schon reflective model essay

Calculators
Swot Analysis
Pestle Analysis
Five Forces Analysis
Organizational Structure
Copywriting
Research Topics
Student Resources

Services We Provide

Resources We Provide

Login / Register

Master the Art of Reflection with Schön's Reflective Model
Exploring Different Types of Reflection Models with Examples

Schon reflective model was given by Donald Schon in 1991 to provide a base for reflection. The model provides an additional element in reflection by differentiating reflection during and after the occurrence of an event. The use of this model helps in the quality enhancement work of practitioners by considering individual actions at the time of occurrence of an event and considering actions that could have been implemented to effectively deal with a particular situation. This model is different from all other reflection models as the use of this model is not a multi-stage or circular model, rather it is a type of reflection model that involves reflection during and after an event.

Stages of Schon reflective model
Example of Schon reflective model

This model of reflection mainly focuses on three concepts which include knowing in action, reflection in action, and reflection on action. Knowledge in action is less commonly used in this reflective model as it relates to the intuitive ability of an individual to perform certain tasks. For instance, knowledge in the action phase of a health practitioner may include visiting patients. Indeed, the two other commonly cited concepts are a reflection in and on the action which are mostly used during and after an event (Hébert, 2015). Reflection in action helps practitioners to become more responsive while dealing with some complicated situations and reflection on action allows an individual to spend more time considering the complexity of a situation and practices that could have been adopted to effectively deal with a situation.

Students often confuses Schön's model with johns model of reflection cycle but the major difference between the both is that Schön's model majorly focuses on action and learning from experiences, while Johns model encourages a broader range of reflection while giving suitable question from various aspects.

Considering the use of Schon reflective model, this model is mainly used in nursing care as this model helps practitioners properly plan immediate responses to some situations and to learn from such experiences. The use of this model of reflection also helps to promote the continuous professional development (CPD) of nursing professionals by considering implicit knowledge. Schon reflective model also helps to nurture professional knowledge via reflection to further enhance the quality of care.

Three stages of Schon reflective model

Now, you must be thinking about how we can apply this model of reflection. Schon reflective model can be applied by following three steps which are discussed as follows:

Stage 1: Knowledge in action

The first step involved in this model is thinking about knowledge in action where a nurse can consider actions that are implemented in day-to-day operations beforehand. This can help to boost the confidence and strength of nursing staff. In this section, you will highlight what you already know and why that information is important. Some of the questions that can help you in answering this section of the reflection are

What do you already know about the situation? In this section, you will highlight the knowledge and skills that you already have and you think will help you deal with the situation more efficiently.
How is that information helpful? In this, you will focus on emphasizing the reason you believe that the information you have will help you in dealing with the situation in a certain manner.

Stage 2: Reflection IN action

The second stage includes reflection in action where nursing staff can reflect on actions that can be undertaken to deal with this situation. This includes reflection during the doing stage where nurses reflect on their practice while the incident is occurring. Some assisting questions for the same are

What is happening? In this, you will highlight the current happening when you are in the situation and taking actions.
What are you feeling? While answering this, you will shed light on the feelings you were experiencing at the time of the incident you are reflecting upon.
What other factors are involved? Here you will highlight the involvement of other factors which can be people or other situations that contributed to the occurrence of the event.

Stage 3: Reflection ON action

The last stage of schon's reflective model is ‘reflection on action’ where practitioners can provide complete detail on the event after the event has happened. Questions that can help you in answering this section are listed below.

What happened? Once the situation has occurred, now you will sum up the whole incident and explain to the readers the whole context of the situation.
Why did it happen? Here you will highlight the reasons you think contributed to the occurrence of the event.
How can we deal with this situation in the future? Here you will highlight the action you will take in order to ensure that you deal with similar situations more efficiently in the future.

After critically understanding the model, for a better comprehension of the model, let’s take an example of the implementation of the model.

Example of reflection in nursing using Schon's model

Case assessment: schon's reflective model example is of the nurse working in Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge. This example of reflection will focus on her experience while working in the child placement unit with a patient suffering from heavy bleeding due to a cut on her knee.

Whilst placed in a child placement unit, I considered practices we follow in day-to-day operations. Considering this, I found that welcoming a patient into a treatment room is an important practice. This is important because making patients feel welcomed will help in diagnosing them and making them comfortable so that they can talk openly. So, I decided that I will teach my patients calmly and will try my best to make them feel welcome.

A child aged 5 years entered a clinic with a cut on a knee. He began to cry and was reluctant to have an examination. Upon discussion with her mother, I got to know that a cut occurred from a sharp object. I also saw that his knee was bleeding heavily. During our first aid training, we were told that adding direct pressure to the wound would assist in stopping the bleeding. First-aid training can enhance both the expected and actual utilization of first-aid skills as well as perceived competence in implementing those skills (Kano, 2005). Hence, I placed direct pressure on the child's knee for 10 minutes. The bleeding was not stopping and he started to cry much louder. This resulted in a delay and after that, I thought that sutures were needed to treat the cut and stop the bleeding. Hence, I used my knowledge and used the liquid bandage to seal the wound. During this whole scenario, I was feeling nervous and anxious because I was not able to control the child properly. In fact, my senior had to intervene and handle the situation himself, which made me feel a little disappointed. At that point of time, I just wanted to sit down and take deep breaths because I only wanted to calm myself down at that particular moment.

When I realized that the bleeding was not stopping from his knee, I thought that sutures will assist in stopping it but my senior doctor guided me that stitching the cut can be painful and can also cause serious problems. I knew that immediate action could have been implemented by properly examining the wound, cleaning the wound, and placing a liquid skin bandage on his knee. Thus, I immediately used a liquid skin bandage to stop the bleeding and seal the wound. I realized that the main reason behind the delay was that I had issues comforting the child due to a lack of experience in dealing with children. However, my senior doctor comforted the patient by giving some toys to the child and engaging him in play while I examined the wound. Further, I also found that there was a high risk of infection and I can also prescribe antibiotics to him to prevent the risk of infection. In the near future, I have assured myself that I will now learn how to handle kids and be more comfortable around them. This will help me handle my patients of younger age more efficiently in the future.

Can Schön's reflection model be used in fields other than nursing?

Yes, Schön's reflection model can be applied outside of nursing. It is useful across a wide range of professional disciplines, including education, business, engineering, and social work, where practitioners can use the model to reflect on their actions during and after events in order to improve their problem-solving and decision-making skills.

What distinguishes reflection-on-action from reflection-in-action?

After a circumstance or event, people reflect on what happened, why it happened, and what they learnt as a result. This process is known as reflection-on-action. It entails a more deliberate and thoughtful analysis of prior acts to gather knowledge and enhance performance in the future.

On the other hand, reflection-in-action takes place as an event or situation really unfolds. In this type of reflection, people respond quickly, modifying and adapting their behaviours as the situation develops. It entails being adaptable, using critical reasoning, and solving problems as they arise so that practitioners may make judgements and modifications right away using their knowledge and skills. Reflection-in-action assists practitioners in improving their capacity to manage challenging and unpredictable circumstances.

How can I get around the limitations of applying the Schön reflective model?

Learn about the Schön reflective model's principles, and embrace emotional reflection if you want to overcome its difficulties. To create a more organised method of reflection that includes the steps of description, feelings, evaluation, analysis, conclusion, and action planning, you can combine the Gibbs Reflective Cycle with Schön's model. This combination makes it possible to thoroughly explore experiences both during and after an event, which accelerates the process of learning and development.

Previous Model

Hébert, C. (2015). Knowing and/or experiencing: a critical examination of the reflective models of John Dewey and Donald Schön. Reflective Practice, 16(3), 361-371. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2015.1023281

Kano, M. (2005) First-aid training and capabilities of the lay public: A potential alternative source of emergency medical assistance following a natural disaster, Disasters. U.S. National Library of Medicine. Available at: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15720381/ (Accessed: December 2, 2022).

Schön’s Model of Reflection

This article is part of a series of articles covering reflective practice and will look at who Donald Schön was and the ideas about practitioner self-reflection that he developed.

It will also look at the advantages and disadvantages of his work, as well as some alternatives. Finally, we will present some examples of Schön’s ideas in practice.

Table of Contents

About Donald Schön

Donald Schön was born in Boston, Massachusetts on September 19th, 1930. He graduated from Yale University in 1951 and went on to complete both Masters and Doctoral studies in Philosophy at Harvard University. He also studied music at the Sorbonne in Paris.

In 1953, he began lecturing at UCLA. After time in the army, Schön joined the Institute for Applied Technology in the National Bureau of Standards as a director. He subsequently moved to a similar position at the Organization for Social and Technological Innovation (OSTI). In 1963, he published his book Displacement of Concepts, followed by Technology and Change: The New Heraclitus in 1967. He is perhaps most well-known for his work in The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action, which we will be looking at below.

Schön joined MIT in 1968 as a result of his published works and was appointed Ford Professor of Urban Studies and Education in 1972. He enjoyed playing jazz and chamber music and this helped him formulate his theory of improvisation or ‘thinking on one’s feet’. Schön believed that people should be able to incorporate their life experiences into their work.

Schön’s Theories About Reflection

Schön’s made the distinctions between knowing-in-action, reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action.

Knowing-in-action

Knowing-in-action is a practitioner’s ability to carry out a task without much thought. This can perhaps be thought of as automatic or habitual actions. For example, a nurse will wash their hands many times throughout the day and follow the correct hand-washing technique every time without much cognitive effort.

Reflection-on-action

If you are familiar with other models of reflection , you will know that reflective practice is often described as a deliberate process to be performed following an event or situation to extract meaning and learn from the experience. This is what Schön means by reflection-on-action .

Reflection-in-action

Reflection-in-action is a type of self-reflection that occurs during practice. Whilst carrying out tasks the practitioner will be accessing their bank of knowledge to aid their decision-making. This can include both theoretical knowledge and insights that may have been obtained during reflection-on-action sessions. It can also include, specific knowledge about the particular situation, such as the needs and preferences of the patient or client. It is often referred to as ‘thinking on one’s feet’ and brings together all the information available to a practitioner at the time to make a decision about the best course of action.

Double-loop Learning

Another concept developed by Schön (alongside Argyle) is that of double-loop learning .

They argue that many businesspeople learn in what is a single-loop process. When they encounter a problem, they use their knowledge and experience to find a solution within the governing variables of the situation. Governing variables can be thought of as assumptions about the situation.

In contrast, double-loop learning involves questioning or challenging the underpinning governing variables, with the aim of achieving a better outcome than would be attained by working within the existing restrictions. A phrase that is congruent with this idea is ‘ thinking outside the box ‘.

Examples of each of these ideas can be found below.

Advantages & Disadvantages of Schön’s theories

Here, we will be exploring the pros and cons of Schön’s work.

