabouthavingtospendamassiveamountoftimepreparingforgoodEnglishlessons,sheconsidereddifferentperspectives(Level3)andsheassertedthatitwouldbeworththewhile,sincewhatmattersmostinlanguageteachingistheabilitytoarouseinterestinthelearners.Indeed,sheexaminedtheissueoflanguagegamesfromdifferentperspectivesandapproachedherownexperiencewithaviewtobringingimprovementtoherteachinginthefuture(Level4).
Interacting with Instructor Finally,inthelasttheme,theteachercandidatesengagedininteracting with the instructor.Lauraattemptedtoseek the instructor’s adviceontheissueofmediumofinstruction:
ButifthestudentscouldnotunderstandmyEnglishevenIspokeslowlyandusedsimpleEnglish,whatcouldIdo?
Somestudentsprovided responses to the instructor’s feedback on their journals.Forinstance,Carlyrespondedbydirectlyaddressingtheinstructor:
Thanksalotforyourresponse.ActuallyItotallyagreewithyouthateducationisahelpingprofession.
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
130
Attemptstoseekadviceoraskquestionsarenotclassifiableintodifferentlevelsofreflection,buttheygenerallycontinuefromtheteachercandidate’sdiscussionorreflection,suchasLaura’squestionabove,whichsprangfromherreflectionontheuseofL1(i.e.,Cantonese)inthesecondlanguageclassroom. Toanswerthefirstresearchquestionposedearlier(What did the teacher can-didates write about in their response journals? Did their journal entries show signs of reflectivity?), thesamplesabovedemonstratethattheteachercandidates’thinkingdidnotsimplystayatLevel1,i.e.,thelowestlevelofreflection.Instead,journalwritingprovidedthemwithopportunitiestoengageinhigherlevelsofreflectionatdifferenttimesandasdifferentissuesweredescribedordiscussed.Theyinterpreted,analyzedandinquiredaboutteaching/learningorotherprofessionalissues,result-inginanincreaseinknowledgeandself-understanding,anddevelopingacriticalstanceregardingteaching/learningandprofessionalissuesatthesametime.Throughevaluatingthemselves,theirpeersanddifferentaspectsofthecourse,theywereabletogaininsightsabouthowtheyshouldgoaboutteaching. Theyalsoextrapolatedfromtheinputobtainedfromlessons,bothfromtheinstructorandtheirpeers,personalizedlearningbymakingconnectionsbetweenwhatwasobservedandtheorizedinclassandtheirownpersonalexperience,andasaresultdevelopedabetterunderstandingofEnglishlanguageteachingandteachingingeneral.Allinall,responsejournalsenabledthemtodeveloptheirprofessionalidentitiesbysharingtheirprivatevoices,shapingtheirunderstandingofpertinentissuesandpreparingthemfortherealitiesintheclassroom(Farris&Fuhler,1996;Good&Whang,2002).
Interview Data This section attempts to answer the second research question—i.e., What were the teacher candidates’ reactions to the journal writing experience? Relevantinterviewdataareextracted(andcitedverbatim)toillustratethefourmajoras-pects,including(1)howjournalwritingwasreceived;(2)perceivedbenefitsanddifficulties;(3)roleoftheinstructor’sfeedback;and(4)developmentofreflectivethinking.Againpseudonymsareusedthroughout.
