Reflection is considered an essential component of professional practice and growth of future teachers (Zeichner & Liston, 1987, 1996). It is assumed that successful reflection increases TCs' awareness of modifications that may enhance their teaching (Whipp, 2003). This study offers a unique way to emphasize the reflection component within physical education teacher education programs by examining TCs' reflection abilities using digital video editing.
Purpose
This study compared the effects of two types of reflection - video editing and written - on TCs' reflectivity levels
Methods
Ten TCs enrolled in a pedagogy course volunteered to participate in this study. TCs were randomly assigned throughout the course into two reflection conditions: a) written reflection (WR), and b) editing reflection (ER). A semi-structured reflection protocol guided the WR and the ER. The main difference between the two conditions was that TCs assigned to the ER protocol were asked to digitally edit certain video vignettes of their teaching prior to responding to the guided reflection questions. Using an alternating treatment design, some days TCs were asked to follow the WR protocol where in other days they were asked to follow the ER protocol. A total of fifty reflections (WR and ER) were collected and qualitatively analyzed using a reflection rubric developed by Ward and McCotter (2004). Each researcher read and analyzed each reflection essay based on the three categories including: a) focus of concerns regarding the practice, b) process of inquiry, and c) change of practice and perspective. Then researchers labeled the reflection as one of the following: a) routine; self disengaged from change b) technical; instrumental response to specific situation without changing perspective c) dialogic; includes consideration for other perspectives, or d) transformative; demonstrating fundamental questions and change (Ward & McCotter, 2004). Interobserver agreement between researchers was established at the level of 85%.
Analysis/Results
Results from this study suggested that the ER protocol fostered a higher level of TC reflectivity than the WR. Following the ER protocol, TCs seemed to reflect on higher fundamental questions which lead into a thought of change whereas the reflection following the WR protocol dealt with instrumental responses to specific situation with limited perspective on how their teaching practice should change to better student learning outcomes.
Conclusions
Findings from this study emphasis the advantage on the ER protocol over the WR on TCs' reflectivity levels. Future research will have to examine the effects of different types of ER on TCs' reflectivity levels.