The advantages of Schön’s ideas include:

Reflective practice is no longer just a retrospective process but can be performed whilst on-the-job
Reflective practice can be performed at a much deeper level as we learn to question our assumptions and prejudices
Can be used to explain why experienced practitioners often know what to do without understanding why they know what to do (intuition)
Can benefit practitioners with limited time that may not always be able to reflect following a situation

However, there are also some disadvantages associated with using the Schön reflective model.

If overused, deliberate reflection-in-action may immobilise us or take our focus away from the task in hand
It is not a self-contained model in itself – these ideas should be used in conjunction with other models that describe the process of reflection
Double-loop learning requires more time and effort than single-loop learning, which may not be practical for practitioners with busy schedules

Alternatives to Schön’s model

As discussed above, Schön’s work is not a model of reflection in itself but can enrich the process of reflection using existing models. Models that may be combined with or used as alternatives to Schön’s work are discussed below.

Kolb’s Model of Reflection

Kolb’s model of reflection is one of the earliest theories about experiential learning and, because of its simple 4-step cycle, it can be easy for beginners to grasp the concepts of the reflective practice.

Gibbs’ Model of Reflection

Gibbs’ model builds upon the work of Kolb and although there are more steps to the process, it is still a great introduction to the reflective practice cycle.

Atkins & Murphy’s Model of Reflection

Based on a literature review of pre-existing models, Atkins and Murphy’s framework for critical reflection provides a more detailed examination of the reflective practice cycle.

Johns’ Model of Reflection

Similarly, Johns’ model aims to bring a deeper level of understanding to the reflective practice process by using a questioning model that helps practitioners to challenge their underlying assumptions, including their values and beliefs.

An Example of Schön’s Reflective Practice

The following example illustrates how Schön’s ideas about reflection work in practice. This example comes from the field of early years education .

An early years practitioner has planned a physical activity for the 4-year-olds that he is responsible for. The activity is an obstacle course for the children to complete. The practitioner is aware that there is a child that uses a wheelchair in the group that will not be able to complete the course because of their restricted mobility and so (to ensure that they are included) he plans for this child to blow the whistle for the other children to start.

The practitioner begins the session by sitting the children down and explaining to them what they will be doing. This is something that the practitioner always does when initiating an adult-led activity and so could be thought of as knowing-in-action .

The practitioner then explains to the child in the wheelchair that they are going to be his helper and gives them a whistle. Unexpectedly, the child throws the whistle on the floor and yells that they want to do the same as the other children. Because the practitioner knows that it will not be physically possible for the child to traverse some of the obstacles, the practitioner decides to add and remove some of the obstacles so that the child is able to participate. This is an example of reflection-in-action .

That evening the practitioner takes the time to consciously reflect upon the day’s events. He realises that he had planned the activity without taking into account the needs of the child in the wheelchair and the responsibility he had given the child had been more of an afterthought. He thinks about how the child must have felt to not be involved in the same capacity as the other children and feels disappointed and guilty about his error. He concludes that in future, he should always ensure that the needs and preferences of all children are considered during the activity planning process. This is an example of reflection-on-action .

The process of reflection resulted in the practitioner challenging their pre-existing ideas about equality and inclusion. Despite having a lot of theoretical knowledge in this area, the practitioner realises that he has underlying prejudices in this area that have now been brought to the surface. He recognises that his thoughts regarding inclusion are that all children are able to participate in some capacity. But this is not always appropriate – a better principle is that all children should be given the opportunity to participate in the same way as their peers. These insights fundamentally alter the practitioner’s ideas about inclusive practice going forward, thereby improving their future practice. This is an example of double-loop learning .

Schon, Donald, The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books. 1983
Argyris, C. & Schon, D. (1978 ). Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective . Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

education, community-building and change

Donald Schon (Schön): learning, reflection and change

Donald schon (schön): learning, reflection and change. donald schon made a remarkable contribution to our understanding of the theory and practice of learning. his innovative thinking around notions such as ‘the learning society’, ‘double-loop learning’ and ‘reflection-in-action’ has become part of the language of education. we explore his work and some of the key themes that emerge. what assessment can we make now.

Contents : introduction · donald schon · public and private learning and the learning society · double-loop learning · the reflective practitioner – reflection-in- and –on-action · conclusion · further reading and references · links · how to cite this article

Note: I have used Donald Schon rather than Donald Schön (which is the correct spelling) as English language web search engines (and those using them!) often have difficulties with umlauts ).

Donald Alan Schon (1930-1997) trained as a philosopher, but it was his concern with the development of reflective practice and learning systems within organizations and communities for which he is remembered. Significantly, he was also an accomplished pianist and clarinettist – playing in both jazz and chamber groups. This interest in improvisation and structure was mirrored in his academic writing, most notably in his exploration of professional’s ability to ‘think on their feet’. On this page we review his achievements and focus on three elements of his thinking: learning systems (and learning societies and institutions); double-loop and organizational learning (arising out of his collaboration with Chris Argyris ); and the relationship of reflection-in-action to professional activity.

Donald Schon

Donald Schon was born in Boston in 1930 and raised in Brookline and Worcester. He graduated from Yale in 1951 (Phi Beta Kappa), where he studied philosophy. He was also a student at the Sorbonne, Paris and Conservatoire Nationale de Music, where he studied clarinet and was awarded the Premier Prix. After graduating, he received the Woodrow Wilson Fellowship and continued at Harvard, where he earned master’s and doctoral degrees in philosophy. The focus for his doctoral dissertation (1955) was John Dewey’s theory of inquiry – and this provided him with the pragmatist framework that runs through his later work. In 1953 he began to teach Philosophy at the University of California, Los Angeles. This was followed by two years of service in the U.S. Army. Concurrently, he lectured at University of Kansas City as an Assistant Professor of Philosophy.

Working from 1957-63 as senior staff member in the industrial research firm Arthur D. Little, Inc., Donald Schon formed the New Product Group in the Research and Development Division. Under the Kennedy administration, he was appointed director of the Institute for Applied Technology in the National Bureau of Standards at the US Department of Commerce (he continued there until 1966). He then co-founded and directed OSTI (Organization for Social and Technological Innovation), a non-profit social research and development firm in the Boston area (he left the directorship in 1973).

His first book, Displacement of Concepts (1963) (republished in 1967 as Invention and the Evolution of Ideas ) dealt with ‘the ways in which categories are used to examine “things” but are not themselves examined as ways of thinking’ (Parlett 1991, quoted in Pakman 2000). Pakman (2000:3) goes on to comment:

The interest in metaphor expressed in that book, would grow years later toward his elaborations on “generative metaphor,” and its role in allowing us to see things anew. Thus, he was already showing some of what would be epistemological enduring interests for his inquiry, namely: learning and its cognitive tools, and the role of reflection (or lack of it) in learning processes in general, and conceptual and perceptual change in particular.

Donald Schon’s next book Technology and Change, The new Heraclitus (1967) developed out of his experience as an organizational consultant and received considerable critical acclaim. He was invited to give the 1970 Reith Lectures in London . His focus, ‘Change and industrial society’, became the basis for his path-breaking book: Beyond the Stable State . Schon’s central argument was that ‘change’ was a fundamental feature of modern life and that it is necessary to develop social systems that could learn and adapt. Both books show the influence of the work of his great friend and colleague, Raymond Hainer. (Donald Schon had been able to work through his ideas with Hainer, and to draw upon, for example, his exploration of pragmatism, rationalism and existentialism [Hainer 1968]).

It was the last of these areas that then provided the focus for the deeply influential series of books around the processes and development of reflective practitioners (1983; 1987; 1991). He sought to offer an approach to an epistemology of practice based on a close examination of what a (small) number of different practitioners actually do. The heart of this study was, he wrote, ‘an analysis of the distinctive structure of reflection-in-action’ (1983: ix). He argued that it was ‘susceptible to a kind of rigor that is both like and unlike the rigor of scholarly work and controlled experimentation’ ( op. cit. ). His work was quickly, and enthusiastically, taken up by a large number of people involved in the professional development of educators, and a number of other professional groupings.

His last major new literary project arose out of a long-term collaboration, dating back to the early 1970s, with Martin Rein (a colleague at MIT). Frame Reflection (Schon and Rein 1994) is concerned with the ways in which intractable policy controversies can be reconciled. During his later years Donald Schon also developed an interest in software design and, in particular, the role of computers in designing, and the uses of design games to expand designing capabilities.

Donald Schon died September 13, 1997 at Brigham and Women’s Hospital after a seven-month illness.

Public and private learning, and the learning society

While it is Donald Schon’s work on organizational learning and reflective practice that tends to receive the most attention in the literature, his exploration of the nature of learning systems and the significance of learning in changing societies has helped to define debates around the so called ‘ learning society ’. Indeed, Stewart Ranson (1998: 2) describes Donald Schon as ‘the great theorist of the learning society’. He was part of the first wave of thinkers around the notion (other key contributors include Robert M. Hutchins 1970; Amitai Etzioni 1968; and Torsten Husen 1974). Hutchins, in a book first published in 1968, had argued that a ‘learning society’ had become necessary. ‘The two essential facts are… the increasing proportion of free time and the rapidity of change. The latter requires continuous education; the former makes it possible (1970: 130). He looked to ancient Athens for a model. There:

education was not a segregated activity, conducted for certain hours, in certain places, at a certain time of life. It was the aim of the society. The city educated the man. The Athenian was educated by culture, by paideia . (Hutchins 1970: 133)

Slavery made this possible – releasing citizens to participate in the life of the city. Hutchins’ argument is that ‘machines can do for modern man what slavery did for the fortunate few in Athens’ ( op. cit. )

Donald Schon (1973, first published 1971) takes as his starting point the loss of the stable state. Belief in the stable state, he suggests, is belief in ‘the unchangeability, the constancy of central aspects of our lives, or belief that we can attain such a constancy’ (Schon 1973: 9). Such a belief is strong and deep, and provides a bulwark against uncertainty. Institutions are characterized by ‘dynamic conservatism’ – ‘a tendency to fight to remain the same’ ( ibid. : 30). However, with technical change continuing exponentially its pervasiveness and frequency was ‘uniquely threatening to the stable state’ ( ibid. : 26). He then proceeds to build the case for a concern with learning (see inset).

Exhibit 1: Donald Schon on learning and the loss of the stable state

The loss of the stable state means that our society and all of its institutions are in continuous processes of transformation. We cannot expect new stable states that will endure for our own lifetimes.

We must learn to understand, guide, influence and manage these transformations. We must make the capacity for undertaking them integral to ourselves and to our institutions.

We must, in other words, become adept at learning. We must become able not only to transform our institutions, in response to changing situations and requirements; we must invent and develop institutions which are ‘learning systems’, that is to say, systems capable of bringing about their own continuing transformation.

The task which the loss of the stable state makes imperative, for the person, for our institutions, for our society as a whole, is to learn about learning.

