Page 144 - Štremfel, Urška, ed., 2016. Student (Under)achievement: Perspectives, Approaches, Challenges. Ljubljana: Pedagoški inštitut. Digital Library, Documenta 11.
P. 144
ficult to change. According to this model, a teacher’s true personality, profes-
sional identity, notions and competencies define his/her teaching strategies
and, through that, the quality of his/her teaching. However, the opposite con-
nection also exists, which is also important and cannot be neglected – chang-
es to those layers nearer the surface through reflection can lead to changes in
the layers further down.
Understanding each of the individual influences is of key importance in
order to increase the effectiveness of reciprocal influences. While keeping in
mind that an educational effect is a complex consequence of giving meanings
to reciprocal social interactions, it is most certainly necessary to point out the
possibilities of how to form and transform one’s knowledge about a certain oc-
currence. Only if teachers remain aware that their own knowledge and actions
can be changed, and know the ways in which this can be achieved, can it be
expected that they will transfer this knowledge to youths. At the same time,
the resilience of youths can only be increased if they are made aware of the
possibilities made available through the changing of knowledge.
Korthagen (2004) thus developed a model of core reflection, through
144 which an individual can become aware and improve his/her options for trans-
forming the already acquired knowledge, experience, cognitive structures,
feelings, emotions, motivation to learn and an engaged attitude towards work
etc. Korthagen and Kessels (1999) describe four phases (the ALACT model3 for
reflection), which are suitable for facilitating and developing an (active) reflec-
tive attitude towards one’s professional activities and professional develop-
ment, based on an analysis of one’s own practice and cognition that guide an
individual’s thinking, actions, evaluation and comprehensive activities: 1. ac-
tion; 2. looking back on the action; 3. awareness of essential aspects; 4. creat-
ing alternative methods for action.
(Self )Reflection in such a cyclical form is the activity that directs teachers
towards creating new approaches and methods for further actions while ana-
lysing their own activities. Teachers’ own views of knowledge, learning and
teaching can also be of key importance in what teachers report about stu-
dents (are students successful, how successful they are) and how students per-
ceive this assessment. None of the discussed concepts (e.g. grading or trans-
ferring knowledge) can be defined in a limited fashion as part of subjective
conceptions, but rather they belong in one of the key competencies of teach-
ers, as was previously stated at the start of this paper.
3 The ALACT model is named after the initial letters of individual phases: 1. Action; 2. Looking back on
action; 3. Awareness of essential aspects; 4. Creating alternative methods of action. The fourth phase is
followed by the fifth, labelled Trial, which at the same time functions as phase 1 – Action (Korthagen
and Kessels, 1999).
student (under)achievement: perspectives, approaches, challenges
sional identity, notions and competencies define his/her teaching strategies
and, through that, the quality of his/her teaching. However, the opposite con-
nection also exists, which is also important and cannot be neglected – chang-
es to those layers nearer the surface through reflection can lead to changes in
the layers further down.
Understanding each of the individual influences is of key importance in
order to increase the effectiveness of reciprocal influences. While keeping in
mind that an educational effect is a complex consequence of giving meanings
to reciprocal social interactions, it is most certainly necessary to point out the
possibilities of how to form and transform one’s knowledge about a certain oc-
currence. Only if teachers remain aware that their own knowledge and actions
can be changed, and know the ways in which this can be achieved, can it be
expected that they will transfer this knowledge to youths. At the same time,
the resilience of youths can only be increased if they are made aware of the
possibilities made available through the changing of knowledge.
Korthagen (2004) thus developed a model of core reflection, through
144 which an individual can become aware and improve his/her options for trans-
forming the already acquired knowledge, experience, cognitive structures,
feelings, emotions, motivation to learn and an engaged attitude towards work
etc. Korthagen and Kessels (1999) describe four phases (the ALACT model3 for
reflection), which are suitable for facilitating and developing an (active) reflec-
tive attitude towards one’s professional activities and professional develop-
ment, based on an analysis of one’s own practice and cognition that guide an
individual’s thinking, actions, evaluation and comprehensive activities: 1. ac-
tion; 2. looking back on the action; 3. awareness of essential aspects; 4. creat-
ing alternative methods for action.
(Self )Reflection in such a cyclical form is the activity that directs teachers
towards creating new approaches and methods for further actions while ana-
lysing their own activities. Teachers’ own views of knowledge, learning and
teaching can also be of key importance in what teachers report about stu-
dents (are students successful, how successful they are) and how students per-
ceive this assessment. None of the discussed concepts (e.g. grading or trans-
ferring knowledge) can be defined in a limited fashion as part of subjective
conceptions, but rather they belong in one of the key competencies of teach-
ers, as was previously stated at the start of this paper.
3 The ALACT model is named after the initial letters of individual phases: 1. Action; 2. Looking back on
action; 3. Awareness of essential aspects; 4. Creating alternative methods of action. The fourth phase is
followed by the fifth, labelled Trial, which at the same time functions as phase 1 – Action (Korthagen
and Kessels, 1999).
student (under)achievement: perspectives, approaches, challenges