How Journal Writing Was Received by Teacher Candidates Outofthe13teachercandidates,11saidtheyenjoyedwritingresponsejournals.Someenjoyeditthroughouttheperiod,whilesomefoundgreaterenjoymentinthesecondsemester.Thiscouldbedemonstratedbythefactthatsixteachercandidatescontinuedwithjournalwritingduringtheteachingpracticumeventhoughitwasno longer a requirementof thecourse,whereasoneof them (Kitty referred toearlier)didoraljournalsbyaudio-recordingherafter-lessonthoughtsduringthepracticum.Teachercandidates’reasonsforenjoyingjournalwritingareextractedbelow,citingthestudentsverbatim:
Icy Lee
131
Inthefirstsemester,Idon’treallyunderstandhowtoteachandIfacedmanydif-ficultiesanddoubts,andIcangetmanyadvicefrommylecturer.(Lily)
BecauseIcanwriteaboutmyfeelingsanddifficulties.Yes,anditisquiteusefulformetoreflectandtobereflective.(Lucy)
Enjoymentwasfoundtolinkwithstudents’perceptionofthenatureandpurposeofjournalwriting.Afewstudentsconsideredjournalwritingtobeakindofhomeworkinthefirstsemester,butgraduallywhenthepurposebecameclearer,theyfoundjournalwritingeasiertomanageandhencemoreenjoyable.Kittysaid:
InthefirstsemesterIthinkit’skindofhomework,andIdon’twanttodoit.It’snotpracticalforIjustwrotesomethingtosharemyfeelings....Buttheninthesecondsemester,IfinditgoodbecauseIreallyknowthepurposeandIbelievethisisagoodwaytoachievethatpurpose,andit’salsogoodformyselfandalsomyteacher.
Anotherreasonwhysomestudentsenjoyedjournalwritinglessinthefirstsemesteristhelackofideas.Catherinesaid:
WritingjournalsinthefirstsemesterismoredifficultbecauseIdidn’thaveanyideawhatkindofwritingshouldIwritebecausewejustrefertothelessonlikethe concept or the theory during the lesson, so I can say I don’t really enjoyjournalwriting.
Mostteachercandidatesfeltthatjournalwritingbecameeasierinthesecondse-mester,andhencemoreenjoyable.Kathysaid:
Forthefirstsemester,it’sapressure.Inthesecondsemester,it’sapleasurewrit-ingtotheteacher.
Forthisteachercandidate,onceshestartedtoputpentopaper,thejoyofjournal-ingkeptgrowing. Onlyonestudentmaintainedshedidnotenjoyjournalwritingatanytime,andthestatedreasonwasherlaziness:
I’mtoolazytodothat.Inormallydoitrightbeforewehavetosubmitit.
Perceived Benefits and Difficulties All13studentsconfirmedjournalwritingasabeneficialexperience,includingthetwowhodidnotenjoyit.Theonlyproblemsraisedpertainstotimemanage-mentandlackofideasinitially.Theteachercandidatesvaluedtheopportunitytocommunicatewiththeinstructor,evidencedfromthequotebelow:
...shewilltrytoanswermeandthengivemesomeresponse.It’smorelikeacommunicativewaysoIlearnfromher.(Lily)
Astudentpointedoutthattheresimplywasnotenoughtimeinclassforthekindofsharinganddiscussionmadepossiblethroughjournalwriting:
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
132
It’sagoodwaytodiscusssomethingwiththeprofessorbecauseduringclasstimeyouwon’thavemuchtimetoshare.(Carly)
Lucypointedouttheadvantageofwrittenjournalsoverface-to-facemeetings:
Ithinkit’sdifficulttoknockonherdoorandtalktoher.Well,it’sstrange.Icangotohereveryday...butIdon’tknowwhethertheyarebusyornotsoIcannotreallytalkdirectlyorgotothem.SoIthinkwritingjournals,yes,theycanreadthejournalswhentheyhavetime.(Lucy)
Studentsalsofoundthatjournalwritingprovidedgoodopportunitiesforthemtopracticeanddevelopreflectivethinking.Sandrasaid:
Igettimetoreally,youknow,torethinkwhatI’velearnedinclass.
