Levels of Reflectivity and Reflective Judgment

Van Manen's (1977) work with "levels of reflectivity" and Tom's (1985) "arenas of the problematic" suggest, like cognitive developmentalists such as Kitchener and King(1994), that teacher reflection can occur at increasing levels of complexity and critical perspective-taking. The levels of reflective judgment studied by Kitchener and King (1994) are briefly summarized below.

Level One - Pre-reflective.

At the first level, knowledge is perceived as certain, immediately available, and gained through direct observation (Kitchener and King, 1994). The dominant concern is with efficient and effective application of educational knowledge for the purposes of attaining certain outcomes.

Level Two - Quasi-reflective.

The second level is called quasi-reflective. Knowledge is perceived as idiosyncratic and based on situations or personal beliefs. Knowledge is gained via our own or other's biases or data. Practical matters are important, and there is some ability to weigh evidence within one point of view.

Level Three - Reflective.

Only at the third level, reflection or true reflective judgment, evidence is carefully weighed and principles and ethical criteria are utilized as a part of the discourse about educational commitment and actions. Multiple points of view are considered in decision making, and there is certainty that some knowledge claims are better or more complete than others based on careful review of the evidence.

 

Although the literature on reflection has been extensive, far less is known about how to encourage deeper more complex reflection. The next section describes a process for encouraging deeper reflection that is based on recent theory and research in cognitive structures.