Achieving Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) in Early Childhood Education Through Critical Reflection in Transformative Learning

The central role of education in creating a more sustainable future has been already recognized by educators and policy-makers alike. This chapter argues that this can only be truly achieved through the efforts of teachers in implementing an “education of a different kind,” a general educational shift that seeks to encompass a converging transformation of the priorities and mindsets of education professionals. In this regard, the professional preparation of teachers, as the leading actors in shaping children’s learning processes, and their continuous professional development are vital considerations for Education for Sustainable Development (ESD) to be successfully achieved. Linking transformative learning and ESD has emerged as a distinct and useful pedagogy because they both support the process of critically examining habits of mind, then revising these habits and acting upon the revised point of view. This study aims to describe and evaluate the potential of transformative learning in innovating mainstream education toward sustainability by focusing on the role of critical reflection in a capacity building research project realized in Turkey. The data was gathered from 24 early childhood educators using a mixed-method research design involving learning diaries, a learning activities survey, and follow-up interviews. This chapter identified content, context, and application method of the in-service training as factors that have contributed to the reflective practices of the participants. In addition, presenting the implications regarding the individual differences in how learners engage in critical reflection practices, this research offers a framework for a content- and process-based approach derived from Mezirow’s conception of critical reflection

Factors confounding the assessment of reflection: a critical review

BACKGROUND: Reflection on experience is an increasingly critical part of professional development and lifelong learning. There is, however, continuing uncertainty about how best to put principle into practice, particularly as regards assessment. This article explores those uncertainties in order to find practical ways of assessing reflection. DISCUSSION: We critically review four problems: 1. Inconsistent definitions of reflection; 2. Lack of standards to determine (in)adequate reflection; 3. Factors that complicate assessment; 4. Internal and external contextual factors affecting the assessment of reflection. SUMMARY: To address the problem of inconsistency, we identified processes that were common to a number of widely quoted theories and synthesised a model, which yielded six indicators that could be used in assessment instruments. We arrived at the conclusion that, until further progress has been made in defining standards, assessment must depend on developing and communicating local consensus between stakeholders (students, practitioners, teachers, supervisors, curriculum developers) about what is expected in exercises and formal tests. Major factors that complicate assessment are the subjective nature of reflection's content and the dependency on descriptions by persons being assessed about their reflection process, without any objective means of verification. To counter these validity threats, we suggest that assessment should focus on generic process skills rather than the subjective content of reflection and where possible to consider objective information about the triggering situation to verify described reflections. Finally, internal and external contextual factors such as motivation, instruction, character of assessment (formative or summative) and the ability of individual learning environments to stimulate reflection should be considered

Global patient outcomes after elective surgery: prospective cohort study in 27 low-, middle- and high-income countries.

BACKGROUND: As global initiatives increase patient access to surgical treatments, there remains a need to understand the adverse effects of surgery and define appropriate levels of perioperative care. METHODS: We designed a prospective international 7-day cohort study of outcomes following elective adult inpatient surgery in 27 countries. The primary outcome was in-hospital complications. Secondary outcomes were death following a complication (failure to rescue) and death in hospital. Process measures were admission to critical care immediately after surgery or to treat a complication and duration of hospital stay. A single definition of critical care was used for all countries. RESULTS: A total of 474 hospitals in 19 high-, 7 middle- and 1 low-income country were included in the primary analysis. Data included 44 814 patients with a median hospital stay of 4 (range 2-7) days. A total of 7508 patients (16.8%) developed one or more postoperative complication and 207 died (0.5%). The overall mortality among patients who developed complications was 2.8%. Mortality following complications ranged from 2.4% for pulmonary embolism to 43.9% for cardiac arrest. A total of 4360 (9.7%) patients were admitted to a critical care unit as routine immediately after surgery, of whom 2198 (50.4%) developed a complication, with 105 (2.4%) deaths. A total of 1233 patients (16.4%) were admitted to a critical care unit to treat complications, with 119 (9.7%) deaths. Despite lower baseline risk, outcomes were similar in low- and middle-income compared with high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: Poor patient outcomes are common after inpatient surgery. Global initiatives to increase access to surgical treatments should also address the need for safe perioperative care. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN5181700

Bringing the heart and soul back in: collaborative inquiry and the DBA

Waddock and Lozano (2013) propose that there is an urgent need to bring the 'heart and soul' back into management education. Indeed, its absence has also been implicated in the plethora of recent scandals and the global financial crisis. We suggest that, in part, such issues are attributable to a continued over reliance on a scientific and detached form of knowing which displaces particular 'human characteristics' and in so doing, downplays our inherent connections to others. In contrast, we identify the importance of embracing a supplementary form of knowing- collaborative inquiry which potentially restores our connections to others in ways which provide opportunities for a more heartfelt and soulful management practice. Specifically, we extend Van de Ven and Johnson’s (2006) notion of collaborative inquiry to consider how it is mobilized in the context of a UK DBA program and in turn examine the impact this move accomplishes. Drawing upon a detailed analysis of twenty students’ reflective journals, we illustrate the ways in which they develop a form of empathy. Crucially, we found that this was one important means for (re)-connecting to others and in ways which begin to bring in a sense of heart and soul back into management education

Making changes to assessment methods in social work education: focusing on process and outcome

Moving towards delivering the new social work qualification led to many social work programmes considering the 'fitness for purpose' of assessment methods being used to assess the competence of social work students. This article highlights how changes in assessment methods were considered on one particular social work programme. The advantages and disadvantages of three particular assessment methods in relation to professional practice are debated here. Discussions emanating from these considerations and subsequent changes made to the programme are highlighted. The specific focus is on the experience of one particular social work programme which is used as a case study to illustrate issues of general relevance in social work education. It is intended that the reflections presented in this article will contribute to this broader arena of learning and teaching for professional practice taking place and continuing beyond the introduction of the new qualification

Preparing doctoral candidates for the viva: issues for students and supervisors

The PhD viva has been described as mysterious (Burnham, 1994; Morley et al, 2002), unpredictable (Rugg and Petre, 2004) and potentially fearful for students (Delamont et al, 2004), with its form and duration a function of the predilections of individual examiners as well as a function of differences across disciplines. Despite its myriad manifestations the PhD viva voce (live voice), as oral examination of the doctoral thesis, constitutes the final ‘test’ of the PhD endeavour. In the UK this is a private event, though in some countries such as Belgium and the Netherlands, for example, the viva is conducted in a public arena (Delamont et al, 2004). Although there is no standard or prescribed format, students across all disciplines can expect to defend their thesis with this involving questioning, clarification and discussion of key elements. This critical commentary discusses a number of issues that inform the preparation of students focusing on the role of the internal and external examiner, the viva voce process, guidance for students and some practical suggestions for supervisors and students, particularly the value of full role-play in building students’ confidence. The extent to which the doctoral viva, in its current ‘secret’ form, can be seen as a fully accountable and independently rigorous process is taken up in the conclusion that highlights the phenomenon of ‘cosy’ reciprocal examining arrangements, the spectre of litigation when things go wrong and the need to consider a fundamental review of both the purpose and conduct of the viva