Withoutwritingresponsejournalsafterclass,teachercandidatesmighthavead-optedalearn-but-forgetattitudetolearning.Havingtoreflectonwhattheyhadlearnedinclass,however,mayhavepromptedteachercandidatestorethinktheissuescoveredinclass,expresstheirviews,andaskquestions.Learningbecamemorerealandmorepersonal. Severalstudentsalsocommentedonthevaluableoutcomeofself-developmentthroughpracticingreflectivethinking.Writingresponsejournalshelpedthemmakedecisionsthroughintrospection.Thejournalwritinghelpedtoclarifytheirconfusion,promoteself-evaluationandsuggestwaystheymightimprovethemselves:
Throughjournalwriting,ithelpsmetomakeupmyideas.Ithelpsmetomakeupmymind.Everythingissosimpleafterwritingjournals.(Sandra)
EverytimeIlookatmyjournals,Icanthinkof...howtoimprove(Helen)
Indeed,thejournalsprovideawindowintoteachercandidates’innermostfeelingsandthoughtsandareanexpedient toolforachievingpersonalandprofessionaldevelopment:
Ilookbackmyfirstfewjournals,IfoundlikemaybeiffoundI’vealreadygrownup.WhenIlookbackmyfirstfewjournalsandcompareitwiththelatterone,Ifindthedifferencebetween...likeitisn’tmyself.(Kitty)
Anotherbeneficialaspectofjournalwriting,asindicatedbyNatalie,isthedevel-opmentofwritingfluency:
ItcanimprovemyEnglishwritingbecausejournalissomethingtoexpressourselves.
When students lookedbackon thewhole experienceof journalwriting,4studentspointedout that theycouldappreciate thebenefitsonlyafter theyhadgotusedtowritingjournalsandwhentheybecamemorereflectiveinthesecondsemester.Nataliesaid:
InthefirstsemesterIcan’tfindanythingtoreflect...Ijustsitinthelesson.Idon’t’thinkIhavesomethingtoimprove.
Icy Lee
133
Thisshowsthatreflectivethinking,whenfirstintroducedtoteachercandidates,maybeatotallyalienideaandmaynotbeparticularlywell-received.Withmorepractice,however,teachercandidatescandevelopalikingaswellasadispositionforreflectivethinking.
The Instructor’s Feedback Allthe13teachercandidatesfoundtheinstructor’sfeedbackuseful,encourag-ingandvaluable:
The most important thing, I think, is to get the feedback from the lecturer.(Kathy)
Theinstructor’scommentsmakesmesocomfortable.(Sandra)
Ialwayswrotesomethingaboutmyanxiety,andyouknow,readingherwordscouldcomfortme.(Kathy)
Ithinkthatsheisveryexperiencedandsheinspiredmealot.(Ida)
Twelveof13studentsvaluedtheteacher’swrittenfeedbackontheirjournals,andstatedthatwithoutthefeedbacktheywouldhavelikedjournalingless.Fromtheircomments,itcanbeconcludedthattheteachercandidatesexpectedtheinstructortoanswertheirqueries,stimulatetheirthinking,pointoutareasforimprovement,etc.:
Ireallyliketohavetheteacher’sfeedback.Youknow,aslongastheteacherispresent,itmakesthehomeworkmeaningful.(Kitty)
Iwillbe lessmotivated towriteanythingbecauseI thinkmaybeIneedsomeguidance.(Lucy)
Onestudentheldadifferentviewaboutinstructorfeedbacktothejournalwriting:
Ithinkit’sokevenwithoutfeedbackbecauseIreallyenjoyreadingmyownjour-nal...Iexploremoreduring...exploremoreonmyselfduringtheprocessofwriting.Itreallyhelps,butnotonlyproduct,butalsotheprocessofwritingthejournal.(Lily)
Thequotesuggeststhatthestudentwasintrinsicallymotivated,enjoyedwriting,andhencewaslessreliantontheteacherforcommentsandsuggestions.Overall,theteachercandidates’viewsindicatethattheteachereducatorhasasignificantroletoplayinthejournalingprocess.
