440CHAPTER 26REFLECTIVE PRACTICE ANDCRITICAL REFLECTIONJan FookIntroductionIt has been argued that there is an increasing need for reﬂective practice, given agrowing ‘crisis’ in the professions (Gould 1996; Schon 1983). This crisis revolvesaround an increased questioning of professional authority and infallibility. Alignedwith this there have been moves to manage professional practice through moreobjective, routinized and measurable systems of accountability (Fook, Ryan andHawkins 2000, p.242). It might be argued that the essentially subjective processes ofcritical reﬂection are antithetical to the more technocratized systems of managerialism.However, I would argue that the move towards reﬂective practice can be seen as partof the same imperative – to make professional practice more accountable throughongoing scrutiny of the principles upon which it is based.For this reason, the ability to reﬂect upon practice in an ongoing and systematicway is now regarded as essential to responsible professional practice. There has beensome criticism that ‘reﬂective practice’ has simply become a new, and uncritical,orthodoxy (Ixer 1999), possibly because it can be enacted in many and variedways, and is used so widely across many diﬀerent professions and disciplines (Fook,White and Gardner 2006). In this chapter, therefore, I aim to provide enough basicdetail about reﬂective practice and critical reﬂection for new social work studentsand practice teachers to begin to use the process in their own practice. I begin byoutlining the basic theory and origins of critical reﬂection, illustrating this with adetailed example of how it can be used in practice learning and teaching, and indeedas an underpinning for ongoing professional practice. I fnish by discussing some ofthe issues for learning that emerge.Reﬂective practice and critical reﬂection – defnitionsThe terms ‘reﬂective practice’ and ‘critical reﬂection’ are often used interchangeably.Both involve an ongoing scrutiny of practice based on identifying the assumptionsCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.htmlReﬂective Practice and Critical Reﬂection 441underlying it. ‘Reﬂective practice’ emerges principally from the work of DonaldSchon (for example, 1983 and 1987), who was one of the frst to alert us to the crisisin the professions often represented by the perceived gap between formal theory andactual practice. In Schon’s thinking, reﬂective practice was a way of reducing the gap,by unearthing the actual theory that is embedded in what professionals do, ratherthan what they say they do. In this sense reﬂective practice is essentially a way ofimproving practice.Reﬂection, on the other hand, is broader. It is a way of approaching anunderstanding of one’s life and actions, as exemplifed by Socrates’ notion ofreﬂection as ‘the examined life’ for ethical and compassionate engagement with theworld and its moral dilemmas (Nussbaum, 1997). This is a striking reminder of whyit is important to reﬂect. Reﬂective practice is more focused on professional practice,but reﬂection is relevant to all aspects of living. Many writers also make a distinctionbetween reﬂection and critical reﬂection (Fook and Askeland 2006a). The idea ofcritical reﬂection seems to be more associated with writers in the education feld, inparticular adult education (for example, Brookfeld 1995; Mezirow 1991). Part ofthe difculty in pinning down exactly what reﬂective practice and critical reﬂectionmean may be due to the fact that there has been a great deal of development of theseconcepts in widely varying felds, from the health and welfare professions to law,management, business and education, and from both research and practice traditions.Critical reﬂection is defned in various ways. There are two main ways of being‘critical’ with reﬂection. The frst involves the ability to unearth, examine and changevery deeply held or fundamental assumptions (Mezirow 1991). Brookfeld (1995, p.8)however, emphasizes a second meaning which is that what makes reﬂection criticalis the focus on power. ‘Critical’, however, in both these senses, is about the ability tobe transformative, ‘to involve and lead to some fundamental change in perspective’(Cranton 1996, pp.79–80). The former meaning relies on the examination of veryfundamental assumptions, which leads to fundamental change. The latter involveschanges wrought by an awareness of how power operates. We can further extendthis to encompass an awareness of how assumptions about the connection betweenoneself and social context/structure can function in powerful ways, so that awarenessof these assumptions can provide a platform for transformative action (for example,Fook 2012; Kondrat 1999). These latter understandings are associated with a criticalsocial theory tradition (Agger 1998). This is the perspective that I adopt in thischapter and in my own work more generally, because I feel it is most compatible withthe theoretical traditions of the social work profession and with the for social changeaspirations of many current practising professionals.Critical reﬂection and reﬂective practice are therefore not mutually exclusive,but can be based on similar assumptions and processes of thinking. I like to thinkof critical reﬂection as being a subset of reﬂective practice. Critical reﬂection, whenused specifcally to improve professional practice, is reﬂective practice that focuseson the power dimensions of assumptive thinking, and therefore on how practicemight change in order to bring about change in the social situations in whichCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.html442 Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social Careprofessionals work. In order to be able to critically reﬂect, obviously one must beable to