What is the nature of the process by which organizations, institutions and societies transform themselves? What are the characteristics of effective learning systems? What are the forms and limits of knowledge that can operate within processes of social learning? What demands are made on a person who engages in this kind of learning? (Schon 1973: 28-9)

Donald Schon argues that social systems must learn to become capable of transforming themselves without intolerable disruption. In this ‘dynamic conservatism’ has an important place.

A learning system… must be one in which dynamic conservatism operates at such a level and in such a way as to permit change of state without intolerable threat to the essential functions the system fulfils for the self. Our systems need to maintain their identity, and their ability to support the self-identity of those who belong to them, but they must at the same time be capable of transforming themselves. (Schon 1973: 57)

Schon’s great innovation at this point was to explore the extent to which companies, social movements and governments were learning systems – and how those systems could be enhanced. He suggests that the movement toward learning systems is, of necessity, ‘a groping and inductive process for which there is no adequate theoretical basis’ ( op. cit ). The business firm, Donald Schon argues, is a striking example of a learning system. He charts how firms moved from being organized around products toward integration around ‘business systems’ ( ibid. : 64). In an argument that has found many echoes in the literature of the ‘ learning organization ’ some twenty years later, Donald Schon makes the case that many companies no longer have a stable base in the technologies of particular products or the systems build around them. A firm is:

… an internal learning system in which the system’s interactions… must now become a matter of directed transformation of the whole system. These directed transformations are in part the justification for the business systems firm. But they oblige it to internalise processes of information flow and sequential innovation which have traditionally been left to the ‘market’ and to the chain reactions within and across industry lines – reactions in which each firm had only to worry about its own response as one component. The business firm, representing the whole functional system, must now learn to effect the transformation and diffusion of the system as a whole. (Schon 1973: 75)

In many respects, we could not ask for a better rationale for Peter Senge’s later championship of the Fifth Discipline (systemic thinking) in the generation of learning organizations.

Two key themes arise out of Donald Schon’s discussion of learning systems: the emergence of functional systems as the units around which institutions define themselves; and the decline of centre-periphery models of institutional activity ( ibid .: 168). He contrasts classical models of diffusing innovation with a learning system model.

In this we can see the significance of networks, flexibility, feedback and organizational transformation. At the same time we have to recognize that the ‘ways of knowing’ offered by the dominant rational/experimental model are severely limited in situations of social change. Donald Schon looks to a more ‘existentially’-oriented approach. He argues for formulating projective models that can be carried forward into further instances (a key aspect of his later work on reflective practice).

Moreover, learning isn’t simply something that is individual. Learning can also be social:

A social system learns whenever it acquires new capacity for behaviour, and learning may take the form of undirected interaction between systems… [G]overnment as a learning system carries with it the idea of public learning, a special way of acquiring new capacity for behaviour in which government learns for the society as a whole. In public learning, government undertakes a continuing, directed inquiry into the nature, causes and resolution of our problems.

The need for public learning carries with it the need for a second kind of learning. If government is to learn to solve new public problems, it must also learn to create the systems for doing so and discard the structure and mechanisms grown up around old problems. (Schon 1973: 109)

The opportunity for learning, Donald Schon suggests, is primarily in discovered systems at the periphery, ‘not in the nexus of official policies at the centre’ ( ibid .: 165). He continues, ‘the movement of learning is as much from periphery to periphery, or from periphery to centre, as from centre to periphery’. Very much after Carl Rogers , Donald Schon asserts that, ‘Central comes to function as facilitator of society’s learning, rather than as society’s trainer’ ( ibid .: 166).

Taken together, the themes that emerged in Beyond the Stable State provided a rich and highly suggestive basis for theorizing about both ‘ the learning society ’ and ‘ the learning organization ’. Yet for all his talk of networks and the significance of the ‘periphery, Donald Schon’s analysis falters when it comes to the wider picture.

While his critical analysis of systems theory substitutes responsive networks for traditional hierarchies, his theory of governance remains locked in top-down paternalism. Only an understanding of the role of democratic politics can provide answers to the purposes and conditions for the learning society he desires. The way societies learn about themselves, and the processes by which they transform themselves, is through politics, and the essence of politics is learning through public deliberation, which is the characteristic of effective learning systems. (Ranson (1998: 9)

Donald Schon’s later work with Martin Rein around frame reflection does attend to some matters of public deliberation – but the broad line of argument made by Stuart Ranson here would seem to stand. It was the contribution of two of Schon’s contemporaries – Ivan Illich and Paulo Freire – that takes us forward. The formers focus on learning webs, the debilitating impact of professionalization, and the need for an ecological appreciation; and the latter’s championship of dialogue and concern to combat oppression allow for a more committed and informed engagement with the ‘learning society’ and ‘learning organization’.

Double-loop learning and theories in use

Donald Schon’s work on learning systems fed nicely into a very significant collaboration with Chris Argyris around professional effectiveness and organizational learning. Their (1974) starting point was that people have mental maps with regard to how to act in situations. This involves the way they plan, implement and review their actions. Furthermore, they asserted that it is these maps that guide people’s actions rather than the theories they explicitly espouse. One way of making sense of this is to say that there is split between theory and action. Chris Argyris and Donald Schon suggested that two theories of action are involved. They are those theories that are implicit in what we do as practitioners and managers, and those on which we call to speak of our actions to others. The former can be described as theories-in-use . The words we use to convey what we, do or what we would like others to think we do, can then be called espoused theory . This was an important distinction and is very helpful when exploring questions around professional and organizational practice (see Chris Argyris and theories of action for a full treatment of this area).

To fully appreciate theory-in-use we require a model of the processes involved. To this end Argyris and Schon (1974) initially looked to three elements:

Governing variables: those dimensions that people are trying to keep within acceptable limits. Any action is likely to impact upon a number of such variables – thus any situation can trigger a trade-off among governing variables. Action strategies: the moves and plans used by people to keep their governing values within the acceptable range. Consequences: what happens as a result of an action. These can be both intended – those actor believe will result – and unintended. In addition those consequences can be for the self, and/or for others. (Anderson 1997)

For Argyris and Schön (1978: 2) learning involves the detection and correction of error. Where something goes wrong, they suggested, a starting point for many people is to look for another strategy that will address and work within the governing variables. In other words, given or chosen goals, values, plans and rules are operationalized rather than questioned. According to Argyris and Schön (1974), this is single-loop learning . An alternative response is to question to governing variables themselves, to subject them to critical scrutiny. This they describe as double-loop learning . Such learning may then lead to an alteration in the governing variables and, thus, a shift in the way in which strategies and consequences are framed. (See Chris Argyris and double-loop learning ).

When they came to explore the nature of organizational learning Chris Argyris and Donald Schon (1978: 2-3) described the process as follows:

When the error detected and corrected permits the organization to carry on its present policies or achieve its presents objectives, then that error-and-correction process is single-loop learning. Single-loop learning is like a thermostat that learns when it is too hot of too cold and turns the heat on or off. The thermostat can perform this task because it can receive information (the temperature of the room) and take corrective action. Double-loop learning occurs when error is detected and corrected in ways that involve the modification of an organization’s underlying norms, policies and objectives.

Single-loop learning seems to be present when goals, values, frameworks and, to a significant extent, strategies are taken for granted. The emphasis is on ‘techniques and making techniques more efficient’ (Usher and Bryant: 1989: 87) Any reflection is directed toward making the strategy more effective. Double-loop learning, in contrast, ‘involves questioning the role of the framing and learning systems which underlie actual goals and strategies’ ( op. cit.) .

Finger and Asún (2000) argue that this constitutes a two-fold contribution to pragmatic learning theory. First, their introduction of the notion of ‘theory in action’ gives greater coherence and structure to the function of ‘abstract conceptualization’ in Kolb’s very influential presentation of experiential learning . ‘Abstract conceptualisation now becomes something one can analyse and work from’ (Finger and Asún 2000: 45). Second, they give a new twist to pragmatic learning theory:

Unlike Dewey’s, Lewin’s or Kolb’s learning cycle, where one had, so to speak, to make a mistake and reflect upon it… it is now possible… to learn by simply reflecting critically upon the theory-in-action. In other words, it is not longer necessary to go through the entire learning circle in order to develop the theory further. It is sufficient to readjust the theory through double-loop learning ( ibid .: 45-6)

To be fair to John Dewey , he did not believe it was necessary to go through a series of set stages in order to learn (although he is often represented as doing so). However, Finger and Asún’s main point stands. The notion of double-loop learning adds considerably to our appreciation of experiential learning.

The reflective practitioner – reflection-in- and –on-action

Donald Schon’s third great contribution was to bring ‘reflection’ into the centre of an understanding of what professionals do. The opening salvo of The Reflective Practitioner (1983) is directed against ‘technical-rationality’ as the grounding of professional knowledge. Usher et. al. (1997: 143) sum up well the crisis he identifies. Technical-rationality is a positivist epistemology of practice. It is ‘the dominant paradigm which has failed to resolve the dilemma of rigour versus relevance confronting professionals’. Donald Schon, they claim, looks to an alternative epistemology of practice ‘in which the knowledge inherent in practice is be understood as artful doing’ ( op. cit. ). Here we can make a direct link between Donald Schon and Elliot Eisner’s (1985; 1998) interest in practitioners as connoisseurs and critics (see Eisner on evaluation ).

The notions of reflection-in-action, and reflection-on-action were central to Donald Schon’s efforts in this area. The former is sometimes described as ‘thinking on our feet’. It involves looking to our experiences, connecting with our feelings, and attending to our theories in use. It entails building new understandings to inform our actions in the situation that is unfolding.

The practitioner allows himself to experience surprise, puzzlement, or confusion in a situation which he finds uncertain or unique. He reflects on the phenomenon before him, and on the prior understandings which have been implicit in his behaviour. He carries out an experiment which serves to generate both a new understanding of the phenomenon and a change in the situation. (Schön 1983: 68)

We test out our ‘theories’ or, as John Dewey might have put it, ‘leading ideas’ and this allows to develop further responses and moves. Significantly, to do this we do not closely follow established ideas and techniques – textbook schemes. We have to think things through, for every case is unique. However, we can draw on what has gone before. In many respects, Donald Schon is using a distinction here that would have been familiar to Aristotle – between the technical (productive) and the practical.

We can link this process of thinking on our feet with reflection-on-action. This is done later – after the encounter . Workers may write up recordings, talk things through with a supervisor and so on. The act of reflecting-on-action enables us to spend time exploring why we acted as we did, what was happening in a group and so on. In so doing we develop sets of questions and ideas about our activities and practice.

The notion of repertoire is a key aspect of this approach. Practitioners build up a collection of images, ideas, examples and actions that they can draw upon. Donald Schon, like John Dewey (1933: 123), saw this as central to reflective thought.

