Keywords

1 Introduction

Building preservice teachers’ critical reflections on the understanding and transformation of their acquired knowledge are crucial in shaping their early professional development. However, preservice teachers in general are quite often found to have difficulties and feel disappointed when they taught in the actual classrooms due to the gaps between the acquired knowledge during teacher education and practicum experience (Korthagen et al., 2006). Defined as “deliberate thinking about action with a view to its improvement” (Hatton & Smith, 1995, p. 40), reflection is a valued emphasis in the current field experience requirements of teacher education programmes because preservice teachers are expected to develop the “ability to facilitate learning and talk meaningfully about their practice” (Tyrrell et al., 2013, p. 15). Peer dialogues in a virtual learning environment of preservice teachers from four countries on practical teaching issues indicated different reflected depths of teacher education and practicum (Wang et al., 2020). Classroom observation, which provides a direct way to observe and evaluate teachers’ teaching behaviours, is a vital tool for teacher evaluation and professional development (Martinez et al., 2016).

Therefore, reflective teaching and classroom observation can be two practical approaches for preservice teachers to improve reflection depth and ultimately achieve quality teaching. This study describes a pilot study examining the impact of a short self-access online training in reflective teaching (RT) and classroom observation (CO) on preservice teachers’ depths of reflection before they starts their practicum practice.

2 Literature Review

2.1 Reflective Teaching

Reflective teaching refers to teachers’ reflections of their teaching practice in the classroom, especially the problems they meet during teaching, to put forward appropriate strategies and methods to resolve them (Schön, 1983). However, problem-solving is not the only feature of reflective teaching. The knowledge and experience that preservice teachers have acquired in the past may not provide sufficient support for the current teaching situation. Preservice teachers need to transform from relying on the prior knowledge and experience to actively achieving new knowledge and creating new thoughts. Reflection allows preservice teachers to adopt the newly reconstructed knowledge into practice, thus further enhancing their teaching skills and promoting their practice. For instance, Lee (2005) believed that through teaching reflection, preservice teachers could continuously enrich their teaching knowledge, develop their teaching competence, apply the constructed new knowledge and accumulate experience in teaching practice.

However, preservice teachers need to consider a broader range of teaching to accomplish teaching effectiveness through an in-depth reflection. Moon (2007), for instance, classified four reflective writing levels: descriptive writing, descriptive writing with some reflection, descriptive reflective writing, and in-depth reflective writing. Considering how and the depth that learners reflect on their teaching practice, Ryan and Ryan (2013) created a Model for Teaching and Assessing Reflective Learning (TARL) for students and teachers to develop their critical thinking levels of reflection in tertiary education. TARL involves four hierarchical levels of reflection: reporting and responding, relating, reasoning, and reconstructing (see Table 25.1). TARL provides a holistic understanding of the gradual progress of reflections from elementary to profound by preservice and in-service teachers. The TARL model is beneficial for teachers to improve their teaching performance by describing and responding to a simple question using related theories to explain and better resolve the issues (Barton & Ryan, 2014).

Table 25.1 Model for teaching and assessing reflective learning (Ryan & Ryan, 2013)
Full size table

2.2 Classroom Observation

Classroom observations also contribute in generating deeper reflection on teaching performance. With an accurate teaching and learning situation, preservice teachers could objectively observe what happens in the classroom through classroom observation (CO). Peer observation, which is also beneficial to teachers’ professional development (O’Connell et al., 2000), helps preservice teachers reflect their teaching performance and form new insights.

Different classroom observation instruments have been used to evaluate teachers’ teaching practices. As a widely-researched instrument, the International Comparative Analysis of Learning and Teaching (ICALT) aims to study teaching behaviours and examine teaching behaviour growth (Van de Grift, 2007). The ICALT instrument has been adopted to help preservice teachers to improve their teaching practice during the teacher education period (Maulana & Helms-Lorenz, 2016; Maulana et al., 2017). Research shows that the ICALT stage model provides an appropriate description of the development of effective teaching for most teachers and each teacher’s current teaching skills (Van der Lans et al., 2017). Additionally, it has been verified that the ICALT instrument is invariance for measuring effective teaching across five different countries (Maulana et al., 2019).

2.3 Online Training of Preservice Teachers

With the popularity of massive open online courses (MOOCs), universities are eager to supplement existing curricula and self-regulating learning with online modules. With the rapid development of high technology, online learning and online training have contributed to teachers’ teaching reflection and professional development (Bates et al., 2016). In-service teachers considered their teaching benefitted from a one-year teacher online training program (Krammer et al., 2006).