reﬂect. However, not all reﬂective practice will lead to critical reﬂection – thatis, to fundamental changes. In addition, eﬀective critical reﬂection will apply to manyimportant aspects of living, which may extend beyond the terrain of professionalpractice. In this sense, more fundamental and generalizable critical reﬂection shouldfunction to improve the way we live and relate as human beings, and in the processalso improve our professional practice. While this chapter will outline generalreﬂective processes and thinking, it will also discuss some of the issues involved withcritical reﬂection specifcally.In order to understand the idea of critical reﬂection and the processes involved,it is helpful to explore the main traditions of thinking from which it arises. Ihave identifed four main ones that are involved: reﬂective practice, reﬂexivity,postmodernism/deconstruction and critical social theory. These traditions arenot mutually exclusive and, of course, share many commonalities. It is helpful tounderstand some of the basic tenets of each of these traditions in order to build up amore complex understanding of the theoretical underpinnings of critical reﬂection. Inaddition, a better understanding of some of this thinking will enable us as learners tomake more substantial connections between our own assumptions and our social andcultural contexts. In the following section I will detail each of these main traditionsand their major contributions to the idea of critical reﬂection.The theoretical background of critical reﬂectionREFLECTIVE PRACTICEIn the professions, the idea of reﬂective practice is often credited initially to Argyrisand Schon (1976) and later to Donald Schon (1983, 1987). These works form muchof the initial basis for subsequent writings in the professional learning traditions,such as nursing (for example, Rolfe 2000; Taylor 2000). In education literature,the work of Dewey (1933) tends to be cited as originating the idea of reﬂection(Cranton 1996, p.76; Mezirow 1991). Mezirow (1991, p.5) notes that for Dewey‘reﬂection referred to (Dewey 1933, p.9) “assessing the grounds (justifcation) ofone’s beliefs”, the process of rationally examining the assumptions by which we havebeen justifying our convictions’.Schon (1983, 1987) emphasized the importance of acknowledging thatprofessional knowledge involves both ‘technical rationality’ (rules) and professionalartistry (reﬂection in action). Part of the ‘crisis’ for professionals arises from thefact that very often the ‘theory’ or rules espoused by practitioners, is quite diﬀerentfrom the ‘theory’ or assumptions embedded in the actual practices of professionals.Reﬂective practice therefore involves the ability to be aware of the ‘theory’ orassumptions involved in professional practice, with the purpose of closing the gapbetween what is espoused and what is enacted, in an eﬀort to improve both. A processof reﬂective practice, in this sense, also serves to help improve practice, by helpingCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.htmlReﬂective Practice and Critical Reﬂection 443to articulate and develop practice theory. In this sense also, reﬂective practice canbe seen as a process of researching practice theory, by developing it directly fromconcrete practice. From Schon’s initial idea of reﬂective practice, a reﬂective approachhas been developed (for example, Fook 1996), which encompasses the recognitionof the intuitive, the artistic and the creative in professional practice. The role of theemotions is also often emphasized (Fook 1999a).Put in terms of the reﬂective practice tradition, critical reﬂection involves a focuson assumptions about power. This includes the many ways power operates, and aperson’s own power and relationship to it. In addition, focusing on the intuitive andartistic aspects of one’s practice also unearths the role of emotions in supportingparticular assumptions. A simple reﬂective approach is useful in helping pinpointimportant and indeed formative assumptions. What it can lack, however, is a detailedanalysis of how power operates, and in particular the role of personal power inrelation to social and structural contexts and constraints. This can be illustrated witha particular example, say the personal experience of loss or grief. Simple reﬂectionmight unearth assumptions about the personal meaning of the loss to a person.However, critical reﬂection, in addition to noting the meaning of the loss, mightnote how assumptions about social factors might also inﬂuence the experience. Forinstance, the person might feel social expectations to grieve in a certain way, orpressure to relate to other loved ones. The person may feel his or her own lack ofpower in the face of such pressures. In this example, reﬂection and critical reﬂectionare complementary. Critical reﬂection simply also notes how a person’s assumptionsmay carry power dimensions.REFLEXIVITYThe idea of reﬂexivity comes from diﬀerent traditions again, and is often associatedwith social science research (Marcus 1994) in felds like anthropology (for example,Rosaldo 1993). It has been developed more recently in the health and human serviceprofessions (for example, Taylor and White 2000). Reﬂexivity, or a ‘turning back onitself ‘ (Steier 1991), has been defned in various ways. White’s version of reﬂexivity(2002, p.10) emphasizes the ability to look both inwards and outwards to recognizethe connections with social and cultural understandings. This is similar to my ownversion, which involves the ability to recognize that all aspects of ourselves and ourcontexts inﬂuence the way we research (or create knowledge) (Fook 1999b). I amusing the idea of research here to refer to all the diﬀerent ways in which we createknowledge – some occur on a more formal and systematic