When a practitioner makes sense of a situation he perceives to be unique, he sees it as something already present in his repertoire. To see this site as that one is not to subsume the first under a familiar category or rule. It is, rather, to see the unfamiliar, unique situation as both similar to and different from the familiar one, without at first being able to say similar or different with respect to what. The familiar situation functions as a precedent, or a metaphor, or… an exemplar for the unfamiliar one. (Schön 1983: 138)

In this way we engage with a situation. We do not have a full understanding of things before we act, but, hopefully, we can avoid major problems while ‘testing the water’. When looking at a situation we are influenced by, and use, what has gone before, what might come, our repertoire, and our frame of reference. We are able to draw upon certain routines. As we work we can bring fragments of memories into play and begin to build theories and responses that fit the new situation.

There have been three important areas of criticism with regard to this model (beyond those wanting to hang onto ‘technical rationality’). First, the distinction between reflection in and on action has been the subject of some debate (see Eraut 1994 and Usher et al 1997). Indeed Donald Schon may well have failed to clarify what is involved in the reflective process – and there is a problem, according to Eraut, around time – ‘when time is extremely short, decisions have to be rapid and the scope for reflection is extremely limited’ (1994: 145). There have also been no psychological elaborations of the psychological realities of reflection in action (Russell and Munby 1989). However, when we take reflection in and on action together it does appear that Schon has hit upon something significant. Practitioners are able to describe how they ‘think on their feet’, and how they make use of a repertoire of images, metaphors and theories. However, such processes cannot be repeated in full for everything we do. There is a clear relationship between reflection in and on action. People draw upon the processes, experiences and understandings generated through reflection on action. In turn, things can be left and returned to.

We have to take certain things as read. We have to fall back on routines in which previous thought and sentiment has been sedimented. It is here that the full importance of reflection-on-action becomes revealed. As we think and act, questions arise that cannot be answered in the present. The space afforded by recording, supervision and conversation with our peers allows us to approach these. Reflection requires space in the present and the promise of space in the future. (Smith 1994: 150)

Second, there is some question as to the extent to which his conceptualisation of reflective practice entails praxis . While there is a clear emphasis on action being informed, there is less focus on the commitments entailed. Donald Schon creates, arguably, ‘a descriptive concept, quite empty of content’ (Richardson 1990: 14). While he does look at values and interpretative systems, it is the idea of repertoire that comes to the fore. In other words what he tends to look at is the process of framing and the impact of frame-making on situations:

As [inquirers] frame the problem of the situation, they determine the features to which they will attend, the order they will attempt to impose on the situation, the directions in which they will try to change it. In this process, they identify both the ends to be sought and the means to be employed. (Schön 1983: 165)

The ability to draw upon a repertoire of metaphors and images that allow for different ways of framing a situation is clearly important to creative practice and is a crucial insight. We can easily respond in inappropriate ways in situations through the use of an ill-suited frame. However, what we also must hold in view is some sense of what might make for the good (see Smith 1994: 142-145).

Third, it could be argued that while Donald Schon is engaged here in the generation of formal theory – ‘what we do not find in Schon is a reflection by him on his own textual practice in giving some kind of account of that he does of reflection-in-action and the reflective practicum… He does not interrogate his own method’. (Usher et. Al 1997: 149). A more sustained exploration of his methodology may well have revealed some significant questions, for example, the extent to which he ‘neglects the situatedness of practitioner experience’ ( ibid. : 168). This is a dimension that we have become rather more aware of following Lave and Wenger’s (1991) exploration of situated learning . It may well be that this failure to attend to method and to problematize the production of his models and ideas has also meant that his contribution in this area has been often used in a rather unreflective way by trainers.

The impact of Donald Schon’s work on reflective practice has been significant – with many training and education programmes for teachers and informal educators adopting his core notions both in organizing experiences and in the teaching content. Indeed, there is a very real sense in which his work on reflective practice has become ‘canonical’ – frequently appealed to by trainers in a variety of professional fields (Usher et . al. 1997: 143). As such they have suffered from being approached in ways that would have troubled Donald Schon. Rather too often, practitioners are exhorted to ‘apply’ his theories and exemplars to their own situations and experiences. For him reflective practice was to be enacted. It may be that his theory of reflective practice is far less ‘critical’ than it appears to be, ‘since it is not directed to its own situated practice of doing theory’ (Usher et. al . 19977: 147). However, it remains very suggestive – and for has some very real echoes in people’s accounts of their processes as ‘professionals’.

In a similar fashion, his work with Chris Argyris still features very strongly in debates around organizational learning and the possibilities, or otherwise, of learning organizations . And while there is good deal of rhetoric around the notion of the learning society , as Stuart Ranson has convincingly argued, it is Donald Schon’s work on learning systems that still provides the most thorough theoretical treatment.

Taken together with his work on design and upon the ‘resolution of intractable policy controversies’ via ‘frame reflection’ this is a remarkable catalogue of achievements. Interestingly, though, it is difficult to find a sustained exploration of his contribution as a whole. While there are discussions of different aspects of his thinking (e.g. Newman 1999 analysis of Schon’s ‘epistemology of reflective practice’), as far as I know, his work has not been approached in its totality. This is a great pity. Going back to books like Beyond the Stable State pays great dividends.

Learning and Change in the Work of Donald Schön: Reflection on Theory and Theory on Reflection

Magnus Ramage 5
Living reference work entry
Later version available View entry history
First Online: 04 April 2017

1606 Accesses

1 Citations

2 Altmetric

Donald Schön was a deeply original thinker working on change, education, design, and learning. He is perhaps best known for his work on the reflective practitioner, in which he formulated a new epistemology of practice founded on knowing-in-action and reflection-in-action, a theory which has had considerable impact. He also made huge contributions to the field of organizational learning, working with Chris Argyris on theories in action and on single/double loop learning. Underlying all these contributions was a theory of change grounded in Dewey’s theory of inquiry and deeply concerned with how institutions and professionals deal with a world beyond the stable state. An educator as well as a theorist and practitioner, Schön was highly interested in how professionals can be taught in ways that reflect the reality in which they work rather than the traditional forms of technical rationality. This chapter examines Schön’s key contributions, the influence of philosophy and music upon his work, and the many ways his work has been used.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution .

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Google Scholar

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective . Reading: Addison-Wesley.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, method, and practice . Reading: Addison-Wesley.

Ashby, W. R. (1960). Design for a brain: The origin of adaptive behaviour (2nd ed.). London: Chapman & Hall.

Book Google Scholar

Bamberger, J. (2000). Unanswered questions. Cybernetics & Human Knowing, 7 , 9–16.

Bateson, G. (1972). Steps to an ecology of mind . Toronto: Chandler.

De Geus, A. (1997). The living company. Harvard Business Review, 75 , 51–59.

Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry . New York: Henry Holt and Company.

Fischler, R. (2012). Reflective practice. In B. Sanyal, L. J. Vale, & C. D. Rosan (Eds.), Planning ideas that matter: Livability, territoriality, governance, and reflective practice (pp. 313–332). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Forrester, J. W. (1961). Industrial dynamics . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Ison, R. (2010). Systems practice: How to act in a climate change world . London: Springer.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development . Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.

Newman, D. (1994). Defining the enemy: Adult education in social action . Sydney: Stewart Victor Publishing. Retrieved from http://www.michaelnewman.biz/pdf/defining_the_enemy-COMP.pdf

Newman, S., & van der Waarde, K. (2015). Donald A. Schön: Bibliography. Retrieved from http://www.graphicdesign-research.com/Schon/bibliography.html

Ramage, M. (1999). The learning way: Evaluating co-operative systems . Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Lancaster University.

Ramage, M., & Shipp, K. (2009). Systems thinkers . London: Springer.

Richmond, J., Sanyal, B., Rodwin, L., Fischler, R., & Verma, N. (1998). Donald Schön – A life of reflection. Journal of Planning Literature, 13 , 3–10.

Article Google Scholar

Schön, D. (1963). Displacements of Concepts. London: Tavistock Publications.

Schön, D. (1967). Technology and change: The new Heraclitus . Oxford: Pergamon.

Schön, D. (1971). Beyond the stable state: Public and private learning in a changing society . London: Temple Smith.

Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action . New York: Basic Books.

Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Schön, D. A. (1992). The theory of inquiry: Dewey’s legacy to education. Curriculum Inquiry, 22 , 119–139.

Schön, D., & Bennett, J. (1996). Reflective conversation with materials: An interview with Donald Schön by John Bennett. In T. Winograd (Ed.), Bringing design to software (pp. 171–184). Reading: Addison-Wesley.

Schön, D., & Rein, M. (1994). Frame reflection . New York: Basic Books.

Schwartz, H. S. (1987). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action (book review). Administrative Science Quarterly, 32 , 614–617.

Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization . New York: Doubleday.

Smith, M. K. (2001, 2011). Donald Schön: Learning, reflection and change. In The encyclopedia of informal education . Retrieved from www.infed.org/thinkers/et-schon.htm

Waks, L. J. (2001). Donald Schön’s philosophy of design and design education. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 11 , 37–51.

Warsh, D. (1997, December 28). The giraffe. The Boston Globe , p. F1.

Wiener, N. (1948). Cybernetics: Or control and communication in the animal and the machine . Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

School of Computing & Communications, The Open University, Walton Hall, MK7 6AA, Milton Keynes, UK

Magnus Ramage

You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Magnus Ramage .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo, Michigan, USA

David B Szabla

Columbia University , New York, New York, USA

William A. Pasmore

The George Washington University , College Park, Maryland, USA

Mary A. Barnes

Asha N. Gipson

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Ramage, M. (2017). Learning and Change in the Work of Donald Schön: Reflection on Theory and Theory on Reflection. In: Szabla, D., Pasmore, W., Barnes, M., Gipson, A. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Organizational Change Thinkers. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49820-1_57-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49820-1_57-1

Received : 24 February 2017

Accepted : 24 February 2017

Published : 04 April 2017

Publisher Name : Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-49820-1

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-49820-1

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Business and Management Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Chapter history

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49820-1_57-2

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-49820-1_57-1

Find a journal
Track your research

University Library Services

Study skills- reflective writing.

Reasons to Reflect

Models of Reflection

Writing Academic Reflections
What does Reflection Involve?
How to Reflect
Writing up Reflections
Introduction

When reflecting you may be asked to use a model of reflection to frame your thoughts.

The models vary in how many steps they include but overall you are being asked to think about what you or others did and learn from that through academic, structured research.

A great tool to use is the Edinburgh University reflection toolkit that may be useful when planning and organising you thoughts before engaging in reflection.

Explore the tabs to discover more about some commonly used reflective models.

Gibbs reflective cycle provides a detailed structure for the user to organise their thoughts.

The structure of a piece of reflective writing, whether it be an essay or learning log entry, might consist of six components or paragraphs that follow Gibb’s cycle.

Description - what happened in the event?
Feeling - how do you and others feel about the event?
Evaluation - Make sense of the themes that have come out of the steps above.
Analysis - Use literature to break down the themes. Do they relate to each other?
Conclusion - What does this mean for practice?
Action Plan - Create goals or aims that will influence practice.