Moreover, online learning through high technology, such as mobile phones and other wireless technologies, offers a fragmented time and relaxed atmosphere for encouraging preservice teachers to engage in the learning activities (Becker et al., 2018). An online learning platform allows preservice teachers to learn asynchronously with more autonomy and selectivity without time and space limit.

2.4 Practicum Preparation in the Chinese Context

Generally, both primary and secondary school teaching qualifications take four years’ study. To cultivate research-oriented teachers with a solid basis of theoretical knowledge and teaching practice, a few top teacher education universities offer two to three years of graduate study by selecting some excellent students.

Teaching reflection has been emphasised in teacher education programmes. According to the new curriculum of teacher education program (Ministry of Education [MOE] of China, 2011), preservice teachers need to have the ability to critically think about their learning and teaching, thus becoming reflective practitioners. They also need to prepare themselves as life-long learners, thus to continuously promoting their knowledge and teaching skills through the whole teaching career. During practicum preparation, they are required to deepen their understanding of the specific subject knowledge as well as pedagogical knowledge and develop the ability to launch reflective teaching and solve teaching problems through formal courses (i.e. teaching case study, classroom observation of high-quality class and famous teachers), and various learning activities (i.e. learning community, group discussion). MOE of China (2014) proposed setting up a new trinity mode in which teacher education universities, local governments and local schools cooperate to strengthen teacher preparation of preservice teachers. Preservice teachers can be well prepared during practicum practice.

There is a lack of research that considers the effects of an online training programme on the depths of preservice teachers’ reflections. Therefore, this study aimed at exploring the effects of a short self-access online training in reflective teaching and classroom observation on preservice teachers’ depths of reflection. The research questions addressed are as follows:

  1. 1.

    Can online training in reflective teaching and classroom observation enhance preservice teachers’ depths of reflection?

  2. 2.

    Do reflection topics make a difference in preservice teachers’ depths of reflection?

  3. 3.

    Does the order of the training sequence make a difference in preservice teachers’ depths of reflection?

3 Methodology and Research Design

This study adopted a quasi-experimental research design with two different methods to examine the effects of a short self-access online training on preservice teachers’ depth of reflection.

3.1 Participants

Thirty preservice teachers were recruited from a teacher education university in Hebei Province in northern China. All of them were in the second semester of their junior year during the data collection. Their ages varied from 18 to 24 years old. Three were male and twenty-seven were female. Their majors were classified into four majors: math and science studies, language studies (Chinese and English language study), primary education study, and others (i.e. History, Geography, Physical Education). In their future practicum practice, seven participants would be assigned to primary schools, and twenty-three to secondary schools based on their majors. However, their acquired knowledge was similar during practicum preparation. The participants were randomly divided into three groups: the control group without any training and two experimental groups, the Reflective Teaching-Classroom Observation Group (RT-CO Group) and the Classroom Observation-Reflective Teaching Group (CO-RT Group), differed in the sequence of the two training sessions (i.e., RT and CO). Each group has ten participants. Table 25.2 shows the details of the participants in each group. All participants joined voluntarily and were briefed on the research aim and procedures before submitting their consent forms. All information related to the participants was treated anonymously and confidentially.

Table 25.2 Information of participants
Full size table

3.2 Instruments

3.2.1 Online Training

The content of the training session was designed based on the relevant literature of RT and CO. For instance, the RT sessions were based on the studies on reflection and reflective teaching (e.g., Moon, 2007; Hall & Simeral, 2015) and collaborative reflection (e.g., Prilla & Renner, 2014; Wang & Quek, 2015); The CO sessions were based on the studies on classroom observation, effective teaching, and inspiring teaching (e.g., Borich, 2010; Van de Grift, 2014; Sammons et al., 2014, 2016; Ko et al., 2019).

Four narrated PowerPoints were developed on two themes, two on RT and two on CO. “What do preservice teachers need to know about RT?”, “How can you become a reflective teacher?”, “What do preservice teachers need to know about CO?”, “How to do classroom observation?”. The training sessions provided various learning activities to motivate preservice teachers to learn autonomously. The PowerPoints were designed initially in English and then translated into Chinese to make them more accessible for the participants. Figures 25.1 and 25.2 show some screenshots of the PowerPoints.

Fig. 25.1
A screenshot for 4 key behaviors essential for effective teaching and a T A R L model in a pyramid in both English and a foreign language. The pyramid has the following labels, reporting and responding, relating, reasoning, and reconstructing from top to bottom.