basis, yet others are useddaily, and often in unarticulated ways to make sense of immediate surroundings. Inthis sense, research, or knowledge creation, is integral to the daily business of living.Therefore, in order to be reﬂexive, we need to be aware of the many and variedways in which we might create, or at least inﬂuence, the type of knowledge we use.There are at least four ways this might happen. First, knowledge is embodied andsocial in nature – it is mediated by our physical and social lenses. So our physicalCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.html444 Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social Carestates and our social positions will inﬂuence how we interpret and select information,and indeed how we are socially interpreted and interacted with. Similarly, knowledgeis also mediated by our own subjectivity – our particular being, experience and socialposition will inﬂuence what phenomena we see and how we see them. Third, thereis a reactivity element – the knowledge we obtain is at least partly determined by thekinds of tools and process we use to create it. So our own beliefs about what constituteslegitimate knowledge and its legitimate creation, and the types of methods we shouldand do use, will inﬂuence what we fnd out. For example, information gathered fromobservation may be quite diﬀerent from that gained through a conversation. And, last,knowledge is also interactional – it is shaped by historical and structural contexts.Using the idea of reﬂexivity then, critical reﬂection is a way of researchingpersonal practice or experience in order to develop our understandings of ourselvesas knowers or makers of knowledge. This in turn helps us make specifc connectionsbetween ourselves as individuals and our broader social, cultural and structuralenvironment, by understanding how our ideas, beliefs and assumptions might be atleast partially determined by our social contexts.POSTMODERNISM AND DECONSTRUCTIONISMThe inﬂuence of postmodern thinking brings with it particular ways of thinking,which to some degree transcend yet complement those associated with reﬂexivity.For the purposes of this chapter I also include poststructural thinking, in that thereare common threads that are useful to our understanding of critical reﬂection(Fook 1999a).By postmodernism, I am referring simply to the questioning of ‘modernist’ (orlinear and unifed) thinking (Parton 1994). It represents a questioning of the ideathat knowledge must be arrived at in a progressive way and that it is non-conﬂictual.Thus, postmodern thinking alerts us to the relationship between knowledge andpower (a useful analysis in critical reﬂection). By pointing up the role of dominantdiscourses in creating what is perceived as legitimate knowledge (and thereforepower), postmodernism sheds light on where power rests and how it is maintainedby focusing on how certain thinking, and its association with certain groups, mightfunction to strengthen the position of that group in relation to others. Poststructuralistsalso alert us in particular to the role of language in forming our knowledge. The waywe speak about things, what we choose to label and what is not labelled, and therelationships we imply through the language we use, all have a role in marking whatis legitimate and what is thus powerful.In particular, the tendency to construct binary opposites, that is to create pairedcategories of phenomena that are total, mutually exclusive and oppositional (forexample, ‘male’ and female’) is an important element in language-making (Berlin1990). It often underlies how we make diﬀerence, and is therefore a crucial part ofidentity-making, and by implication, inclusion and exclusion. For instance, we oftenattribute inferiority to the second part of a binary category (for example, ‘female’Copyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.htmlReﬂective Practice and Critical Reﬂection 445is inferior to ‘male’ by defnition) and indeed the second part of the binary is oftendefned in terms of the frst (for example, females are defned as ‘not male’). Thereby,the frst category in the binary opposite retains primacy.In addition, language (and dominant discourse) also has a role in silencingmultiple and marginal perspectives, since it is often only the major (unifed) voicethat is recognized or recorded historically.In broad terms then, postmodern and poststructural thinking recognizes thatknowledge can be socially constructed. By assuming that particular knowledge islinear and unifed, we can unwittingly support a dominant power base, and unwittinglyparticipate in preserving these power relations through the very language that we useto speak about our world. Thus, postmodern thinking opens up an awareness of thepossibilities for contradiction, change and conﬂict in thinking, by recognizing thatmany diﬀerent experiences can be legitimate, and by providing the basis from whichto question accepted dominant ways of thinking.From a postmodern and poststructural angle then, critical reﬂection can be aidedby deconstructing our thinking in order to expose how we participate in constructingpower. This opens the way for us to explore conﬂicts and contradictions that may havebeen previously silenced. In particular, it is useful in helping to explore difculties inpractice that are brought about because of perceived (binary) dilemmas or tensions,such as where we have reached an impasse in practice because we believe thereis a fundamental dilemma or conﬂict involved. For example, social workers oftenconceptualize a basic dilemma in their work as being between ‘care’ and ‘control’ orabout ‘value-based practice’ versus ‘outcome-driven practice’, as if the two categoriesare mutually exclusive. Postmodern thinking can lead us to question