As a student the Gibbs model may be useful as it breaks down your reflection into distinct sections, encouraging you to briefly describe the event and consider your feelings around it.

It also includes evaluation and analysis sections allowing you to focus on if the response was positive or negative and how you can make sense of the response. This may be through reading academic literature around the topic to result in evidenced conclusions and recommendations.

Watch the below video to gain further understanding of the stages of the Gibbs Cycle and how you may use it at university.

While the Gibbs model was designed as a way of promoting reflective thought, it may not always be the most effective way to do this.

If you get the chance to choose a model of reflection it may be useful to justify why you have chosen that model and why it is useful for your reflective practice.

Criticisms of the Gibbs model of reflection include that there are many sections and if you have a short word count it can be difficult to balance each section with enough detail. It can also be difficult to separate the analysis section from the conclusions and action plan due to them following on logically and closely from one another.

The Gibbs model does not refer to considerations such as your own biases and that influence on your objectivity when analysing experiences. This could result in an unbalanced reflection.

These criticisms are not necessarily reasons not to use the Gibbs model in your reflection but are examples of areas to be aware of when writing an academic reflection.

The Rolfe model of critical thinking focusses on three key questions.

So What?

By answering these questions you are encouraged to think about your experience in context, going into detail about why it matters and what could be learned from the experience.

Watch the short video below the diagram to explore the reflective cycle in more detail.

The Rolfe reflective cycle has mainly been used in nursing and education but has slowly been adopted in other disciplines.

A criticism of the model include that due to the lack of structure it may be easier to spend more time being descriptive rather than analytical.

It may be useful for focussing on one event, including considering any consequences as a result of the event with particular targets for improvement or development.

Schön's reflective model focuses on two different stages to promote reflection.

Reflecting in action - during the event, relating to how you choose to act at that time.
Reflecting on action - after the event, relating to your feelings on the event and what you would do differently if it happened again.

It may be a useful model to use if you are reflecting on a practical event like a teaching or nursing as you can consider how you are feeling during the event and how this has effected your actions. Your feelings after the event may differ to during it.

A criticism of this model could be that due to only using two steps it may promote a surface level reflection without literature and research being incorporated into the reflection by the student.

Discover more about Schön's model of reflection in the video below:

Kolb's (1984) experiential learning cycle is designed to help students learn from their experiences.

It can be used to help you structure your thinking and reflective writing. The cycle is designed to be worked around to complete each step in a logical order.

Concrete experience

This is experiencing something and will usually involve describing what was experienced.

Reflective observation

Linking your skills and knowledge to your experience in order to reflect upon it.

Abstract conceptualisation

Focus on learning from your experiences, the meaning of your reflection and possibilities for the future. This may result in identifying what went well and what didn't to influence future experiences and interactions.

Active experimentation

The focus of this stage is on setting goals and making action plans.

It is important that any goals for the future are SMART .

That is specific , measurable , achievable , realistic and timebound . This means having a set deadline at which the goals will be reviewed to ensure that they continue to be relevant and appropriate.

Discover more about the Kolb experiential learning cycle in the video below.

F, J. (2017) Reflection on action vs in action . Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE2p13j8L0o (Accessed: 4 August 2023).

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford: Oxford Brooks University.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Nursing Answers (2021) R olfe reflective cycle . Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2ZL0O3Fsfg (Accessed: 4 August 2023).

Preceptor Education Program (2017) M5 Kolb's experiential learning cycle . Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rp-gaV-uSIo (Accessed: 4 August 2023).

Rolfe, G., Freshwater, D. and Jasper, M. (2001) Critical reflection in nursing and the helping professions: A user's guide . Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Schön, D. A. (1991). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action . Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.

University of Edinburgh (ND) Reflection toolkit . Available at: https://www.ed.ac.uk/reflection (Accessed: 4 August 2023).

University of Hertfordshire Library (2022) Gibbs reflective cycle . Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gbczr0lRf4 (Accessed: 4 August 2023).

University of Hull (ND) Reflective writing: reflective frameworks . Available at :https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/reflectivewriting/reflection3 (Accessed: 4 August 2023).

Last Updated: Apr 11, 2024 2:45 PM
URL: https://libraryguides.sunderland.ac.uk/reflective-writing

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

3.3 Donald Schon

Schön (1983) based his work on that of Dewey and is most widely known for his theory of reflecting in and reflecting on one’s practice. His theory was grounded in reflection from a professional knowledge and learning perspective (Bolton, 2014.p.6). In simple terms this is described as reflecting as the experience is occurring or reflecting on the experience after it has occurred. Reflecting in action refers to situations such as: thinking on your feet, acting straight away, and thinking about what to do next. Reflecting on action means you are thinking about what you would do differently next time, taking time to process (Bolton, 2014.p.6).

Reflection in action is reflection as something happens and reflection on action is reflecting after something happens.

Video: Reflective Practice

Learn more about reflective practice by watching the video: 3 minute theory by Kayak Essentials [3:32] below.

Reflective Practice in Early Years Education Copyright © 2022 by Sheryl Third, RECE; ECE.C, B.A., M.A is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book

It’s not my intention to give full information or an extensive discussion on every theory. This website is intended to be a starting point and the main difference with other websites is the visual representation of the theory, which I hope will help get to grips with the theory. There are also links it the bottom to get your further research started.

Reflection in action/Reflection on action

Donald a. schön – 1983, introduction.

Schön’s work revolves around the learning process in ‘the professions’ and is a reaction to the Model of Technical Rationality, which is the reverse of the ‘Reflection in Action’ approach he proposes. It’s a model that doesn’t start from academic knowledge, but from day to day ‘tacit’ knowing in action (Schön, 1983, p.49).

Rolfe on Technical rationality versus reflective practice models reflection.

Compare it to the efficiency of learning to swim from a book and learning to swim by doing.

But, let’s return to reflective theory… this doesn’t mean that career theory (in reflective practice) needs to be completely abandoned, however. However, when we rely too much, or completely on career theory and related, we may avoid situation where this is difficult to apply, or we could interpret situations with clients in a way that is too rigid and doesn’t recognise the day to day realities of the client’s situation. Theories are after all abstractions of reality; the don’t represent reality fully. Artistry is required by the practitioner in order to do the “on the sport surfacing [?], criticizing, restructuring, and testing of intuitive understanding of experienced phenomena [sic]” (Schön, 1983, p.241). Schön describes artistry as ‘intuitive knowing’ like the ‘intuitive theories-in-action’ of an expert [ ] (1983, p.276) (in this case expert doesn’t mean ‘expert’ as teacher, but expert in the artistry of their work). This could be represented as follows:

Adapted from Schön, 1983, p.300

Recognise something?…

The keen observer will have noticed that nothing about this, especially the grid above, is new. Reflection in action is, or should be, embedded in our day to day practice in different ways. There are strong links with Roger’s client based theory as well as the models we use now, such as Egan and even the Grow model. Reflection ON action, however, is different in the sense that this happens away from the client, but with both the client and our practice in mind. Let’s have a look to see how this looks…

What does Schön’s model look like?

Schön himself recognises that reflection (in action) interferes/can interfere with the action. He recognises that while we are in ‘the thick of the action’ there may not be time to reflect, and if we do, the action may stop or it may affect what is going on in the intervention. (1983, p.277). Another important point he makes is that “the stance appropriate to reflection is incompatible with the stance appropriate to action” (1983, p.278), which means that if we need to reflect, we are usually in a different state of mind that the one we have when we are in the middle of the action. I would argue that, as a career professional, reflection in action works slightly differently to the reflection in action we would do when, for instance, we are driving a car. Reflecting on action every time we take an action in a car can be very dangerous as it delays the time between when we have to take action and when we actually take it. Intuition is life saving in this case.

Within the field of career guidance, we reflect more on what the client presents us with and how we respond. This is where we can, and to beneficial often have to, take a brief pause to reflect on what is going on around us, in order to respond appropriately and with focus to benefit the client (and the quality of the intervention). Intuition comes with practice and through reflection. Schön captures this brilliantly when he says that “a good coach learns to capture the complexity of action in metaphor” (1983, p.279)

There are a lot of resources to be found about Schön’s theory on the web, so I will keep it to the reference I have used on this page.

Schön, D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in action. London: Temple Smith.

Privacy Overview

301 Academic Skills Centre
Study skills online

Reflective practice

Guidance on the value of and models for reflective thinking and writing.

A group of students walking through Firth Court

Reflective thinking at university

Throughout your time at university, you will be asked to think and write reflectively. Sometimes what we've learned from an activity or piece of work isn’t always obvious, which is why we need to reflect on our experiences.

Being able to recall what happened, and apply your insights to future behaviour isn’t always easy and this online resource will take you through that process step-by-step.

Reflective thinking involves the following:

Evaluating your first-hand experience of an event, process or activity, then;
Analysing the the experience to understand what has gone well and less well, then;
Drawing on the experience to improve or refine your performance if a similar situation arises again.

Reflective writing is evidence of reflective thinking in which your personal experience forms a case study or data set for exploration. Reflective writing is a method for transforming this powerful subjective experience into a form of academic evidence by putting it into a broader context and drawing out its implications.

MySkills and Reflection

MySkills is a digital skills portfolio available to all students at the University of Sheffield providing a space to reflect on your learning and co-curricular experiences during your programme.

Recording your reflections in MySkills will allow you to build an authentic portfolio that will be invaluable in creating CVs and strengthening job applications and interview performance.

Why, when and how to reflect

Why reflect.

Reflecting can help you to:

Apply experiences from one situation to another
Deal with new challenges confidently
Identify ways to improve your performance
Demonstrate that you are an independent and critical learner

When is reflective thinking and writing needed?

Reflective thinking and writing could be needed for the following:

On your course: reflecting on group work, practical work and coursework, including reflective assessments.
Dissertation or research: understanding what went well or badly, where your approach was limited and what would you do differently if you were to continue with the research.
Job applications or interviews: competency-based questions will encourage you to demonstrate your ability to reflect on experience, for example: 'Tell me about a time when you worked collaboratively and what challenges you had to overcome'.
Professional development: engaging in continuous professional development and accreditation in the workplace will usually involve elements of reflection on performance to evidence your

Reflective thinking – how?

When thinking reflectively, you should aim to:

Be objective, honest and be critical of your own actions.
Discuss your experiences with others (peers, lecturers, personal tutor) to gain perspective.
Compare your experience with that of others, or explore relevant theory – does it match up? Can you learn from, or challenge the theory?

Types of reflective writing

There are various types of reflective writing, for example:

Stories or narratives : Analysis of an event with a beginning, middle and end and a set of characters
Learning journals and logs : Reflect on various events at different times
Learning diaries : Reflect on events frequently, eg daily or weekly. An entry might be on something as specific as a particular lab method or data analysis technique
Personal Development Planning (PDP) : eg Doctoral Development Programme (DDP) that all PhD students must demonstrate engagement with. The DDP helps students determine their training needs (action plan) given their past experiences and aspirations
Blogs, Twitter, video diaries : Good ways of selling yourself to potential employers and collaborators as a reflective, self-sufficient learner

Reflective Models

You may be asked to use different reflective models within your assignments, or you may wish to choose a reflective model of your own. This guide introduces you to some of the most common models of reflection used within academic writing.

