Table 4 Theories and models of group reflections
From: A systematic scoping review of group reflection in medical education
Author | Concept |
|---|---|
Reflective Theories | |
It involves a concrete experience, followed by reflective observation and reflection on the experience. It is theorized that abstract concepts and generalizations are formed, which are experimented in future situations, resulting in subsequent new concrete experiences. | |
Reflexivity [88] | Reflexivity is described as a level of consciousness of ‘cultural, political, social, linguistic and ideologic’ origins of one’s own and others’ voice and perspective. It increases awareness of how personal values and beliefs interconnect with social and environmental contexts. |
Mezirow’s transformative learning theory [18] | Encouragement of challenging personal and cultural ‘frames of reference’. In professional dilemmas, one is encouraged to consider alternative responses, focusing on the problem rather than emotions. |
Common phases of debriefing [104] | 1. Reaction/ Description a. Time for participants to diffuse emotions and decompress b. Open-ended questions about participants’ feelings c. Reviewing facts of event 2. Understanding/Analysis a. Preview topics/learning objectives b. Explore, discuss inquire c. “What happened and why did it happen?” 3. Application/Summary a. Applying learning experiences to a future encounter b. Allow participants to ask questions |
Rudolph et al. [104] | • Reaction ⚬ “How did that feel?” to hear initial reactions and validate emotional responses. • Analysis ⚬ Focus on understanding what, why and how actions evolved during the scenario ⚬ Investigates gaps noted during the scenario ⚬ Understand the rationale behind actions ⚬ Work toward closing the gap and reflective discussion ⚬ Use of advocacy inquiry • Summary ⚬ Focus on learning points from the analysis phase and “take away” points |
The PEARLS framework is similar to the one outline by Rudolph et al. However, an additional description follows the reactions phase to invite participants to summarize their perspective of the experience to ensure all members and the facilitator are on the same page. | |
Korthagen’s ALACT model [116] | (1) Looking back on an action (2) Awareness of essential aspects (3) Creating alternative methods of action |
Commonly used as a debriefing model, it involves discussing the positive points from the reflective experience (“plus”) and points that can be improved on (“delta”). | |