The screenshots of slides of online training in reflective teaching (English version VS Chinese version)

Full size image
Fig. 25.2
A screenshot for the applications of classroom observations and three points that enlist the lesson observation of teaching performance in both English and a foreign language. It has a picture of a teacher teaching the children.

The screenshots of slides of online training in classroom observation (English version VS Chinese version)

Full size image

3.2.2 Topics as Stimulation for Reflections

We explored the reflection task effects on reflection because preservice teachers understand and reflect on different teaching contexts using scenarios during teacher education (Snoek, 2003; Aubusson & Schuck, 2013). Thus, after each training session, participants were given two topics to stimulate their reflections to write a log for each. In the RT training sessions, participants were asked to comment on a math teacher’s teaching reflection (Topic 1, Fig. 25.3) and write a reflective log on their own limited teaching experience (Topic 2, Fig. 25.4). In CO training sessions, participants were asked to write whatever they wanted to discuss after observing a teacher teaching insects (Topic 3, Fig. 25.5) and two overseas teachers teaching Geography and Math (Topic 4, Fig. 25.6).

Fig. 25.3
A screenshot of a case study on the teaching reflection of Alisa, a math teacher. It has 5 questions to comment on the teacher's reflection. It requires a word limit of at least 100 words.

Topic 1- A math teacher’s teaching reflection

Full size image
Fig. 25.4
A screenshot of an activity to write a self-reflection diary based on eight questions with a writing example beneath. It requires a word limit of at least 100 words.

Topic 2- A self-reflection dairy

Full size image
Fig. 25.5
A screenshot of a conversation between a teacher and four pupils about insects based on the observation of a lesson taken by the teacher. It asks the pupils to write their observations in at least 100 words.

Topic 3- A teaching case of insects

Full size image
Fig. 25.6
A screenshot for a classroom observation has 2 photos of 2 overseas teachers teaching in their respective classrooms. The activity asks about the differences between the two teaching methods, and their advantages, and disadvantages to be written in at least 100 words.

Topic 4- Classroom observation

Full size image

3.3 Training Session Sequence

We could not find any literature on the effects of learning RT and CO in different sequences. Both topics were not formally taught in the university of the participants. All participants of the two experimental groups were asked to go through a training session of two PowerPoints in two weeks. However, the training sequence was different for each group (see Table 25.3). The RT-CO Group took two sessions of RT first and then two sessions of CO; the CO-RT Group took the training sessions in reverse order. The participants in the two experimental groups wrote the reflective logs according to the training sequence.

Table 25.3 Training sequence for three groups
Full size table

Training sessions with reflective logs were delivered online to participants via WeChat, a Chinese instant messaging system. Each time, all participants were asked to finish learning an online training session before submitting a reflective log in three days. Although the control group did not take the online training, they still needed to write reflective logs like their peers in the two experimental groups. The order of writing reflective logs for the participants in the Control Group was the same as the RT-CO Group.

3.4 Data Analysis

First, an in-depth qualitative dialogue analysis (Hennessy et al., 2016) was conducted to determine the depths of reflection in the reflective logs. The four hierarchical levels of TARL (Ryan & Ryan, 2013) were adopted to categorize the depths of every reflective statement found. Table 25.4 shows the coding descriptions with some examples of excerpts from reflective logs. The first author split the reflective logs into reflective statements line by line and then coded and categorized them according to the code descriptions and examples. Another coder from the same project team verified the splitting of reflective statements.

Table 25.4 Code descriptions of preservice teachers’ reflective logs
Full size table

The second coder coded 10% of the total materials. The interrater reliability was high using Krippendorff’s (1980) Alpha (α = 0.88). The first author made the final decision of the coding disagreements and coded the remaining reflective statements.

Second, chi-square tests were conducted with SPSS 25 to determine how the online training might affect the generation of reflective statements in different depths and whether various topics and training sequences might matter.

4 Findings

In total, 555 reflective statements were identified from 120 reflective logs of 30 participants. The descriptive statistics in Table 25.5 showed that the participants in the two experimental groups generated more reflective statements (N = 231, N = 180, respectively) than that of the Control Group (N = 144). The total mean score of preservice teachers’ depths of reflection was 1.29 (SD = 0.68). The depths of reflection of two experimental groups (M = 1.41, SD = 0.79; M = 1.26, SD = 0.66; respectively) were slightly higher than that of the Control Group (M = 1.13, SD = 0.45).

