Reflection In Teacher Education

The teaching profession naturally is context-based and full of uncertainty (Edward, et al, 2002; Murray, 1996) that a teacher has to entertain in a flexible and open-mind manner. That is why Larrivee (2006), Daloglu (2001) and Darling-Hamond (2006) claimed that it is almost impossible to manage all ‘learning engagements to teach’ at the time of training in the teacher education. Reflection, particularly critical reflection, helps learners to realize being experienced, innovator, participant observers, continuous experimenters, adapters, action researchers, problem solvers, clinical inquirers, self-evaluator, political craftsmen, etc. in such a way that it ensures continuous professionalism in teaching (Tom, 1985; Zeichner, 1983), which is useful

Race (2002) also added reflection is not helping only when the learning process is failing; it is equally useful to pressurize student teachers learning towards further distances and insights. Korthagen (2002) and Estrada & Grady (2001) also noted that reflection is valuable to solve problems in a rational manner in order to make both the practical and theoretical knowledge complementary to each other. Generally, reflection is an important and transferable skill to enhance student teachers’ lifelong learning in moving back and forth between the theoretical experiences obtained in the classroom and actual work area practices (Dewey, 1938; Luttenberg & Bergen,

descriptive, dialogic and close-ended) is relatively less intensive in coping with the larger values and norms of the society. However, it involves in a discourse for exploring the decisions and judgments made and the possible reasons too (Luttenberg & Bergen, 2008; Hatton & Smith, 1995). Higher order reflection (productive, critical, and open-ended), on the other hand, entertains reflection for the broader and deeper historic, cultural, and political values in framing practical problems and to arrive at a solution (Hatton & Smith, 1995; Hellen, 2011). According to Whitton, et al (2004), reflection can be practiced in three phases that comprises direct experience, analysis of our conceptualizations of the experience, and consideration of the options which should lead to action as a result of the analysis. Yot, et al (2000), on their side, proposed the level of reflection into three: technocratic, interpretive and critical