Skip to Main Content

Models of Reflection

A structure for reflective practice

When learning to use reflective practice and reflective writing, it can be helpful to start with a model or framework, as you get used to the process. In general, any model or framework is likely to have the following three phases:

Description: The goal of this phase is to recall, describe and record the experience, including the actual events and your emotions or internal reactions. 

Analysis: This phase involves critically unpacking your actions and behaviour, and developing an understanding of the way prior experiences, unconscious reactions, emotions, underlying assumptions or stereotypes, the environment, or other factors can influence your experiences. Honesty and authenticity are important here, in order to facilitate self-awareness, growth and change. Skilled practitioners will use this phrase to understand their own tacit and unconscious knowledge. This phase can also be used to hypothesise about possible solutions or changes that can improve future similar experiences.

Action: The focus during this phase is planning what action you can take following the analysis. This can include proactive steps like skills development or training, or a commitment to behaving differently in the future. 

There are many models you can use to structure reflective practice and reflective writing; there are a few selected examples below. 

Models of Reflection

Gibbs' Reflective Cycle, developed in 1988, is widely used in healthcare as well as other disciplines. 

Each stage of the cycle builds on the previous stage, until the practitioner arrives at an action they can implement. 

Description 

The first stage is about recalling the situation and describing it as accurately as possible. 

  • What happened? How and where did it happen?
  • Who was present? What did you and the other people do?
  • Why were you there?
  • What was the outcome of the situation? What did you want to happen?

Feelings

This stage is about describing the emotions and internal thoughts you had during, before and after the situation.

  • What were you feeling during the situation? What were you feeling before and after? Has there been any change?
  • What do you think other people were feeling before, during and after the situation?
  • What were you thinking during the situation? What do you think about it now?

Evaluation

During this stage, you can begin to evaluate what happened and identify underlying issues or problems. Try to be as objective and honest as possible. You can include positive aspects as well as negative, in order to fully evaluate the whole situation.

  • What was good and bad about the situation?
  • What went well? What didn't go well?
  • What did you and the other people contribute to the situation? (Positive or negative.)

Analysis

This stage is when you begin to try to make sense of what happened. Previous stages have focused on the details of what happened; during this step, you can start to extract meaning. (This can be a good stage to start including academic literature.)

  • Why did things go well? Why didn't they go well?
  • What sense can I make of the situation?
  • What knowledge - my own, others, or published research - can help me to understand the situation?

Conclusions

During this stage, you can summarise your learning and highlight what you would change in the future. 

  • What did I learn from this situation?
  • How could this have been a more positive situation for everyone involved?
  • What skills do I need to develop, if I face a situation like this in the future?
  • What else could I have done?

Action plan

This stage is when you can turn your conclusions into actionable steps. In addition to planning skills development or training, it can be helpful to think about how you could act differently - planning what you'd like to do can help to make this more achievable.

  • If I had to do the same thing again, what would I change about my behaviour?
  • How will I develop the skills I need?

 

Further reading

 

There have been a few different versions of this model, by researchers including Borton, Driscoll and Rolfe, but in general it remains one of the simplest frameworks for reflection, and links very closely with the experience-reflection-action cycle described above.

The model proposes three questions to ask after a critical incident has taken place, to allow you to extract learning from it:

  • What? The answer to this question should describe what happened, and identify both facts and feelings associated with the incident.
  • So what? You can use this answer to extract meaning. You can analyse your actions, their cause and effect, and the 'bigger picture' surrounding the incident. You can also question what knowledge you had during the situation, the influence of different variables, and consider any other theories or past experiences that help you to make sense of the incident. You can also bring in literature or evidence to relate the experience to theories, standards, and the experiences of others.
  • Now what? The answer to this question should empower you to create a plan, or actions to implement so you can achieve your goal, whether that's furthering your knowledge, building skills, or personal growth.

Further reading

Typically considered a model for more experienced practitioners, Atkins & Murphy's 1993 model was developed during a literature review about other models of reflection. At first three stages, the model later evolved to include five or seven stages. Rather than exploring a situation, it focuses on a trigger point of discomfort or uneasiness on the part of the practitioner to start the process.

The five-stage version of the model incorporates the following steps:

  • Become aware of uncomfortable feelings and thoughts. This initiating stage involves a recognition by the professional that something doesn't feel right, as this is often a sign to an experienced practitioner that a situation requires attention. Healthcare professionals can experience discomfort if they experience a mismatch between expectations and reality during an incident, or between their own knowledge and an incident, and this can provoke reflection.
  • Describe the situation. This stage focuses on recalling and recording what happened, including actions and the practitioner's feelings, objectively and without making judgements.
  • Analyse feelings and knowledge. To make sense of the discomfort, this stage is about constructively and critically analysing the information produced in the first two stages. It can involve: examining the knowledge the practitioner applied and whether this was adequate; assumptions the practitioner made and whether these were true or false; reviewing how the practitioner behaved and how this affected the situation, etc. It can also involve examination of their emotional reactions, with emphasis on processing and self-awareness, to retain positive or useful feelings, and release or remove obstructive feelings. 
  • Evaluate the relevance of knowledge. This stage is usually very personal; the practitioner must assess how the analysis in the previous stage is relevant for their growth as a practitioner, and whether they've identified and resolved the issue that caused the initial discomfort. 
  • Identify any learning. The outcome of this process should be to develop a new perspective on the situation and understand any learning that can be applied to future practice. Extended versions of this model include an action plan stage, which the practitioner can use to commit to a course of action.

 

Further reading

 

Links