Development of Reflective Thinking Alloftheteachercandidatesreportedthattheyhadbecomemorereflectivethroughjournalwriting.Verbalizingthoughtsinwritingincreasestheirunderstand-ingoftheissuesdiscussedinclassanddevelopstheirprofessionalidentitiesasprospectiveteachers.Throughpracticingreflectivethinking,theteachercandidatesgainedadeeperunderstandingofwhatreflectivityentails:
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
134
EverytimeIwriteIfirstjotdowndetailsofwhathappenedthatdayandwhenIwilllookatitlikeathirdperson,likeself-evaluatemyselfasifI’mthethirdperson.(Sandra)
WhenIfirstwrotesomething,maybeIshareaprobleminthejournal.Iusuallythoughtofeverythinglike,thereasonofsuchaproblemandwhatIshoulddonexttime.UsuallyIwillmakeaconclusionlikethis.Iwon’tjustdescribe.Iwon’tjustdescribetheprobleminthejournals.(Lucy)
The teacher candidates appeared to appreciate the importance of thinking thattranscendspurerecallordescriptionandfelttheywereabletodevelopastancethatincorporatedobjectiveanalysis(likeathirdperson),evaluation,problematiz-ingandproblem-solving.What’smore, tracing theirowndevelopment throughreadingandre-readingtheirpersonalrecordswouldprovideapreciousopportunityforfurtherreflection:
IthinkwritingdownintowordscanhelpandonethingwhichisgoodisthatIcanreaditagainlater.Ithinkthisprocessisanotherkindofreflection.(Kitty)
Byrelatingwhatwastaughtinclasstotheirpersonalexperience,byquestioningpre-conceivedideasaboutteaching,andbyprojectingthesethoughtsintotheirownfutureaspracticingteachersintheirresponsejournals,theteachercandidateswerebecomingreflectivepractitioners:
Istartedtorelatemypastexperiencetomyownteachingandonmyfuturecareer...asformypastexperience,Iknowwhatmyteacherhadputefforton.Itrytoassesstheirownskillsorteachingandfromthatassessment,IknowwhatIhavetodointhefuture.(Natalie)
Toanswerthesecondresearchquestion(the teacher candidates’ reactions to the journal writing experience),datashowthattheteachercandidateswelcomedtheuseofresponsejournalsasaninstructionaltoolfordevelopingareflectivestancetowardsteachingandlearning.Althoughsomedidnotreacttoitpositivelywhenthetoolwasfirstintroduced,allteachercandidatesweregraduallyabletoseethebenefitsandappreciatetheimportanceofdevelopingareflectivedispositionwhiletheywerelearningtoteach.Inparticular,theytreasuredtheopportunitiestocommunicatewithandlearnfromtheinstructoroutsidetheclassroom,andtheyvaluedtheinstructor’sfeedbackandconsidereditausefulimpetusfordeeperreflections.
Implications and Recommendations Thestudysuggeststhatresponsejournalsareausefulinstructionaltoolthaten-ablesteachercandidatestoexpressandasserttheirpersonalvoice,tobemoreintouchwiththeirfeelingsandthoughts,andtodeveloptheirprofessionalidentities.Throughwritingresponsejournals,teachercandidatesenhancetheirself-understandinganddeveloptheprofessionalcharacteristicstheywillneedwhentheybecomepracticingteachers—e.g.,abilitytoquestiontheirownpractice,toexploreintoalternatives,
Icy Lee
135
toproblematize,andtoself-evaluate.AsindicatedbyCochran-SmithandLytle(2001),“aninquirystance”iscrucialtoteachers’professionaldevelopment,anditisimportantforteachercandidatestolearnto“poseproblems,identifydiscrepan-ciesbetweentheoriesandpractices,challengecommonroutines,”etc.(p.53).
Provision of Prompts Basedonthefindingsofthestudy,severalrecommendationsmaybemadetoenhancetheeffectivenessofresponsejournalsasatoolfordevelopingreflectivity.First,sinceteachercandidatesmaytendtoresistjournalingintheinitialstage,per-hapsduetoinexperienceandunfamiliaritywiththispedagogicaltool,theteachereducatorcaninitiallyprovidepromptstoguidestudents’journalwriting(seee.g.,Good&Whang,2002),especiallywithmoredependentlearnersandinthebegin-ningstage.Toprovideforgreaterflexibilityandtocatertoindividualdifferences,studentscanoptforeitherrespondingtothepromptsorwritingtheirownideas.Withatopiconcommunicativelanguageteaching,forinstance,thepromptscouldincludethefollowing:In your opinion, which English language teaching method(s) would suit Hong Kong learners most? Which method would you be most comfortable using? Theteachereducatorcanmonitorstudents’progressandassesstheneedforprovidingprompts,anddecideaccordinglytoeithercontinuewiththepracticeorphasethisoutgradually.
