The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Demystifying Reflection: A Study of Pedagogical Strategies that Encourage Reflective Journal Writing
Abstract
Reflection is a mysterious concept to many of the students who enter our graduate-level, secondary teacher education program at a large, Southeastern university. Although all already hold degrees in their subject areas and many have extensive life and work experience, few have written—or perhaps even thought—reflectively during their academic careers (King & Kitchener, 1994). The purpose of this study was to identify pedagogical strategies that helped preservice secondary teachers improve their reflective thinking via journal writing during the 1st semester of a yearlong professional program. A secondary purpose was to study the effectiveness of our own practices as teacher educators. We present brief case studies of four preservice teachers who met our criteria for growth in reflection and report their views of how and why they became more reflective over the course of the semester. We found that no single pedagogical strategy was best and that students responded differently to different strategies. These preservice teachers benefited from spending class time on defining, discussing, and viewing models of reflection. Overall, personalized feedback on their journals and their relationships with their instructors were most important in helping them grow. We must actively teach and model reflective skills in a variety of ways if we are to demystify reflection.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Linking Theory and Practice: Changing the Pedagogy of Teacher Education
Korthagen, F. A. J., & Kessels, J. P. A. M. (1999) · Educational Researcher · doi:10.3102/0013189x028004004 · Cited by 1,266
Teaching Student Teachers to Reflect
Zeichner, K., & Liston, D. (1987) · Harvard Educational Review · doi:10.17763/haer.57.1.j18v7162275t1w3w · Cited by 1,192
Cited by
Preparing Linguistically Responsive Teachers: Laying the Foundation in Preservice Teacher Education
Lucas, T., & Villegas, A. M. (2013) · Theory Into Practice · doi:10.1080/00405841.2013.770327 · Cited by 583
The Personalization of Conversational Agents in Health Care: Systematic Review
Kocaballi, A. B., Berkovsky, S., Quiroz, J. C., Laranjo, L., Tong, H. L., Rezazadegan, D., Briatore, A., & Coiera, E. (2019) · Journal of Medical Internet Research · doi:10.2196/15360 · Cited by 332
“…[61]: while implicit personalization with its often-imperceptible user models and hidden assumptions can result in biased decision-making [62], over-reliance on system suggestions [63], and filter bubbles [64], explicit personalization may involve very formulaic and superficial choices…”
BackgroundFolk Belief Theory, the Rigor Gap, and the Achievement Gap
Torff, B. (2014) · The Educational Forum · doi:10.1080/00131725.2013.878424 · Cited by 15
Metadata
- Authors
- Spalding, E., & Wilson, A.
- Venue
- Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2002-10
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 1393-1421
- ISSN
- 0040-0475 (ISSN-L)
- 0161-4681
- 1467-9620
- OpenAlex
- W2076422055
- Cited by
- 331
- References
- 2
- FWCI
- 18.27
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Demystifying Reflection: A Study of Pedagogical Strategies that Encourage Reflective Journal Writing. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1467-9620.00208
- The paper
- Spalding, E., & Wilson, A. (2002). Demystifying Reflection: A Study of Pedagogical Strategies that Encourage Reflective Journal Writing. Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9620.00208
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.