Table 25.5 Descriptive statistics of the depths of reflection
Full size table

4.1 Depths of Reflection of Preservice Teachers among Groups

In general, the reflective statements tend to be at the Reporting and Responding level (N = 466, 84%), rather than the Relating level (N = 17, 3.1%) and the Reasoning level (N = 72, 13.0%). No Reconstructing reflective statements were found. Table 25.6 shows that the percentages of Reporting and Responding statements (the RT-CO Group: 38.6%, the CO-RT Group: 33.3%, the Control Group: 28.1%), and Reasoning statements (the RT-CO Group: 61.1%, the CO-RT Group: 30.6%, the Control Group: 8.3%) in two experimental groups were higher than that of the Control Group. However, the percentage showed in Relating statements was at the same level between the RT-CO Group (41.2%) and the Control Group (41.2%), while the CO-RT Group showed low percentage (17.6%). The percentages of participants’ reflection depths was significantly different by group, χ2 (4, N = 555) = 19.87, p = 0.00.

Table 25.6 Cross-tabulation of depths of reflection among groups
Full size table

Based on the adjusted Z scores, a post hoc test showed that only the RT-CO Group was significantly different from the Control Group in Reasoning, p < 0.00. Moreover, a significant difference was shown between the appropriate proportions of the Reporting and Responding statements and Reasoning statements in the RT-CO Group, p < 0.00. The participants in the RT-CO Group were more likely to generate reflective statements related to the Reasoning statements.

4.2 Comparison of the Depths of Preservice Teachers’ Reflection by Different Topics

Table 25.7 shows that the participants generated more reflective statements in Topic 1, Topic 2 and Topic 4 (N = 164, 30.5%; N = 134, 24.9%; N = 151, 28.1%; respectively), while fewer in Topic 3 (N = 89, 16.5%). The proportion of the Reporting and Responding reflective statements (N = 466, 86.6%) was the most prevalent in each topic, whereas the proportions of statements in the Reasoning category were relatively small (N = 72, 13.4%). No statements in Topic 3 and Topic 4 were found in the Relating category. The depths of reflection of preservice teachers were significantly different by the topics, χ2 (3, N = 538) = 13.63, p = 0.00.

Table 25.7 Distribution of reflective statements at different depths of reflections by different topics
Full size table

Based on the adjusted Z scores, a post hoc test demonstrated that the proportions of reflection depths in Topic 4 differed significantly, p < 0.00. A relatively more significant proportion of the Reporting and Responding statements was shown in Topic 4.

4.3 Comparison of Depths of Reflection Between the Two Experimental Groups

Table 25.8 shows that the total count of reflective statements of the two topics on RT in the RT-CO Group (N = 65, N = 54, respectively) was higher than the CO-RT Group (N = 22, N = 49, respectively) whose topics were in CO after the participants finished the first two online training sessions. The total count of reflective statements of the two topics on RT in the CO-RT Group (N = 64, N = 45, respectively) was almost the same as the RT-CO Group (N = 47, N = 65, respectively) whose topics were in the CO. According to the results showed within the RT-CO Group, the percentages of reflective statements for two themes were similar (RT: 51.5%, CO: 48.4%). According to the results showed within the CO-RT Group, the frequency of reflective statements for the CO theme was 39.4%. However, the percentage of reflective statements was increased to 60.6% after finishing the last two online training sessions in RT. However, there was no significant difference between these two experimental groups by different topics, χ2 (3, N = 411) = 5.89, p = 0.12.

Table 25.8 Distribution of reflective statements in different topics between two experimental groups
Full size table

5 Conclusion and Discussion

This study explored the impact of online training in reflective teaching and classroom observation on the depths of reflection of preservice teachers. The results have generally verified the beneficial effects of the short self-access online training program and different topics, a no significant association with the training sequence, and a lack of depth in reflections despite online training.

5.1 Lack of Depth in Reflection in Chinese Preservice Teachers

The results showed that most of the participants’ reflective statements were at the Reporting and Responding level, indicating that all participants’ depths of reflection were relatively shallow. Despite the sample of excellent preservice teachers, we may expect the issue to be more worrisome in average and lower quality of teacher education based on student in-take. The nature of the self-access online training might explain the low performance because the preservice teachers were doing it without credit, and the online training sessions might hamper motivation to provide reflections the best they could. External factors in the social context could affect intrinsic motivation that stimulates people to produce satisfactory results (Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2013).