these divisions,to formulate perhaps more complex ways of working. However, what postmodern andpoststructural thinking lacks in its contribution to critical reﬂection are details aboutthe evaluative aspects – how we determine which forms of power actually preserveor challenge domination and how we might change this need further explication. Forthis we need to turn to critical social theory.CRITICAL SOCIAL THEORYThere are aspects of the work of many diﬀerent theorists that share some commonalitieswith this category (for example, Marx, Marcuse, Habermas (Agger 1998)). Forour purposes here, I focus on the common themes of critical social theory. I haveparaphrased and summarized these (Fook 2012a) from Agger (1998) as follows.Critical social theory recognizes that domination is both personally experienced andstructurally created. Therefore, individuals can participate in their own domination,by holding self-defeating beliefs about their place in the social structure, their ownpower and possibilities for change. Social change must therefore be both personal andcollective. This involves a recognition that knowledge often has an empirical reality,but the way that knowledge is used and interpreted may be constructed (socially andCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.html446 Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social Carepersonally). Therefore, in bringing about social and personal change, communicationand dialogue are important to enable new shared understandings to be created.Critical social theory provides a broader framework for understanding whatcritical reﬂection can and should help achieve. By making connections betweenthe personal and structural, and emphasizing the importance of communication,critical social theory points to how a critical reﬂection process might help us forgebridges between our own experience and that of others to bring about desired socialchanges. As Mezirow points out: ‘precipitating and fostering critically self-reﬂectivelearning means a deliberate eﬀort to foster resistance to…technicist assumptions,to thoughtlessness, to conformity, to impermeable meaning perspectives, to fear ofchange, to ethnocentric and class bias, and to egocentric values’ (1991, p.360).In practical terms, a critical perspective on critical reﬂection simply involves theidea that when dominant social understandings or assumptions are exposed (througha reﬂective process) for the political (or ideological) functions that they perform (i.e.that they exist for political reasons in supporting the status quo, apart from whateverinherent truth they might have), the individual who holds those assumptions is givena choice. Once these hidden ideas are exposed, people who hold them are thus giventhe power to change them (Fook and Askeland 2006a).An example of the critical reﬂection processThe theoretical traditions outlined above can be used to devise a process and model ofcritical reﬂection. In this section I will describe just such a process, which I have beendeveloping over a period of some years, and which I currently use in the continuingeducation of practising health and welfare professionals.THE AIM OF THE CRITICAL REFLECTION PROCESSAs we said earlier, the aim of critical reﬂection is to assist the learner to unearthand unsettle assumptions (particularly about power) and thus to help identify a newtheoretical basis from which to improve and change a practice situation. In essence,this is the critical reﬂection process: a reﬂective analysis, particularly of powerrelations, which leads to change eﬀected on the basis of new awareness derived fromthat analysis. It is important to emphasize these two aspects of the critical reﬂectionprocess – analysis and change. In the process the learner is eﬀectively researchingtheir own practice and developing their own practice theory directly from their ownexperience. Not only does this function to evaluate and scrutinize practice, it alsoteaches the learner the process of learning directly from their own concrete practice.In other words, they are learning to create theory that is applicable to practice.Elsewhere I have likened the overall critical reﬂection process to a frst stage ofdeconstruction and a second stage of reconstruction (Fook 2012a). It is also similarto a conscientization process (Alfrero 1972), in which a person shifts from a moreCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.htmlReﬂective Practice and Critical Reﬂection 447fatalistic stage in which the ‘facts’ dominate to a fnal stage of understanding the causallinks between ‘facts’ and social circumstances. With this model of critical reﬂectionthere is a further stage that links this new critical awareness with possibilities foraction.CRITICAL REFLECTION QUESTIONSQuestions are derived from the above four theoretical traditions (reﬂective practice,reﬂexivity, postmodernism and critical social theory) to assist in critically reﬂectingon a specifc piece of practice. Below are some examples.From a reﬂective practice tradition, questions might include: What was Iassuming? What beliefs did I have about power (for example, mine, other people’s)?What are my most important values coming across and how do these relate to power?From a reﬂexivity standpoint, we might ask: How did I inﬂuence the situation?What preconceptions did I have and how might these have inﬂuenced what I did orinterpreted? How did my presence make a diﬀerence? What sort of power did I thinkI have, and how did I establish myself in the situation? What were my beliefs aboutpower and how did these aﬀect what I did or chose to see?Using a postmodern/deconstructive perspective, we might ask: What language/words/patterns have I used? Have I used any binary opposites, and what is the basisfor these? What