Gibbs Reflective Learning Cycle

The Gibbs Reflective Learning Cycle [google doc] is one of the most commonly-used reflective models in academic writing. It is especially useful if you would like a highly structured way to reflect on an experience, e.g. if you are new to reflective writing.

The stages of the Gibbs model are as follows. Try reading them with an experience in mind, for example, a recent job interview:

Describe an experience: What happened and when? This will be important later on to help keep track of your experiences and look back on them.
How did it make you feel? This is your raw data that needs to be immediate and authentic. If you think back later on it is unlikely that you will be able to remember your emotional response.
Evaluate the experience: What went well? What went less well? Why do you think that may have been the case?
Analyse the experience: Can you put your experience in a wider context? Have you had similar experiences before and how did they compare? Is there literature that can help you to understand your experience?
What conclusions can you draw? What were the alternatives? What have you learned from the experience?
What will you do differently next time? Looking ahead, what can you take away from this experience that you can learn from and improve on in the future?

See G. Gibbs (1988), Learning by Doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods . Further Education Unit. Oxford Polytechnic: Oxford. Check out our video on the Gibbs Reflective Cycle to get some ideas of how to use it in your work.

What? So What? Now What?

The What? So What? Now What? model [google doc] is one of the simplest models for reflective writing. While it was originally designed for reflecting on medical practice, it can be used for any kind of reflective writing. It is memorable and thus useful for reflecting on-the-go in practice-based disciplines.

The stages of the model are as follows:

What? What happened, how did you react, and what did you do in response? If relevant to explaining your response, how did others who were involved respond? For an accurate record of the event, try to write this as soon as you can afterwards.
So what? How did you feel, and were these feelings similar/different to others who were involved? This is your raw data that needs to be immediate and authentic. If you think back later on it is unlikely that you will be able to remember your emotional response. Did you benefit from any observations or feedback from others involved in the event?
Now what? What are the implications of the event for you and others involved - what have you learned, and what conclusions do you draw from the event? Is there literature that can help you to understand your experience? Looking forward, how could you change your approach if you faced a similar situation in the future?

See J. Driscoll (1994), ‘Reflective practice for practise’, Senior Nurse , 14(1), pp.47-50 and (2007), Practising Clinical Supervision . 2nd edn. Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle

Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle [google doc] describes the key stages that are involved in having an experience and learning from it. The cycle provides a model for explaining an experience you have had, how you have reflected on it, then what you have learned, and how you have implemented what you have learned.

This is cyclical because these experiments with implementing the learning lead to new experiences; we are constantly involved in this process of learning and putting what we have learned into practice. As such, this model is especially helpful in capturing continuous processes of learning, especially where you want to put focus on practically and actively implementing the learning as a result.

Concrete experience: Describe a situation you have experienced. What happened and when? How did you feel/what did you think? How did you act in response? For an accurate record of the event, try to write this as soon as you can afterwards. Your feelings are raw data and should be immediate and authentic.
Reflective observation: Now, taking a step back from the immediate experience, reflect on it. How did the situation happen? Why did you and any other relevant participants react and act the way you did? What went well, what went less well, and why do you think this was?
Abstract conceptualisation: This stage is about analysing your reflections from a broader perspective than your own. How do you know that the experience was successful/unsuccessful? This might involve reflecting on any feedback you have received from other participants in the interaction. At this stage, you should also read relevant literature in order to reflect on how your experience fits into a wider context. As a result of these reflections, how could you change your approach if you faced a similar situation in the future?
Active experimentation: Now, you can make a plan to put this learning into practice. To make sure it is realistic to act upon, formulate this as a SMART goal . At this stage, you can test out the different ideas you have come up with for improvement within similar situations. This will generate new concrete experiences and thus continue the cycle.

See D. Kolb (1984), Experiential Learning: experience as the source of learning and development . Hoboken: Prentice Hall.

The Schön Reflective Model

The Schön Reflective Model [google doc] is helpful for practice-based disciplines, as it adds a distinction between the reflection we do during our practice (reflection-in-action) and the reflection we do after the fact (reflection-on-action). However, it is not very structured within these areas and so offers the scope to adapt it to your own needs.

Reflection-in-action: The reflection that takes place immediately while you are thinking on your feet. What is currently happening? What immediate feedback can I gather about how the experience is going? Is the event surprising? What should I do next in order to act and react to the situation?
Reflection-on-action: The reflection you undertake after the event has taken place. What went well? What went less well? Why do you think that may have been the case? Is there literature/theory that can help you to understand your experience? What have you learned from the experience? Looking ahead, what can you take away from this experience that you can learn from and improve on in the future?

See D.A. Schön (1991), The Reflective Practicioner: How professionals think in action . Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.

301 Recommends:

Our Reflective Practice workshop explains what it is to be a reflective practitioner, and why it’s important in your academic studies to harness this skill. You will learn methods and techniques that will enable you to apply this to your university work and beyond. You will explore some of the theory behind reflective practice, and find out how you can turn this into a practical action plan.

Try using the following phrases to get you started:

I learnt or I discovered…
I was surprised or I was excited by…
I was moved by or I felt…
I wonder about…
I need to know more about…
I was reminded that…
I’m challenged by… or challenged to…
I need to remember… or remember to…

Ask yourself the following questions:

What? When? Who? Why? Where?
How? What if? So what? What next?

Remember the following:

Insights – What I've learnt
Applications – How I'll use what I've learnt
Questions – What I need to learn or explore further

Related information

Mind mapping

Note taking

Be the first to hear about our new and upcoming workshops!

The 301 Academic Skills Centre newsletter is a fortnightly email for study skills, mathematics and statistics.

Be the first to find out about our:

new and upcoming workshops,
special events and programmes, and
new and relevant online materials and resources.

Sheffield is a research university with a global reputation for excellence. We're a member of the Russell Group: one of the 24 leading UK universities for research and teaching.

Reflective writing: Reflective frameworks

What is reflection? Why do it?
What does reflection involve?
Reflective questioning
Reflective writing for academic assessment
Types of reflective assignments
Differences between discursive and reflective writing
Sources of evidence for reflective writing assignments
Linking theory to experience
Reflective essays
Portfolios and learning journals, logs and diaries
Examples of reflective writing
Video summary
Bibliography

On these pages:

“A framework ... can help you draw out the learning points from an experience by using a systematic approach” Williams et al., Reflective Writing

There are many frameworks for reflective writing. Being aware of these frameworks (or 'models') can help you to maximise the learning from any experience you have. This is because they assist in the systematic deconstruction of experiences , helping you to ensure you ask the right reflective questions at each stage of an experience. This means frameworks of reflective practice can be used as a basis for the structure of a reflective essay.

Introduction to using frameworks of reflective practice

Often, reflective assessments will require you to use a framework or model for your reflection . Always ensure you read the assignment criteria carefully to make sure you are taking the right approach. You may be given a free choice on which framework to use, or you may be asked to choose from a selection. If you have to choose, you may need to justify your decision, but this is not always the case. Whatever your assignment asks you to do, you need to think critically about which model you use. This guide will later introduce you to the most common frameworks.

Frameworks of reflective practice

If your assignment requires you to make reference to a framework (or 'model') of reflective practice, you will need to choose a framework through which to structure your assignment. Each framework establishes a different approach to reflection and will require you to approach your writing differently. While not an extensive list, the reflective frameworks listed below are the most commonly used and each has its own page on this guide.

<< Previous: Reflective questioning
Next: Kolb >>
Last Updated: Jan 19, 2024 10:56 AM
URL: https://libguides.hull.ac.uk/reflectivewriting
Login to LibApps
Library websites Privacy Policy
University of Hull privacy policy & cookies
Website terms and conditions
Accessibility
Report a problem

Reflective Model – Schön

Contributed by:, intended learning outcome:.

This model provides a framework for reflection before, during & after a learning experience. It is useful as an activity to discuss learning. It can also be used as a plan for a reflective journal, as part of an essay plan where personal reflection is required or in an action research project.

Before an experience:

1. What do you think might happen?

2. What might be the challenges?

3. What do I need to know or do to be best prepared for these experiences?

During an experience:

1. What’s happening now, as you make rapid decisions?

2. Is it working out as I expected?

3. Am I dealing with the challenges well?

4. Is there anything I should do say or think to make the experience successful?

After an experience:

1. What are your insights immediately after, and/ or later when you have more emotional distance from the event?

2. In retrospect how did it go?

3. What did I particularly value and why?

4. Is there anything I would do differently before or during a similar event?

5. What have I learnt?

Large Group Teaching:

With large groups, you can either run this as a solo activity and then put students into groups to discuss/ adjust their decisions or you could have small-group discussions which contribute to a whole-group activity of generating one list

Online Teaching:

Next steps:, links to other activities:.

Your students may prefer Gibbs’ reflective model : https://www.musostudy.com/ tla-reflective-model-gibbs

Search TLA's

Submit your TLA here

This website and all the @musostudy accounts are part of my PhD research looking at how to improve study skills in Popular Music Education students in Higher Education. Any comments left on Facebook, Twitter or Instagram using @musostudy or #musostudy may be anonymised and used in my research. For more information please do email me. Thank you.

Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience Essay

Introduction, types of reflection, personal experience, kolb’s reflective model.

No one would deny the fact that reflection plays an important role in one’s practice. However, the very notions of reflection and reflective practice are rather debatable ones. For example, Dewey defines reflection as thinking about thinking (1933, p.144), whereas Schon (1983, p.134) introduces the wider concept of reflective practice, which, he claims, means an important strategy that helps professionals become aware of their implicit knowledge base and benefit from their experience. In his work Becoming a Reflective Practitioner Johns states that reflection is:

“…being mindful of self, either within or after the experience, as if a window through which the practitioner can view and focus self within the context of a particular experience, to confront, understand and move toward resolving the contradiction between one’s vision and their actual practice. Through the conflict of contradiction, the commitment to realize one’s vision, and understanding why things are as they are, the practitioner can gain new insights into self and be empowered to respond more congruently in future situations within a reflexive spiral towards developing practical wisdom and realizing one’s vision as a lived reality. The practitioner may require guidance to overcome resistance or to be empowered to act on understanding” (2004, p. 3).

As in the course of everyday practice professionals face numerous situations which cannot be solved by mere technical rational approaches, reflective practice becomes the necessary ‘tool’ that saves the professional’s competence. Reflective practice implies the professional’s ability to see the perspectives of his or her practice, understand and appreciate them for the benefit of career prospects.

According to Schon, (1987, p.123) there are two types of reflection: reflection-in-action and reflection-on-action. Reflection-in-action occurs simultaneously as the event happens, the person reflects on one’s conduct with the purpose to optimize the actions that follow.

