The article may be old, but it is hardly telling as the ideas have not changed. As a candidate teacher, it made me consider what I did as an EFL teacher and whether those actions were routine or reflective. Being a new teacher, I obviously had to reflect on what was and wasn't working in my classroom so that I could fit into the school nicely. However, was this reflection under the definition proffered by Grant and Zeichner? I would answer that as a no. Firstly, I don't think that I practiced pure open-mindedness. I was trained by the headmaster of the school and followed their methods, as I had no prior experience. When things did not work, I asked for their advice and followed from that. It is true that I was open to new ideas, but by only pursuing one avenue of new methods, I was not fully open-minded. In a similar way, I was not partaking an attitude of 'responsibility', as I was adhering too closely to my mentor's practices and did not consider the consequences of my methods.
I feel that this article helped me re-examine what reflection truly is. Prior to reading it, I would have told you that I was reflecting and evaluating myself as a teacher. Now, however, I feel that reflection is a deeper process which involves a more rigorous method of critically analyzing your processes and their effectiveness. I hope to become more critical, re-assessing teaching methods and curriculum in new ways regardless of their popularity or support from other teachers, as this gives a constant avenue for growth and continual learning and improvement.
No comments:
Post a Comment