perspectives are missing? What are my constructions of power? Whatis the relationship between my beliefs about power and the mainstream or dominantview? How have I constructed myself in relation to other people, or power?A critical stance would place the emphasis on how the critical reﬂection processcan bring about change. We might therefore ask questions like: How has my thinkingchanged, and what might I do diﬀerently now? How do I see my own power? CanI use my power diﬀerently? Do I need to change my ideas about myself or thesituations in which I work?Clearly each perspective provides diﬀerent ways of asking critical reﬂectivequestions, but there is also a great deal of commonality. It is not important todiﬀerentiate the traditions each type of question is related to, but instead to usethese theoretical underpinnings, and the analyses they provide, in an integrated andinclusive way. Using many diﬀerent ways of questioning will, one hopes, maximizethe potential meaningfulness of critical reﬂection to diverse types of learners. Thereis in fact no prescribed or formulaic way to undertake critical reﬂection, and indeedthe feld is characterized by many diﬀerent processes, techniques and exercises thatcan be used to further critical reﬂection. It is as much about the enabling climate thatis created as it is about techniques that are used. The highly diverse nature of criticalreﬂection has been criticized (Ixer 1999) but I would argue that this is in fact oneof its primary strengths. Since it is highly adaptable to situation, place, learner andeducator, its ﬂexibility potentially allows it maximum eﬀectiveness.Copyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.html448 Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social CareTHE CLIMATE OF THE CRITICAL REFLECTION PROCESSIt is crucial to successful learning from critical reﬂection, that an appropriate learningclimate is established. Since reﬂection is not necessarily a process that happensnaturally in our often technocratic learning environments, it is vital to establish clearcultural ground rules for reﬂective learning (Fook, 2012b). Also, given the potentiallyﬂexible nature of critical reﬂection, it is important to structure the process to somedegree in order to maximize opportunities to unearth and unsettle assumptions inorder to bring about some change. And since there is potentially much personal andprofessional risk involved in scrutinizing deep-seated assumptions, the climate needsto be enabling and respectful of this.I therefore think it is important to establish a culture in which it is safe andacceptable to be open and to expose professional vulnerabilities for the sake oflearning. Elsewhere this has been termed a climate of ‘critical acceptance’ (Fooket al. 2000, p.230). When I engage in a critical reﬂection process with colleagues,I am explicit about a set of ‘ground rules’ to which I establish mutual agreement.There is not room to include the whole list here but some important rules include:confdentiality; respect and acceptance; non-judgementalism (the purpose of criticalreﬂection is to help unearth assumptions, not to make evaluations of actions); focuson ‘responsibility’ (to inﬂuence and respond to the situation) rather than ‘blame’(for controlling or causing the situation); openness to other, perhaps contradictory,perspectives does not mean having to give up one’s own perspective; separating thereﬂective analysis from the need to make changes or take action.THE STRUCTURE OF THE CRITICAL REFLECTION PROCESSIn the model of critical reﬂection I have developed I ask participants to meet as asmall group (usually up to ten people), and I ask each participant to present a pieceof practice that was crucial to them in some way. This serves as the ‘raw’ material forreﬂection. I then structure the process in two stages. The frst focuses on the analyticalstage: exposing and examining the hidden assumptions. The second stage focuses onturning an awareness of these hidden assumptions into new ways of understandingpractice, our power and how we might challenge and change our environmentsaccordingly.The process essentially involves a small group of participants who assist eachother to critically reﬂect on their practice in a confdential setting facilitated bysomeone versed in the approach. The process normally begins with an introductorysession (approximately one and a half hours in length) in which the facilitator lays thegroundwork for the programme. This might consist of formal group introductions,some theoretical background and a discussion of ground rules, as well as an outlineof the process. This is usually presented in an informal and interactive manner. Thisis followed by a modelling of the frst stage of the critical reﬂection process by thefacilitator, in which the facilitator presents her or his own practice material (‘criticalincident’, as discussed below) and asks the group to assist her or him, to criticallyCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.htmlReﬂective Practice and Critical Reﬂection 449reﬂect upon it, using the questions that have been outlined as a guide. This might lastup to one hour. This modelling is vital in establishing a group climate of trust andensuring that interaction is egalitarian. The facilitator may then spend a brief timediscussing the process and clarifying the participants’ understanding of it.I ask people to present their piece of practice experience in the form of a concrete‘critical incident’. The critical incident technique is widely used and in varying ways(Brookfeld 1995; Davies and Kinloch 2000). In the critical reﬂection process thatI use, I ask that it be kept deliberately concrete – someone’s ‘story’ or ‘narrative’about an event in which they were involved that was signifcant to them in some way.