Journal Keeping during the Practicum Journalwritingshouldbeencouragedduringtheteachingpracticumforteachercandidates.Thestudyshowsthatevenwithoutmakingjournalwritingacompulsoryrequirementoftheinitialteacherpreparationprogramduringthepracticum,abouthalfofthestudentstookituponthemselvestokeepjournals,andtheyallreportedfeelingenthusiasticaboutit.Onceteachercandidatesareadequatelypreparedtowritereflectivejournals,theyshouldbeencouragedtocarryonwiththereflectivedispositionduringtheirteachingpracticum,andmoreimportantly,besupportedduringtheprocess.Forexample,theteachingpracticumjournalscanbecollectedandreadbytheinstructor,whocanthengivefeedbackperiodicallyorattheendofthepracticum.Also,thejournalscanbekeptinaportfolioelectronicallytogetherwithstudents’ lessonplansandteachingmaterialsandcontribute to theoverallassessmentoftheteachereducationcourse.
The Teacher Educator’s Role Theroleplayedbytheteachereducatorinprovidingfeedbackonteachercandi-dates’responsejournalsshouldnotbeunder-estimated.Thesedatahavesuggestedthatteachercandidatesvaluedtheinstructor’sfeedbackasapowerfulincentivetoencouragethemtoengageinreflectionthroughjournaling.Withholdingfeedbackaltogether,especiallyatthebeginning,mayhaveanegativeimpactontheteachercandidate’smotivationtowriteinresponsejournals.Itwouldhelp,however,ifthe
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
136
teachereducator’spresencecouldbegraduallymaderedundant,sothattheteachercandidatesdevelopahabitandwillingnesstoreflectevenwithouthavinganaudi-encetoreadtheirjournals.Lee’s(2004)dialoguejournalstudyhasfoundthatsometeachercandidatesmayactuallybemoreinterestedinusingjournaling“asameansofgettingadvicefromtheteachereducator”thaninusingitasa“toolfordevelopingindividualreflection”(Lee,2004,p.86).Toenableteachercandidatestoengageinreflectionautonomouslyduringthelearning-to-teachprocess,theteachereducatorhastobecarefulindecidingwhentogivefeedbacktostimulatethinkingandtoprovideincentiveandwhentoreducetheamountorevenwithholdfeedback.Forinstance,the teachereducatorcanstartwithexchangingdialogue journalwith the teachercandidates,andaftertheyhavegainedfamiliaritywithreflectivewritingtheycanbeaskedtoexchangejournalswithinasmallgrouporwithajournalpartner/buddy(seeGood&Whang,2002;Grisham,1997),wherebytheyexchangejournalsregu-larly,respondtotheirpeers’journals,supportingeachotherintheirdevelopmentofreflectivethinking.Theinstructor’srolecouldthenbegraduallyreduced,sincetheteachercandidateswouldbetakinggreaterresponsibilitytousejournalsasatoolforstimulatingthoughtsandfordevelopingandsustainingreflectivethinking.
The Teacher Candidate’s Role Finally, theroleplayedby the teachercandidates indevelopingreflectivityandbringingabouttheirownprofessionalgrowthcanbefurtherutilized.Asidefromaskingthemtokeeptheirjournalsinaportfolioandsubmitittotheinstruc-torfromtimetotime,theteachercandidatescanbeaskedtorevisittheirjournalsatdifferentpointsoftime(e.g.,attheendofeachsemester,andattheendoftheteachingpracticum)andtowriteaboutthechanges,ifany,observedintheirowndevelopment.Infact,thedatainthisstudyindicatethatwithoutbeingaskedto,fourstudentsdevelopedthehabitofre-readingtheirownjournalstolookforareasof improvementaswellas toponderonissuesrelatedto theirpersonalgrowthandprofessionaldevelopment.Thissuggests thatwrittenjournalscannaturallyprovidepersonalrecordsforstudentstotracetheirevolvingthoughtsandchang-ingperspectivesonspecificissues,makingsenseofthecomplexitiesinherentinteachingandlearning.Theengagementinactivelearning,whereteacherlearnerstracktheirownknowledgedevelopment,underliestheconstructivistapproachtoteacherdevelopment(Cochran-Smith&Lytle,2001).