I used to resort to this type of reflection at the beginning of my practice in the substance misuse center. Informing people about the consequences of substance misuse I tried to analyze the effectiveness of my performance to improve it. I tried to catch the moments when the audience was extremely attentive and followed every word of mine; my task was to fix my gestures, voice, intonation, everything that helped me to establish quick rapport with my patients and influence their assumption of the problem. In that situation, I played the role of the supervisor and had to do my best to demonstrate my competence.

The second type of reflection is reflection-on-action. It occurs after the event when the person can review, describe, analyze and evaluate the situation. Thus he or she gains insights for improved practice in the future. This type of reflection is more frequent than the first one, because, as a rule, the person does not have time or opportunity to reflect immediately.

Going by Schon (1991, p. 124), I can single out three key stages in the reflective process. The first stage comes with the realization that the knowledge applied in this or that situation was not sufficient to explain what was happening. The second stage is a critical analysis of the situation. Here an examination of knowledge, feelings, and emotions takes place; it is aimed at developing a new perspective on the situation that occurs in the final stage.

My own experience allows me to confirm the classification stated above. Being a supervisor I came through all the stages and found it extremely useful to reflect upon my actions. For example, I had to manage the newly received materials on the problem of substance misuse. Of course, I coped with this task but it wasn’t that easy as it might seem from first sight: the materials were to be classified according to certain principles and to be distributed among the specialists of our center. This should be done as quickly as possible. Though the task was not of primary importance, my delay could have engendered considerable problems. When I came to think over my actions I understood that the lack of experience prevented me from reacting quickly. First, I had to get to know the principles of classification, then, I had to inquire about our specialists’ needs in this or that material and, after that, to distribute them. Now then I know how the system works I can cope with the task faster.

Also, reflection, as the ability of the professionals to critique their practice, to identify their needs, and to take responsibility for their actions, is considered as an effective strategy that is used to solve theory-practice debates. But we should also admit that no evidence shows the prevalence of reflective practitioners over the non-reflective ones.

Still, my personal experience showed the difference between the affectivity of my work when I reflected on it and of the work where I acted as my experience prompted me. I realized that without critical reflection my knowledge and skills gained before could easily be obliterated.

When I found it I tried to discover such a model for reflective thinking that could have fit my knowledge about myself and shouldn’t have ruined the burning desire to improve my performance through analysis of the work done.

As it turned out, there exist numerous reflective models. A few examples include Greenaway’s reflective model where he outlined three simple steps one should take to learn from experience: to plan, to do, and to review. Burton suggests a bit different interpretation of this, like What? So what? Now what?

Baud’s reflective model offers to describe one’s feelings, to reflect on one’s experience, to consolidate one’s experience.

If we consider Gibbs’ approach to reflection we will see that he proposes 6 steps to aid reflective practice. These steps are to be repeated over and over again thus making up a cycle: description of the event, feelings, and thoughts that this event evoked, evaluation of the experience, analysis of the situation, conclusion about it, a plan of actions to be done next. This model stresses feelings and emotions that played an essential part in a particular event.

But most of all, I liked Kolb’s idea of reflection. This American educational theorist suggested that experience alone cannot meet particular learning goals. ‘In such situations, it seems to work better if the raw experience is packaged together with facilitated exercises which involve thinking, discussing, or creatively processing cognitions and emotions related to the raw experience”(1984, p.45). Kolb managed to work out a greater structure in reflection: his “model suggests that a participant has a Concrete Experience, followed by Reflective Observation, then the formation of Abstract Conceptualizations before finally conducting Active Experimentation to test out the newly developed principle” (Neill, 2004).

According to Kolb’s reflective model, the first stage is immersing oneself in the task. When I worked as a supervisor, most often it concerned my understanding of the task that I needed to render to people under my charge. When I worked under someone’s supervision I found it extremely interesting and challenging to get involved in a new task, especially if it contributed to my professional growth.

The second stage meant that I had to state what I have noticed when dealing with this or that task: in the case of people who were experiencing substance misuse this stage was extremely important, as at this time I could get the information about the patient’s addiction and its degree.

During the third stage – conceptualization – I used all the information I got to identify what it could mean. As a rule, this is at that stage when I decided on the specialist the patient had to address, or, the information he or she had to get about the misuse of this or that substance and the consequences it might have.

At the fourth stage, I asked myself what I would do next and what results it would have. When the patient was provided with the treatment required, I used to analyze the effectiveness of the service suggested and to outline the perspectives of the treatment that could be provided in the future.

Think over my overall practice in terms of this model I have to say that I have made sure that practice makes perfect. Day by day reflecting on the actions I took, I got more and more confidence and self-assertion.

During the practice, I really understood the meaning of Schon’s words:

“The practitioner allows himself to experience surprise, puzzlement, or confusion in a situation which he finds uncertain or unique. He reflects on the phenomenon before him, and on the prior understandings which have been implicit in his behavior. He carries out an experiment which serves to generate both a new understanding of the phenomenon and a change in the situation” (1983, p. 68).

The reflective models I have used helped me to become more confident in the application of the well-established and my criteria of judgment. Reflective practice challenged my professional skills, encouraged me to seek and make use of feedback to use it as a springboard for further achievements. Also, it made me take responsibility for my work, criticize it and draw correspondent conclusions.

Boud, D. 1985, Reflection: Turning experience into learning , Kogan Page, London.
Campbell, A. 2004. Practitioner research and professional development in Education , Paul Chapman, London.
Dadds, M. 2001. Doing practitioner research differently, Routledge Falmer.
Denscombe, M. 1998. The good research guide: For small-scale research projects , The Open University Press.
Department of Health. 2004. The NHS knowledge and skills framework (NHS KSF) and the development review process . London: The Stationery Office.
Dewey, J. 1933, How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process , Henry Regnery, Chicago.
Driscoll, J. 2000, Practising clinical supervision, Bailliere Tindall,Edinburgh.
Ghaye, T. 2000, Reflection: principles and practice for healthcare professionals. Wiltshire, Quay Books.
Greenwood, D. J. 1998, Introduction to action research: social research for social change. Thousand Oaks : Sage Publications.
Hammersley, M. 2002, Educational research: policymaking and practice. Paul Chapman Publishing, London.
Jarvis, P. 1992, Paradoxes of learning: On becoming an individual in society , Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Jarvis, P. 1999, The practitioner-researcher. Developing theory from practice, Jossey-Bass, San Fransicsco.
Johns, C. 2004, Becoming a reflective practitioner, Blackwell, London.
Kolb, D. A. 1984, Experiential learning: experience as the source of learning and development , New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
Neill, J. 2004. Experiential learning cycles .
Posner, G. 2000, Field experience: A guide to reflective teaching , Longman, New York.
Schon, D. 1983, The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action , Avebury Press: Aldershot.
Schon, D. 1987, Education the reflective practitioner . Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Schon, D. 1991, The reflective practitioner , Boston: Arena Publishing Arena.
Skills for Health. 2004. Drug and alcohol national occupational standards (DANOS) guide . Bristol: Skills for Health.
Chicago (A-D)
Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, September 12). Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience. https://ivypanda.com/essays/reflection-and-reflective-practice-personal-experience/

"Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience." IvyPanda , 12 Sept. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/reflection-and-reflective-practice-personal-experience/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience'. 12 September.

IvyPanda . 2021. "Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience." September 12, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/reflection-and-reflective-practice-personal-experience/.

1. IvyPanda . "Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience." September 12, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/reflection-and-reflective-practice-personal-experience/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience." September 12, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/reflection-and-reflective-practice-personal-experience/.

Learning Theories of Kolb, Schön, and Gibbs
Adult Learning Through Character in "My Fair Lady" Film
Theories of Reflective Practice
George Orwell: The Kolb Model
Kolb’s, Piaget’s, and Lewin’s Change Theories Comparison
David Kolb and Adult Learning Theory - Psychology
Kolb's Learning Styles Inventory to Reach Every Student
The Journey Freedom Tour 2022 Performance Analysis
Orwell’s Shooting an Elephant From the Perspective of Kolb’s Four-Stages
The Field of Organizational Learning and Its Theories
Living By Own Convictions Philosophy Analysis
The Socratic Legacy or the Cynic Legacy
Aristotle and His Definition of Happiness
What Leads to Cooperation and Competition
Philosophical Perspectives on Death and Dying

Cambridge Libraries

Study Skills

Reflective practice toolkit, introduction.

What is reflective practice?
Everyday reflection
Models of reflection
Barriers to reflection
Free writing
Reflective writing exercise
Bibliography

If you are not used to being reflective it can be hard to know where to start the process. Luckily there are many models which you can use to guide your reflection. Below are brief outlines of four of the most popular models arranged from easy to more advanced (tip: you can select any of the images to make them larger and easier to read).

You will notice many common themes in these models and any others that you come across. Each model takes a slightly different approach but they all cover similar stages. The main difference is the number of steps included and how in-depth their creators have chosen to be. Different people will be drawn to different models depending on their own preferences.

Reflection

The cycle shows that we will start with an experience, either something we have been through before or something completely new to us. This experience can be positive or negative and may be related to our work or something else. Once something has been experienced we will start to reflect on what happened. This will allow us to think through the experience, examine our feelings about what happened and decide on the next steps. This leads to the final element of the cycle - taking an action. What we do as a result of an experience will be different depending on the individual. This action will result in another experience and the cycle will continue.

Jasper, M. (2013). Beginning Reflective Practice. Andover: Cengage Learning.

Driscoll's What Model

By asking ourselves these three simple questions we can begin to analyse and learn from our experiences. Firstly we should describe what the situation or experience was to set it in context. This gives us a clear idea of what we are dealing with. We should then reflect on the experience by asking 'so what?' - what did we learn as a result of the experience? The final stage asks us to think about the action we will take as a result of this reflection. Will we change a behavior, try something new or carry on as we are? It is important to remember that there may be no changes as the result of reflection and that we feel that we are doing everything as we should. This is equally valid as an outcome and you should not worry if you can't think of something to change.

Borton, T. (1970) Reach, Touch and Teach. London: Hutchinson.

Driscoll, J. (ed.) (2007) Practicing Clinical Supervision: A Reflective Approach for Healthcare Professionals. Edinburgh: Elsevier.

Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle

Concrete experience
Reflective observation
Abstract conceptualization
Active experimentation

The model argues that we start with an experience - either a repeat of something that has happened before or something completely new to us. The next stage involves us reflecting on the experience and noting anything about it which we haven't come across before. We then start to develop new ideas as a result, for example when something unexpected has happened we try to work out why this might be. The final stage involves us applying our new ideas to different situations. This demonstrates learning as a direct result of our experiences and reflections. This model is similar to one used by small children when learning basic concepts such as hot and cold. They may touch something hot, be burned and be more cautious about touching something which could potentially hurt them in the future.

