Reading reflections on: Pages 55-69 of Thompson, Sue, & Thompson, Neil. (2008). The critically reflective practitioner.
I enjoyed reading Clutterbuck’s argument that ‘Reflective space is important at three levels; personal (quiet thinking time on one’s own); dyadic (one to one); and as a group or a team. (1998,p. 15)” This chapter is divided helpfully into three sections and relates to the three different contexts for reflection.
Reflecting on Chapter 3 of Thompson and Thompson’s “The critically reflective practitioner,” I found Clutterbuck’s argument regarding the importance of reflective space engaging. He emphasizes that reflective space is crucial at three levels: personal, dyadic, and group or team-based (Clutterbuck, 1998, p. 15). This chapter, divided into three sections, delves into the different contexts for reflection and their significance in critically reflective practice.
The first context discussed is personal reflective space. Clutterbuck suggests that effectively managing work pressures is essential for maximizing potential in guiding one’s reflections and promoting critically reflective practice (Clutterbuck, 1998). Personally, I found this resonant as it highlighted the challenges of balancing career opportunities with managing work boundaries, especially in highly pressurized environments like educational institutions.
Self-awareness, another aspect emphasized in this context, is crucial for understanding one’s impact on situations and recognizing the influence of personal values, actions, and attitudes (Taylor, 2006). Asking critical questions about individual situations, such as one’s impact on a situation and the situation’s impact on oneself, can lead to increased self-awareness and effective problem-solving.
Furthermore, developing self-awareness can lead to better management of pressures and building strengths. Recognizing areas for improvement and seeking additional training or support can contribute to personal growth and professional development (Clutterbuck, 2008).
The second context discussed is dyadic reflective practice, which involves reflection in pairs. This form of reflection allows individuals to draw out and support each other’s learning, providing opportunities to identify mistakes, successes, knowledge gaps, and skills to work on (Harris, 1996). Dyadic reflection can occur in various settings, including line management support, clinical supervision, mentoring, coaching, and peer support.
Lastly, the third context focuses on group learning space, where positive outcomes in promoting reflective practice can be maximized through group interactions. Group settings, such as training courses, conferences, learning sets, and team events, provide opportunities for sharing challenges, insights, and new ideas, fostering a collaborative learning environment (Thompson & Thompson, 2008).
In conclusion, reflecting on the contexts for reflection highlighted in Chapter 3 has deepened my understanding of critically reflective practice. By leveraging personal, dyadic, and group learning spaces, practitioners can enhance self-awareness, learn from others, and broaden their perspectives, ultimately leading to more effective professional practice.
References:
Clutterbuck, D. (1998). Reflective practice: Everyone’s business? Industrial and Commercial Training, 30(7), 259-262.
Clutterbuck, D. (2008). The critically reflective practitioner. Gower Publishing, Ltd.
Harris, S. (1996). Reflection as an enhancement of the supervisory role. Supervision in Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy, 14(1), 37-41.
Taylor, S. (2006). Reflective practice for teachers. Sage Publications.
Thompson, S., & Thompson, N. (2008). The critically reflective practitioner. Palgrave Macmillan.