Conclusion The study suggests that journal writing is a potentially powerful tool forfosteringreflectioninteachercandidates,preparingteacherswho“recognizethecomplexityofteaching,arethoughtfulabouttheirteachingpractices,questiontheirownassumptionsandconsidermultipleperspectivesinordertomakeinformeddecisionsaboutthelearningneedsoftheirstudents”(Schulz&Mandzuk,2005,
Icy Lee
137
p.315).Reflectionasahabit, ifsuccessfullyinstilledinteachercandidates,canpreparethemtocopewiththedailyissuesthatarisefromtheirfutureteachingwithacreativeandcriticalstance.Reflectioncouldthenbecomeamajorpartoftheirteachingrepertoiretoenablethemtoengageinreflectionwithahighcomfortlevel.Giventhepotentialbenefitsofjournalsininitialteacherpreparationprograms,howtomakejournalingmorewriter-friendly,manageable,andusefulforteachercandidateswouldprovideavenuesforfurtherresearch.
Notes 1TheHongKongGovernment’snewrequirementsforaprofessionallyqualifiedEnglishteacherare:(1)Englishsubjectknowledge,(2)anELTteachingqualification,and(3)aprofi-ciencylevelthatmeetsthelanguagebenchmarkstipulatedbytheGovernment.Thegraduatesofthe2+2teachereducationprogramwouldmeetthefirsttworequirements,whichwouldautomaticallyexemptthemfromthethird,i.e.thelanguagebenchmarkrequirement. 2Thetopicscoveredinthe20-weekcourseinclude:Englishlanguageteachingmeth-odology,communicativelanguageteachingandtask-basedlearning,curriculum,syllabusandtechniques,teachingofpronunciation,speaking,listening,reading,writing,vocabularyandgrammar,reflectiveteachingandclassroominquiry,assessment,lessonplanningandevaluation,individualdifferencesandlearningstrategies.Itwasemphasizedthatthejournalswouldnotbemarkedforwrittenaccuracy,andthatthefocuswasonthequalityofreflectivethinkingratherthanwritingcompetence.
ReferencesBean,T.W.,&Zulich,J.(1989).Usingdialoguejournalstofosterreflectivepracticewith
preservice,content-areateachers.Teacher Education Quarterly, 16(1),33-40.Brinton,D.M.,Holten,C.A.,&Goodwin,J.M.(1993).Respondingtodialoguejournalsin
teacherpreparation:What’seffective?TESOL Journal, 2(4),15-19.Burton,J.,&Carroll,M.(2001).Journalwritingasanaidtoself-awareness,autonomy,
andcollaborativelearning. InJ.Burton&M.Carroll(Eds.),Journal writing(pp.1-7).Alexandria,VA:TeachingofEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages,Inc.
Calderhead,J.(1991).Thenatureandgrowthofknowledgeinstudentteaching.Teaching and Teacher Education, 7(5/6),531-535.
CDC[CurriculumDevelopmentCouncil].(2004).English language education key learn-ing area: English language curriculum guide (pp. 1-6). Hong Kong: GovernmentPrinter.
Cochran-Smith,M.,&Lytle,S.L.(2001).Beyonduncertainty:Takinganinquirystanceonpractice.InA.Lieberman&L.Miller(Eds.),Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters(pp.45-58).NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.
Cole,R.,Raffier,L.M.,Rogan,P.,&Schleicher,L.(1998).Interactivegroupjournals:Learn-ingasadialogueamonglearners.TESOL Quarterly, 32(3),556-568.
Daloglu,A.(2001).Fosteringreflectiveteachingfromthestart:Journalkeepinginpreser-viceteachereducation.InJ.Burton&M.Carroll(Eds.),Journal writing(pp.87-100).Alexandria,VA:TeachingofEnglishtoSpeakersofOtherLanguages,Inc.