Kolb, D. (1984) Experiential Learning: Experience as the Source of Learning and Development. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Gibb's Reflective Cycle

Description
Action plan

As with other models, Gibb's begins with an outline of the experience being reflected on. It then encourages us to focus on our feelings about the experience, both during it an after. The next step involves evaluating the experience - what was good or bad about it from our point of view? We can then use this evaluation to analyse the situation and try to make sense of it. This analysis will result in a conclusion about what other actions (if any) we could have taken to reach a different outcome. The final stage involves building an action plan of steps which we can take the next time we find ourselves in a similar situation.

Gibbs, G. (1998) Learning by Doing: A Guide to Teaching and Learning Methods. Oxford: Further Education Unit, Oxford Polytechic .

Think about ... Which model?

Think about the models outlined above. Do any of them appeal to you or have you found another model which works for you? Do you find models in general helpful or are they too restrictive?

Pros and Cons of Reflective Practice Models

A word of caution about models of reflective practice (or any other model). Although they can be a great way to start thinking about reflection, remember that all models have their downsides. A summary of the pros and cons can be found below:

Offer a structure to be followed
Provide a useful starting point for those unsure where to begin
Allow you to assess all levels of a situation
You will know when the process is complete
Imply that steps must be followed in a defined way
In the real world you may not start 'at the beginning'
Models may not apply in every situation
Reflective practice is a continuous process

These are just some of the reflective models that are available. You may find one that works for you or you may decide that none of them really suit. These models provide a useful guide or place to start but reflection is a very personal process and everyone will work towards it in a different way. Take some time to try different approaches until you find the one that works for you. You may find that as time goes on and you develop as a reflective practitioner that you try different methods which suit your current circumstances. The important part is that it works - if it doesn't then you may need to move on and try something else.

<< Previous: Everyday reflection
Next: Barriers to reflection >>
Last Updated: Jun 21, 2023 3:24 PM
URL: https://libguides.cam.ac.uk/reflectivepracticetoolkit

COMMENTS

Understanding Schön's Reflective Model with an easy guide
Overview. Schon reflective model was given by Donald Schon in 1991 to provide a base for reflection. The model provides an additional element in reflection by differentiating reflection during and after the occurrence of an event. The use of this model helps in the quality enhancement work of practitioners by considering individual actions at ...
Schön
The Schön Reflective Model. Schön's (1991) Reflection in action/Reflection on action provides an additional element by making a distinction between reflection during the event and reflection after the event.It may be helpful to take account of this distinction during your own reflective practice. This is particularly useful in practical situations, such as when teaching or nursing, where ...
Schön's Model of Reflection
Kolb's model of reflection is one of the earliest theories about experiential learning and, because of its simple 4-step cycle, it can be easy for beginners to grasp the concepts of the reflective practice. Gibbs' Model of Reflection. Gibbs' model builds upon the work of Kolb and although there are more steps to the process, it is still a ...
Schon's Reflective Model
Reflection according to Donald Schon is the ability of professionals to 'think what they are doing while they are doing it'. He states that managing the indeterminate zones of professional practice requires the ability to think on the run and use previous experience to new conditions. This is important and needs the ability to reflect-in ...
Donald Schon (Schön): learning, reflection and change
Donald Schon made a remarkable contribution to our understanding of the theory and practice of learning. His innovative thinking around notions such as 'the learning society', 'double-loop learning' and 'reflection-in-action' has become part of the language of education. We explore his work and some of the key themes that emerge.
Learning and Change in the Work of Donald Schön: Reflection ...
Donald Schön was a deeply original thinker working on change, education, design, and learning. He is perhaps best known for his work on the reflective practitioner, in which he formulated a new epistemology of practice founded on knowing-in-action and reflection-in-action, a theory which has had considerable impact.
Revisiting Donald Schön's notion of reflective practice: a Daoist
In the first part of the essay, I summarise Schön's critique of technical rationality and his concept of reflection-in-action. I argue that two main weaknesses of Schön's approach to reflective practice are the presupposition of self-protected individualism, and an insufficient attention to ethical concerns.
Revisiting Donald Schön's notion of reflective practice: a Daoist
Daoist reflective practitioner, it follows, is one who performs moral actions spontaneously and. joyfully by adopting the Heavenly view of the world (Huang, 2010). To conclude, a Daoist. construal ...
Models of Reflection
Schön's reflective model focuses on two different stages to promote reflection. These are: Reflecting in action - during the event, relating to how you choose to act at that time.; Reflecting on action - after the event, relating to your feelings on the event and what you would do differently if it happened again.; It may be a useful model to use if you are reflecting on a practical event ...
Review Essays: Donald A. Schön, The Reflective Practitioner: How
Review Essays: Donald A. Schön, The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. ... E.J. (1983) `Personal Practice Models', in A. Rosenblatt and D. Waldfogel (eds) Handbook of ... Book Review Department : THE REFLECTIVE PRACTITIONER : HOW PROFESSIONALS THINK IN ACTION. By Donald A. Schon. New York : Basic Books, Inc., 1983. pp ...
3.3 Donald Schon
3.3 Donald Schon. Photo by Sharon McCutcheon is licensed under the Unsplash License. Schön (1983) based his work on that of Dewey and is most widely known for his theory of reflecting in and reflecting on one's practice. His theory was grounded in reflection from a professional knowledge and learning perspective (Bolton, 2014.p.6). In simple ...
(PDF) Learning through reflection
Killion and Todnem (1991) expanded Schon's reflection model to include the concept of reflection-for-action. This type of reflection guides future action based on past thoughts and actions.
Schön
Introduction. Schön's work revolves around the learning process in 'the professions' and is a reaction to the Model of Technical Rationality, which is the reverse of the 'Reflection in Action' approach he proposes. It's a model that doesn't start from academic knowledge, but from day to day 'tacit' knowing in action (Schön ...
PDF Chapter 1: Reflective Practice
Different theories, models and levels of 01_Sellars_Ch-01.indd 2 17-Oct-13 5:57:13 PM. REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 3 reflection have most commonly focused on differentiating the major ... is a long, ponderous undertaking and also on the content of reflection itself. Schon (1983, 1987, 1991) suggests two levels of reflection: (i) reflection-
Reflective practice
Reflective writing is evidence of reflective thinking in which your personal experience forms a case study or data set for exploration. Reflective writing is a method for transforming this powerful subjective experience into a form of academic evidence by putting it into a broader context and drawing out its implications. MySkills and Reflection.
Reflective practice, in practice
Abstract. The need for professionals to use reflection to learn about and develop their practice is now a universally stated goal. In social work however there has been little research into whether and how reflection in action actually occurs and this paper explores the possibilities and limits to reflective practice by drawing on research that observed encounters between social workers and ...
Reflective writing: Reflective frameworks
Summary: These frameworks of reflective practice can allow you to construct a greater depth of reflection than the experience (1), think (2), learn (3) model introduced previously. It is worthwhile researching other other models for yourself - all have their advantages and disadvantages. << Previous: Reflective questioning.
Learning Theories of Kolb, Schön, and Gibbs Essay
Kolb's theory supplies a model of such learning, and offers to consider the four main learning styles. Schön and Argyris' model supplies a way for organizations and individuals to more critically analyze a persistent adverse situation, improve it, and learn from the experience. Finally, Gibbs' model of reflective learning provides a way ...
Constructing and critiquing reflective practice 1
Yet, until recently, comparatively little attention has been paid to difficulties in Schön's work. This article attempts a critique of Schön's notion of reflection by interweaving philosophical concerns and empirical work, and concludes by suggesting that such a critique is capable of beginning to describe a new approach to reflective practice.
Reflective Model
Tool: This model provides a framework for reflection before, during & after a learning experience. It is useful as an activity to discuss learning. It can also be used as a plan for a reflective journal, as part of an essay plan where personal reflection is required or in an action research project.
Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience Essay
However, the very notions of reflection and reflective practice are rather debatable ones. For example, Dewey defines reflection as thinking about thinking (1933, p.144), whereas Schon (1983, p.134) introduces the wider concept of reflective practice, which, he claims, means an important strategy that helps professionals become aware of their ...
Models of reflection
Luckily there are many models which you can use to guide your reflection. Below are brief outlines of four of the most popular models arranged from easy to more advanced (tip: you can select any of the images to make them larger and easier to read). You will notice many common themes in these models and any others that you come across.
Donald Schon's Model Of Reflective Practice Essay
Improved Essays. 735 Words. 3 Pages. Open Document. Essay Sample Check Writing Quality. Show More. I have chosen to use Donald Schon's (1983) model of reflective practice to reflect on my behaviour management skills. I feel this was the most suitable model as it allowed me to reflect-on-action. REFERENCE I have worked in the reception class ...

Services We Provide

Resources We Provide

Login / Register

Table of Contents

Three stages of Schon reflective model

Stage 1: Knowledge in action

Stage 2: Reflection IN action

Stage 3: Reflection ON action

Example of reflection in nursing using Schon's model

Can Schön's reflection model be used in fields other than nursing?

What distinguishes reflection-on-action from reflection-in-action?

How can I get around the limitations of applying the Schön reflective model?

Schön’s Model of Reflection

About Donald Schön

Schön’s Theories About Reflection

Knowing-in-action

Reflection-on-action

Reflection-in-action

Double-loop Learning

Advantages & Disadvantages of Schön’s theories

Alternatives to Schön’s model

Kolb’s Model of Reflection

Gibbs’ Model of Reflection

Atkins & Murphy’s Model of Reflection

Johns’ Model of Reflection

An Example of Schön’s Reflective Practice

Donald Schon (Schön): learning, reflection and change

Donald Schon

Public and private learning, and the learning society

Double-loop learning and theories in use

The reflective practitioner – reflection-in- and –on-action

Further reading and references

Learning and Change in the Work of Donald Schön: Reflection on Theory and Theory on Reflection

Further Reading

Author information

Corresponding author

Editor information

Rights and permissions

Copyright information

About this entry

Download citation

Chapter history

University Library Services

Models of Reflection

3.3 Donald Schon

Video: Reflective Practice

Share This Book

Reflection in action/Reflection on action

Recognise something?…

What does Schön’s model look like?

Privacy Overview

Reflective practice

Reflective thinking at university

Why, when and how to reflect

When is reflective thinking and writing needed?

Reflective thinking – how?

Types of reflective writing

Reflective Models

Gibbs Reflective Learning Cycle

What? So What? Now What?

Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle

The Schön Reflective Model

Related information

Be the first to hear about our new and upcoming workshops!

Reflective writing: Reflective frameworks

On these pages:

Introduction to using frameworks of reflective practice

Frameworks of reflective practice

Reflective Model – Schön

Large Group Teaching:

Online Teaching:

Further reading:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Search TLA's

Submit your TLA here

Reflection and Reflective Practice: Personal Experience Essay

Study Skills

Driscoll's What Model

Kolb's Experiential Learning Cycle

Gibb's Reflective Cycle