We explore development of elementary preservice teachers’ reflective practices as they solved problems encountered while teaching in a reading clinic. Written reflections (N = 175) were collected across 8 weeks from 23 preservice teachers and analyzed to investigate relationships among problem exploration, teaching adaptations, and problem resolution. In this sequential mixed methods design, exploratory qualitative analysis revealed co-occurrence of problem exploration, instructional adaptation, and problem resolution. Confirmatory quantitative analysis found significant relationships: preservice teachers who engaged in more problem exploration or description of instructional adaptations reported more problem resolutions the following week. Results support mixed method, longitudinal analyses to analyze preservice teachers’ written reflections, and use of written reflections with responsive feedback to develop preservice teachers’ agency for problem solving.
AlexanderP.FivesH. (2000). Achieving expertise in teaching reading. In BakerL.DreherM.GuthrieJ. (Eds.), Engaging young readers: Promoting achievement and motivation (pp. 285-308). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
2.
AlmasiJ. F.FullertonS. K. (2012). Teaching strategic processes in reading (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
3.
BenjaminiY.KriegerA. M.YekutieliD. (2006). Adaptive linear step-up procedures that control the false discovery rate. Biometrika, 93, 491-507. doi:10.1093/biomet/93.3.491
4.
BerlinerD. C. (1986). In pursuit of the expert pedagogue. Educational Researcher, 15(7), 5-13.
5.
BerlinerD. C. (1988, February). The development of expertise in pedagogy. Charles W. Hunt Memorial Lecture, presented at the annual meeting of the American Association of Colleges for Teacher Education, New Orleans, LA.
6.
BiestaG. (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (2nd ed., pp. 95-118). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
7.
BransfordJ.Darling-HammondL.LePageP. (2005). Introduction. In Darling-HammondL.BransfordJ. (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 1-39). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
8.
BrykA. S.RaudenbushS. W. (1992). Hierarchical linear models for social and behavioural research: Applications and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
9.
CaracelliV.GreeneJ. (1993). Data analysis strategies for mixed method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15, 195-207. doi:10.2307/1164421
10.
ChiuM. M. (2008). Flowing toward correct contributions during group problem solving: A statistical discourse analysis. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17, 415-463.
11.
ChiuM. M.KhooL. (2005). A new method for analyzing sequential processes: Dynamic multilevel analysis. Small Group Research, 36, 600-631.
12.
ClayM. M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
13.
Cochran-SmithM.LytleS. (1993). Inside/outside: Teacher research and knowledge. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
14.
CubanL. (1992). Managing dilemmas while building professional communities. Educational Researcher, 2, 4-11.
15.
Darling-HammondL. (2010). Teacher education and the American future. Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 35-47.
16.
DeweyJ. (1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York, NY: Free Press.
17.
DeweyJ. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston, MA: D. C. Heath.
18.
DuffyG.MillerS.KearK.ParsonsS.DavisS.WilliamsB. (2008). Teachers’ instructional adaptations during literacy instruction. In KimY.RiskoV. J.ComptonD. L.DickinsonD. K.HundleyM. K.JimenezR. T.LeanderK. M.Wells RoweD. (Eds.), 57th Yearbook of the national reading conference (pp. 160-171). Oak Creek, WI: National Reading Conference.
19.
FarrellT. S. C. (2007). Failing the practicum: Narrowing the gap between expectations and reality with reflective practice. TESOL Quarterly, 40(1), 193-201.
20.
FountasI. C.PinnellG. S. (1996). Guided reading: Good first teaching for all. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
21.
GiovannelliM. (2003). Relationship between reflective disposition toward teaching and effective teaching. Journal of Educational Research, 96, 293-309. doi:10.1080/00220670309597642
22.
GoldsteinH. (1995). Multilevel statistical models. Sydney, New South Wales, Australia: Edward Arnold.
23.
GooddellJ. E. (2006). Using critical incident reflections: A self-study as a mathematics teacher educator. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 9, 221-248. doi:10.1007/s10857-006-9001-0
24.
GreeneM. (1988). The dialectic of freedom. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
25.
HackerD. J.KeenerM. C.KircherJ. C. (2009). Writing is applied metacognition. In HackerD. J.DunloskyJ.GraesserA. C. & A. C. (Eds.), Handbook of metacognition in education (pp. 154-172). New York, NY: Routledge.
26.
HammernessK. (2006). Seeing through teachers’ eyes: Professional ideals and classroom practices. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
27.
HammernessK.Darling-HammondL.BransfordJ.BerlinerD.Cochran-SmithM.McDonaldM.ZeichnerK. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In Darling-HammondL.BransfordJ. (Eds.), Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 358-389). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
28.
HaverbackH.ParaultS. (2008). Pre-service reading teacher efficacy and tutoring: A review. Educational Psychology Review, 20, 237-255. doi:10.1007/s10648-008-9077-4
29.
HaydenH. E.PasmanT. D. (December2008). Developing reflective practice: Just a matter of time?Presentation at annual meeting of the National Reading Conference, Orlando, Florida.
30.
HaydenH. E.RundellT. D.Smyntek-GworekS. (2013). Adaptive expertise: A view from the top and the ascent. Teaching Education. doi: 10.1080/10476210.2012.724054
31.
HoleS.McEnteeG. H. (1999). Reflection is at the heart of practice. Educational Leadership, 56, 34-37.