Contrary to the prediction of the TARL model (Ryan & Ryan, 2013), the Reasoning level showed a higher frequency than the Relating level. The preservice teachers in the Chinese context may have some difficulties in developing reflections. The Chinese preservice teachers tended to be more aware of pointing out the main elements of teaching problems. Still, they could not link the incidents that happened in the classroom with their theoretical knowledge. Teacher education reform has been promoted and deepened in China, but there are still some problems. As preservice teachers seldom have opportunities to teach in an authentic classroom, it is difficult to integrate their learned knowledge with practical practice during the initial teacher education stage. Their teaching reflection should also be improved (Chen, 2008; Li & Qin, 2015). It suggested that preservice teachers should be encouraged to critically think about their learning and teaching during the teacher education programme. Thus they could achieve higher teaching quality with developed reflections. Reflective skills significantly impact students’ perception of integration theory with practice (Hatlevik, 2012).

5.2 Beneficial Effects of the Online Practicum Preparation and Tasks of Instructional Design

The results showed a significant difference between the experimental and control groups, suggesting that the online training in reflective teaching and classroom observation could enhance preservice teachers’ reflections. The knowledge the preservice teachers acquired from such online training was beneficial for improving their reflections. It suggested that a short self-access online training program could positively support preservice teachers’ reflection during teacher education. Maulana and his colleagues (2015) have demonstrated that novice teachers’ teaching skills could be remarkably improved if they received support from teacher induction programmes, such as formal and informal teacher training and mentors’ guidance. Caywood and Duckett (2003) have found out that there were no significant differences between online teaching and on-campus teaching in student teachers’ learning outcome in teacher education.

Our results showed that the topics provided for preservice teachers after the online training sessions differed significantly, indicating different tasks may also affect the depths of preservice teachers’ reflections. Different tasks and scenarios could stimulate preservice teachers to think about the actual teaching situations and consider how to teach in the real classroom during practicum preparation. Student teachers got higher scores practising the given tasks, and their pedagogical knowledge improved before experiencing the actual classroom (Badiee & Kaufman, 2014). The internship experience of preservice teachers could be enriched through proper reflection tasks (Oner & Adadan, 2011). The results indicated that observing lesson videos could trigger preservice teachers to reflect more during their teacher training stage. Preservice teachers could have more profound reflections via an online video-case study in a teacher training program (Bayram, 2012).

5.3 Primacy of Reflection Training

The results showed that there was no significant difference between the RT-CO Group and the CO-RT Group by different topics. Nevertheless, the CO-RT Group caught up with the RT-CO Group after finishing the last two online training sessions in RT. Additionally, these two experimental groups generated more reflective statements after finishing the online training sessions in RT than CO. This result indicated that the training sequence might make a difference. The training sessions in reflective teaching is conducive for preservice teachers to develop their reflective ability through knowledge construction. The development of preservice teachers’ thinking towards their teaching practice and the acquired knowledge during initial teacher education can improve their teaching quality effectively. It has been demonstrated that reflection plays a vital role in initial teacher education (Pedro, 2005; Lee, 2008; Williams & Grudnoff, 2011). Teachers could achieve teaching effectiveness through integrating their enhanced understanding in teaching with better actions by reflection, and they could regard it as the foundation of the subsequent reflection (Ash & Clayton, 2004).

5.4 Limitations

We also acknowledge the limitations of this study. This study has been verified for the effects of our short self-access online training sessions. Future studies could explore whether preservice teachers’ reflection depth could be improved if they take the short online training as a part of credited courses. In this study, preservice teachers’ reflection levels were relatively shallow. Future studies could adopt collaborative reflection, such as group discussion, to stimulate their reflection depths.

Additionally, due to the pandemic of COVID-19, the schedule for online training became very tight. The online training was conducted within two weeks to finish all training sessions before preservice teachers started their teaching practicum. Therefore, they may not have enough time to reflect and consolidate what they have learned during online training. Future research could extend the length of online training for preservice teachers to have sufficient time to develop reflective skills.

5.5 Significance and Implications for Teacher Educators and Instruction Designers

By exploring the impact of short self-access online training sessions designed to stimulate reflections, this study has contributed to a fresh understanding of their strengths and limitations. This study contributes to the instructional design of reflection training with different tasks and their potentials in a teacher education programme. Moreover, this study is also conductive to encourage preservice teachers to reflect more and deeper on their teaching practice and ultimately develop professionalism based on solid reflective practices.