‘Critical’ in this sense simply refers to something that was crucial or signifcant to theperson. I ask that they describe, in writing, why it was critical (or their reasons forchoosing it), the background or context of the incident and the actual incident. It isvital to use a brief, concrete incident from the person’s own practice because it allowsthem ultimately to keep the focus on further concrete possibilities for their ownpractice, without being distracted by overly abstracted ways of theorizing practice.Participants bring written versions of the incident for distribution to group members,so that the written version can be reﬂected upon as verbal interaction also takes place.Participants present their critical incidents in two stages according to the processoutlined above. They are normally allotted at least half an hour per presentation.Thus, overall the programme takes approximately the equivalent of two and a halfdays. Normally the frst session, which includes the introduction and the facilitator’smodelling, takes a half day, then the next two sessions take one day each, usually splitby a period of at least a week to allow further intervening reﬂection.The frst stage focuses on analysing the story of the incident. The whole groupasks critical reﬂective questions based on the four theoretical traditions outlinedabove. The facilitator tries to ensure that each participant reaches a point where theyfeel able to articulate some major assumptions that have been unearthed, and canidentify some major piece of learning that they wish to take away and reﬂect furtherupon. During and at the end of the frst session, the facilitator also draws out some ofthe commonalities of discussion, taking care to make connections between personaland social experiences. At the end of the frst stage, the facilitator also ensures that thegroup as a whole understands the tasks for the second stage. Before the second stage,each participant reﬂects further on the thinking that has been unearthed in this frststage. In the second stage, participants present their revised ‘theory of practice’ again(allowing approximately at least half an hour each), with a view to devising specifcpractice strategies from it. The group assists this process by asking a series of questionsfocused on how practice and thinking may change or be diﬀerent, compared withtheir original conception of the incident. Often they may focus on how they wouldhandle it now, given their new set of reﬂections. The facilitator may encourage themto put a ‘label’ on this new set of actions and reﬂections, thus engaging in the processof creating their own personal ‘theory of practice’.Copyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.html450 Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social CareGeneral outcomes and usesWhat are some of the claimed benefts of critical reﬂection? In general, most studiesof the eﬀectiveness of critical reﬂection make a range of ambitious claims about howit can contribute to ‘human ﬂourishing’ (Fook et al., in press). The claims includean increased capacity for research and knowledge-building (Hess 1995, pp.65, 81),better knowledge application (i.e. the ability to use previous knowledge in new cases)(Hess 1995, p.75), the ability to create contextually appropriate responses (Fook andNapier 2000), improved practice, the creation of new practice possibilities (Hess1995, p.80) and an increased capacity to practise in change and uncertainty (Fookand Napier 2000).Analysis of evaluation results from my own critical reﬂection groups conductedover the last four years indicates the following broad trends:• Increased collegiality, at a variety of levels including between managers andworkers, between workers and supervisors, between colleagues within anorganization and between colleagues in diﬀering organizations – this wasoften brought about by gaining support from colleagues and therefore a bettersense of connectedness with them. An openness to new or other perspectivesalso encouraged this. Former ‘enemies’ are more likely to be seen as possibleallies, and individuals are more likely to look for cooperative, rather thanoppositional, ways of working.• A motivation and desire to fnd diﬀerent ways of working with colleagues,especially where there had been previous conﬂict.• A re-energizing of interest in and commitment to the job, through areawakening of basic values and an ability to prioritize work on this basis.This was often experienced as better morale.• Finding new strategies and options to deal with longstanding dilemmas.• Finding the motivation to act on longstanding dilemmas that had previously‘frozen’ action.• Many participants speak of being ‘liberated’, usually from assumptions aboutwhat ‘professional’ practice should be. They often come to realize that theyhave constructed ‘professional’ practice in such a way that it limits how theycan relate to service users (for example, Lowth and Bramwell 2000).Applications specifc to practice teaching/learningIt is clear that the critical reﬂection can be adapted in many diﬀerent ways to suitthe particular purposes and contexts of practice teaching and learning. The model Ihave described in this chapter might be used as a component of a university-basedteaching programme, or alternatively as a continuing education or peer supervisionprogramme organized for practitioners. It might be adapted using diﬀerent toolsCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.htmlReﬂective Practice and Critical Reﬂection 451in place of the critical incident (such as ‘stories’ or ‘narratives’ of practice, journalentries, case notes/studies, process recordings, observations or taped recordings ofinteractions). In short, any type of record of practice