JayJ. K.JohnsonK. L. (2002). Capturing complexity: A typology of reflective practice for teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18, 73-85. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(01)00051-8
34.
KennedyP. (2008). Guide to econometrics (6th ed.). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
35.
KinsellaE. A. (2007). Embodied reflection and the epistemology of reflective practice. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 41, 395-409.
36.
KorthagenF. A. J.KesselsJ. P. A. M. (1999). Linking theory and practice: Changing the pedagogy of teacher education. Educational Researcher, 28(4), 4-17. doi:10.2307/1176444
37.
KorthagenF.VasalosA. (2005). Levels in reflection: Core reflection as a means to enhance professional growth. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 11, 47-71. doi:10.1080/1354060042000337093
38.
KramarskiB.MichalskyT. (2009). Investigating preservice teachers’ professional growth in self-regulated learning environments. Journal of Education Psychology, 101, 161-175. doi:10.1037/a0013101
39.
LamB. H. (2011). A reflective account of a pre-service teacher’s effort to implement a progressive curriculum in field practice. Schools: Studies in Education, 8, 22-39.
40.
LoughranJ. J. (2006). Developing a pedagogy of teacher education: Understanding teaching and learning about teaching. New York, NY: Routledge.
41.
LunenbergM.KorthagenF. A. J. (2005). Breaking the didactic circle: A study on some aspects of the promotion of student-directed learning by teachers and teacher educators. European Journal of Teacher Education, 28, 1-22. doi:10.1080/02619760500039589
42.
LytleS. L.Cochran-SmithM. (1992). Teacher research as a way of knowing. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 447-474.
43.
MacbethK. P. (2006). Diverse, unforeseen, and quaint difficulties: The sensible responses of novices learning to follow instructions in academic writing. Research in the Teaching of English, 41, 180-207.
44.
MacKinnonD. P.LockwoodC. M.WilliamsJ. (2004). Confidence limits for the indirect effect: Distribution of the product and resampling methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 39, 99-128.
45.
MillerS. M. (2007). How literature discussion shapes thinking: ZPDs for teaching/learning habits of the heart and mind. In KozulinA.GindisB.AgeyevV. S.MillerS. M. (Eds.), Vygotsky’s educational theory in cultural context (pp. 289-316). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
46.
MilnerH. (2010). What does teacher education have to do with teaching? Implications for diversity studies. Journal of Teacher Education, 61, 118-131. doi:10.1177/0022487109347670
47.
NilssonP. (2009). From lesson plan to new comprehension: Exploring student teachers’ pedagogical reasoning in learning about teaching. European Journal of Teacher Education, 32, 239-258. doi:10.1080/02619760802553048
48.
Orland-BarakL.YinonH. (2007). When theory meets practice: What student teachers learn from guided reflection on their own classroom discourse. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23, 957-969. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.06.005
49.
OstorgaA. N. (2006). Developing teachers who are reflective practitioners: A complex process. Issues in Teacher Education, 15(2), 5-20.
50.
PeughJ. L.EndersC. K. (2004). Missing data in educational research. Review of Educational Research, 74, 525-556. doi:10.3102/00346543074004525
51.
Pui-lanK.BrownW. P.DelamarterS.FrankT. E.MarshallJ. L.MennE.RiggsM. Y. (2005). Taken with surprise: Critical incidents in teaching. Teaching Theology and Religion, 8, 35-46. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9647.2005.00223.x
52.
ReimanA. J. (1999). The evolution of the social roletaking and guided reflection framework in teacher education: Recent theory and quantitative synthesis of research. Teaching and Teacher Education, 15, 597-612. doi:10.1016/S0742-051X(99)00016-5
53.
RiskoV. J.RollerC. M.CumminsC.BeanR. M.BlockC. C.AndersP. L.FloodJ. (2008). A critical analysis of research on reading teacher education. Reading Research Quarterly, 43, 252-288. doi:10.1598/RRQ.43.3.3
54.
SchönD. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, NY: Basic Books.
55.
ShepelE. N. L. (1995). Teacher self-identification in culture from Vygotsky’s developmental perspective. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 26, 425-442. doi:10.1525/aeq.1995.26.4.05x1062v
56.
ShulmanL. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.
57.
StraussA.CorbinJ. (1998). Basics of qualitative research techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). London, England: Sage.
58.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative and quantitiative approaches (Applied social research methods series, Vol. 46). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
59.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (2006, April). Validity issues in mixed methods research: Calling for an integrative framework. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.
60.
TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (2008). Quality of inference in mixed methods research: Calling for an integrative framework. In BergmanM. M. (Ed.) Advances in mixed methods research: Theory and applications (pp. 101-119). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
61.
TeddlieC.TashakkoriA. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quantitative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
62.
TillmanL. C. (2003). Mentoring, reflection, and reciprocal journaling. Theory Into Practice, 42, 226-233. doi:10.1353/tip.2003.0038
63.
TrippD. (1993). Critical incidents in teaching: Developing professional judgment. New York, NY: Routledge.
64.
VygotskyL. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
65.
WellsG. (2003). Los ninos se alfabetizan hablando (Children talk their way into literacy.) In GarciaJ. R. (Ed.), Ensenar a escribir sin prisas . . . pero con sentido (pp. 54-76). Seville, Spain: Publicaciaones del M.C.E.P.