Dewey,J.(1933).How we think: A restatement of the relations of reflective thinking to the
Fostering Preservice Reflection through Response Journals
138
educative process(2nded.).Boston:D.C.Heath.Farris,P.J.,&Fuhler,C.J.(1996).Usingresponsejournalswithpreserviceteachers.The
Clearing House, 70(1),26-29.Garmon,M.A.(1998).Usingdialoguejournalstopromotestudentgrowthinamulticultural
educationcourse.Remedial and Special Education, 19(1),32-45.Garmon,M.A.(2001).Thebenefitsofdialoguejournals:Whatprospectiveteacherssay.
Teacher Education Quarterly, 28(4),37-50.Good,J.M.,&Whang,P.A.(2002).Encouragingreflectioninpreserviceteachersthrough
responsejournals.The Teacher Educator, 37,254-267.Hatton,N.&Smith,D. (1995).Reflection in teachereducation:Towardsdefinitionand
implementation.Teacher and Teacher Education, 11(1),33-49.Ho,B.,&Richards,J.C.(1993).Reflectivethinkingthroughteacherjournalwriting:Myths
andrealities.Prospect, A Journal of Australian TESOL, 8(3),7-24.Lee, H-J. (2005). Understanding and assessing preservice teachers’ reflective thinking.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(6),699-715.Lee,I.(2004).Usingdialoguejournalsasamulti-purposetoolforpreserviceteacherprepa-
ration:Howeffectiveisit?31(3),73-97.Merriam,S.B.(1998).Qualitative research and case study applications in education.San
Francisco:Jossey-Bass.Parsons,L. (1994).Expanding response journals in all subject areas. Portsmouth,NH:
Heinemann.Porter,P.A.,Goldstein,L.M.,Leatherman,J.,&Conrad,S.(1990).Anongoingdialogue:
Learninglogsforteachers.InJ.C.Richards&D.Nunan(Eds.),Second language teacher education(pp.227-240).Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Richards,J.C.,&Ho,B.(1998).Reflectivethinkingthroughjournalwriting.InJ.C.Richards(Ed.),Beyond training(pp.153-179).Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Richards,J.C.,&Lockhart,C.(1996).Reflective teaching in second language classrooms.Cambridge,UK:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Schon,D.(1983).The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action.NewYork,BasicBooks.
Schulz,R.,&Mandzuk,D.(2005).Learningtoteach,learningtoinquire:A3-yearstudyofteachercandidates’experiences.Teaching and Teacher Education, 21(3),315-331.
Todd,R.W.,Mills,N.,Palard,C.,&Khamcharoen,P.(2001).Givingfeedbackonjournals.ELT Journal, 55(4),354-359.
Tsang,W.K.,&Wong,M.(1996).Journallingasareflective toolforpreservice teachertrainees.The Journal of Teaching Practice, 15(1),24-39.
VanManen,J.(1977).Linkingwaysofknowingwithwaysofbeingpractical.Curriculum Inquiry, 6,205-208.
Vickers,C.,&Morgan,S.(2003).Learnerdiaries.Modern English Teacher, 12(4),29-34.Woodfield,H.,&Lazarus,E.(1998).Diaries:AreflectivetoolonanINSETlanguagecourse.
ELT Journal, 52(4),315-322.Yost,D.S.,Sentner,S.M.,&Forlenza-Bailey,A.(2000).Anexaminationoftheconstructof
criticalreflection:Implicationsforteachereducationprogramminginthe21stcentury.Journal of Teacher Education, 51(1),3-49.
Icy Lee
139
Appendix
Response Journals Thepurposeofresponsejournalsistoprovideopportunitiesforyoutoreflectonyourlearningexperiences,toexpressopinions,toclarifyideas,andtopersonalizelearning.Youaretowriteresponsejournals,onaweeklybasis,toreflect criticallyonsalientissuesraisedinclass. Tohelpyouunderstandwhat‘criticalreflection’means,itisa3-wayprocessfocusingon:
1.Theeventitself—e.g.,ateaching/learningepisode,alesson.
2. Recollection of the event —a factual account of what actually hap-pened.
3.Reviewandresponsetotheevent—reviewandquestiontheeventwithaviewtoprocessingitatadeeperlevel.
Ilookforwardtoreadingyourresponsejournals.