might be used as potentialraw material for systematic critical reﬂection. Hypothetical stories might be used(Lehmann 2003) to avoid problems of confdentiality. Critical reﬂection may be doneas ‘self-critical reﬂection’ (Mezirov 1998) – a process conducted by oneself on one’sown material. It can easily be adapted for use in one-to-one supervision sessions oras a model for peer supervision or learning groups. Alternatively, individuals mightmake arrangements with their own ‘critical friend’ – a friend or colleague whom theytrust to assist them in more systematic reﬂection. Interactions may be face to face, butalso conducted by phone, in writing or online.What is most important to emphasize about the use of critical reﬂection forteaching and learning purposes, however, is not technique or technology – it is rathermuch more about approach. As an overall approach, critical reﬂection emphasizesthe idea that we are all both teachers and learners, even though our formal rolesor statuses might be more diﬀerentiated. This is an important point – eﬀectivecritical reﬂection can only take place in a climate that is egalitarian and participatory.Knowledge creation, through ongoing reﬂection on experience, is something thatnever stops in a committed practising professional at any level. Furthermore, thecritical reﬂective attitude is about always being prepared to question (and change)deep-seated assumptions and practices.In terms of practice teaching and learning, this places the onus on all playersto be aware of, and take responsibility for, the learning environment that is created.This means we all need to ask ourselves, as students, managers, university academics,supervisors, senior practitioners, colleagues or new workers, how we can best createa climate for critical reﬂection, in the various settings in which we work. This will ofcourse involve implementing some new technologies and processes for learning, butit may also simply involve being prepared to question and change ourselves in farmore fundamental ways.Conclusion and issues for learningIn conclusion, it is ftting to consider some of the criticisms of, and potentialdifculties with, critical reﬂection as an approach and process.The threat posed by exposing one’s professional practice to detailed scrutinyand questioning holds simultaneous potential for harm and good. Elsewhere (Fookand Askeland, 2006b) my colleague, Gurid Aga Askeland, and I argue that becausecritical reﬂection is also about unearthing deep-seated assumptions that are culturallyheld, the capacity for unsettling and threat may be too great and may work againstlearning potential. The trick is to get the balance right by minimizing the risk andmaximizing the learning. Alternatively, it may be the case that many participantsmay not be ‘robust’ or resilient enough to expose their vulnerabilities in a publicCopyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.html452 Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social Careway. It may be that critical reﬂection is not appropriate for everyone. Its cultureand values may not be compatible with some people. For others (both teachers andlearners), there may not be enough structure. In addition, some workplace culturesmay actively work against a culture of critical reﬂection by exploiting individualworkers’ vulnerabilities.Another perceived difculty of the critical reﬂection process is its reliance onmany theories. Therefore, in practice it can potentially unearth any assumptionsabout anything. And indeed some of these assumptions and related experiencesmay be outside the mandate of the group to deal with. For example, past painfulpersonal experiences may be unearthed, which it would be highly inappropriate fora professional learning group to handle. For this reason, it is important to placeboundaries on the group’s discussion and to give participants the right to drawboundaries themselves. At the same time, the ability to be open ended in what isunearthed can be a potential advantage, in that, without too many preconceptionsabout what to focus on, some crucial but hitherto deeply hidden assumptions maybe uncovered. This is another reason why a critical reﬂection process can take manydiﬀerent forms, and have many diﬀerent outcomes, depending on the theoreticalperspectives of participants and their ability to delve deeply for important assumptions.It has also been argued that reﬂection is a highly individualized activity, itsoutcomes difcult to generalize to other people and situations. It is also a highlydiversifed activity, its processes lacking clarity of detail. It is therefore difcult tomeasure its outcomes, so it seems impossible to assess its success (Ixer 1999). Inaddition, the reﬂective approach and its practice seem to ﬂy in the face of currentmanagerial and cost-cutting trends. Some argue that reﬂection takes too much time ina climate of maximum efciency. Its outcomes are often open ended and unpredictablein regimes that value concrete forward planning and budgeting. Furthermore, itencourages self-examination and the disclosure of vulnerabilities and limitations(Hess 1995), which can undermine the competitive edge of services. Last, it fostersholistic and contextual ways of knowing in economic contexts requiring scientifcproofs of eﬀectiveness and ‘evidence’.My response to these claims is not to disagree, but to point out that theyconstitute all the more reason to identify the benefts of critical reﬂection, both in‘hard’ and ‘soft’ terms, and to persevere in developing the ways in which a criticalreﬂective ability can be shown to improve practice responsiveness. Far from beingan alternative in opposition to evidence-based practice, critical reﬂection may in factbe a very accessible process that can contribute to articulating the evidence baseof practice.NoteSome of the ideas in this chapter have also been developed in: Fook, J. (2004)‘Transformative Possibilities of Critical Reﬂection.’ In L. Davies and P. Leonard (eds)Scepticism/Emancipation: Social Work in a Corporate Era. Aldershot: Ashgate, pp.16–30.Copyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.htmlReﬂective Practice and Critical Reﬂection 453ReferencesAgger, B. (1998) Critical Social Theories. Boulder, CO: Westview.Alfrero, L. A. (1972) ‘Conscientization.’ In New Themes in Social Work Education. New York, NY: InternationalAssociation of Schools of Social Work.Argyris, C. and Schon, D. (1976) Theory in Practice: Increasing Professional Eﬀectiveness. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.Berlin, S. (1990) ‘Dichotomous and complex thinking.’ Social Service Review, March, 46–59.Brookfeld, S. (1995) Becoming a Critically Reﬂective Teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Cranton, P. (1996) Professional Development as Transformative Learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Davies, H. and Kinloch, H. (2000) ‘Critical Incident Analysis: Facilitating Reﬂection and Transfer of Learning.’In V. E. Cree and C. Macauley (eds) Transfer of Learning in Professional and Vocational Education. London:Routledge.Dewey, J. (1933) How We Think. Chicago, IL: Regnery.Fook, J. (ed.) (1996) The Reﬂective Researcher: Social Theories of Practice Research. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.Fook, J. (2012a) Social Work: A Critical Approach to Practice. London: Sage.Fook, J. (1999a) ‘Critical Reﬂectivity in Education and Practice.’ In B. Pease and J. Fook (eds) TransformingSocial Work Practice: Postmodern Critical Perspectives. Sydney: Allen and Unwin, Sydney.Fook, J. (1999b) ‘Reﬂexivity as Method.’ In J. Daly, A. Kellehear and E. Willis (eds) Annual Review of HealthSocial Science, Vol. 9. Bundoora: La Trobe University.Fook, J. and Askeland, G. (2006a) ‘The “Critical” in Critical Reﬂection.’ In S. White, J. Fook and F. Gardner(eds) Critical Reﬂection in Health and Welfare. Maidenhead: Open University Press.Fook, J and Askeland, G. A. (2006b) ‘Challenges of critical reﬂection: Nothing ventured, nothing gained.Social Work Education. 16, 2, 1–14.Fook, J. and Napier, L. (2000) ‘From Dilemma to Breakthrough: Retheorising Social Work Practice.’ InL. Napier and J. Fook (eds) Breakthroughs in Practice: Social Workers Theorise Critical Moments in Practice.London: Whiting and Birch.Fook, J., Ryan, M. and Hawkins, L. (2000) Professional Expertise: Practice, Theory and Education for Working inUncertainty. London: Whiting and Birch.Fook, J., White, S. and Gardner, F. (2006) ‘Critical Reﬂection: A Review of Current Understandings andLiterature.’ In S. White, J. Fook and F. Gardner (eds) Critical Reﬂection in Health and Welfare. Maidenhead:Open University Press.Fook, J., Psoinos, M. and Sartori, D. (in press) ‘Evaluation studies of critical reﬂection.’ In J. Fook, V. Collington,F. Ross, G. Ruch and L. West (eds) Researching Critical Reﬂection. London: Routledge.Gould, N. (1996) ‘Introduction: Social Work Education and the “Crisis” of the Professions.’ In N. Gould andI. Taylor (eds) Reﬂective Learning for Social Work. Aldershot: Arena.Hess, P. (1995) ‘Reﬂecting in and on Practice.’ In P. Hess and E. J. Mullen (eds) Practitioner-Researcher Partnerships.Washington: NASW Press.Ixer, G. (1999) ‘No such thing as reﬂection.’ British Journal of Social Work 29, 513–527.Kondrat, M. E. (1999) ‘Who is the “self ” in self-aware? Professional self-awareness from a critical theoryperspective.’ Social Service Review 34, 4, 451–477.Lehmann, J. (2003) The Harveys and Other Stories. Bendigo, Australia: St Lukes Innovative Resources.Lowth, A. and Bramwell, M. (2000) ‘Dedicated to the Memory of Susan.’ In L. Napier and J. Fook (eds)Breakthroughs in Practice: Social Workers Theorise Critical Moments. London: Whiting and Birch.Marcus, G. E. (1994) ‘What Comes (just) after “Post”? The Case of Ethnography.’ In N. K. Denzin and Y. S.Lincoln (eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research. London: Sage.Mezirow, J. (1991) ‘How Critical Reﬂection Triggers Learning.’ In J. Mezirow (ed.) Fostering Critical Reﬂectionin Adulthood. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Mezirov, V. (1998) ‘On critical reﬂection.’ Adult Education Quarterly 98, 3, 185–198.Nussbaum, M. (1997) Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defence of Reform in Liberal Education. Cambridge, MA:Harvard University Press.Copyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.html454 Handbook for Practice Learning in Social Work and Social CareParton, N. (1994) ‘Problematics of government: (Post) modernity and social work.’ British Journal of SocialWork 24, 9–32.Rolfe, G. (2000) Research, Truth and Authority. London: Macmillan.Rosaldo, R. (1993) Culture and Truth. London: Beacon Press.Schon, D. (1983) The Reﬂective Practitioner. London: Temple Smith.Schon, D. (1987) Educating the Reﬂective Practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Steier, F. (ed.) (1991) Research and Reﬂexivity. London: Sage.Taylor, B. (2000) Reﬂective Practice. Buckingham: Open University Press.Taylor, C. and White, S. (2000) Practising Reﬂexivity in Health and Welfare. Buckingham: Open University Press.White, S. (2002) ‘Auto-ethnography as Reﬂexive Inquiry.’ In I. Shaw and N. Gould (eds) Qualitative Research inSocial Work. London: Sage.Copyright Jessica Kingsley Publishershttp://www.jkp.com/handbook-for-practice-learning-in-social-work-and-social-care-third-edition.html

REFLECTIVE PRACTICE AND CRITICAL REFLECTION | My Assignment Tutor

GET HELP WITH YOUR HOMEWORK PAPERS @ 25% OFF

Related posts:

Related Posts

GET HELP WITH YOUR HOMEWORK PAPERS @ 25% OFF