A vital requirement of becoming an effective teacher is engaging in professional reflective practice. This is of utmost importance and a skill that should be taught during the pre-service years (Pedro*, 2005) and must be continued throughout their career to ensure a higher level of professional practise with an emphasis on student learning (Larrivee, 2008). The ability of learning how to effectively become a reflective practitioner is not something that can be taught quickly. It takes time for an individual to overcome their fears of being criticised and learn how to turn constructive feedback into meaningful changes (Russell*, 2005).

I find that this can be challenging and embarrassing which is something that I will personally need to overcome. Individual reflective practice requires recognition of my own mistakes and imperfections whilst reflective practice with a peer or mentor can be more challenging as it involves exposing these personal flaws to others. 
 
“Reflection, meant to make teaching and learning understandable and open, has itself been an invisible process to many of our pre‐service teachers.” (Ward & McCotter, 2004, p. 255)
 
Pre-service teachers can practise personal reflections via journals, either through a simple dialogue journal, or a more effective response journal. Pre-service teachers who journaled reflectively were found to have more insight into their shortcomings and were able to more effectively learn from this (Lee, 2007). While this is a good way to start becoming a reflective practitioner, I need to be able to open myself to constructive feedback from peers. A method that has been trialled is using a teacher mentor who helps guide and assist a pre-service teacher through their studies, with an emphasis on reflective practises and how these will help shape an individual’s teaching identity (Walkington, 2005). 

One important system that can be used as a starting point for preservice teachers is the Gibbs reflective cycle. While this is a necessary starting point the ultimate goal for any teacher should be to reach “a higher order where teachers examine the ethical, social and political consequences of their teaching, grappling with the ultimate purposes of schooling.”(Larrivee, 2008 p. 2). 

An issue that teachers face is a lack of time. Being able to engage in meaningful reflective practise takes time, especially if there is peer feedback involved. As teachers currently have an extraneous workload often preservice teachers will be unable to find mentors (Walkington, 2005), as they graduate to practicing teachers, they might find that their workload and the expectations from the students’ parents become overbearing, effectively pushing reflective practises to the backburner (Farrell, 2003). Yet, if at the time of graduation, the pre-service teacher is already equipped with the skills necessary to reach a higher level of reflection then they will enter their career with a strong outline of their professional identity and can continue to use their techniques of reflection to grow and shape their identity further, with no impact from lack of time (Harford & MacRuairc, 2008). 

As I develop my professional identity and professional practice, I will utilise timetabling to ensure I reflect weekly, both personally and with my peers. By keeping a response journal, I can reflect on a daily basis without losing time. Peer reflections would hopefully be bi-weekly, either via face-to-face meet ups or online video chats, with supportive peers to reduce embarrassment.


ReferencesFarrell, T. S. (2003). Reflective practice in action: 80 reflection breaks for busy teachers. Corwin Press. 
​
Harford, J., & MacRuairc, G. (2008). Engaging student teachers in meaningful reflective practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(7), 1884-1892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.02.010

Larrivee, B. (2008). Development of a tool to assess teachers’ level of reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 9(3), 341-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940802207451

Lee, I. (2007). Preparing pre-service English teachers for reflective practice. ELT Journal, 61(4), 321-329. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccm022

Pedro *, J. Y. (2005). Reflection in teacher education: Exploring pre‐service teachers’ meanings of reflective practice. Reflective Practice, 6(1), 49-66. https://doi.org/10.1080/1462394042000326860

Russell*, T. (2005). Can reflective practice be taught? Reflective Practice, 6(2), 199-204. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940500105833

Walkington, J. (2005). Becoming a teacher: Encouraging development of teacher identity through reflective practice. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 53-64. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866052000341124

Ward, J. R., & McCotter, S. S. (2004). Reflection as a visible outcome for preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(3), 243-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2004.02.004

Illustration by Ester Dus (@esterdus)

 
Digital natives. A myth or reality? 
 
This is a serious issue currently facing the education sector. The central belief is that the new generation has a technological advantage over their teachers. This presumption of a digital divide deem that past generations lack the ability to effectively teach via technology. The myth has at its core a belief that the new generation have developed mental changes to think and process information in different ways than the prior generation (Prensky, M. 2001). Following from this idea is the assumption people from the younger generation are inherently good at using technology, and that the older generation are incapable of assimilating into a digital lifestyle.
 
However, I believe there is no correlation between an individual’s age and their technological ability. The major influence for being able to have a better understanding of technology is an individual’s socioeconomic status. While it may be true that children from higher socioeconomic backgrounds had opportunities and capabilities to grow up with and learn from the newest technologies, the same cannot be assumed for those of lower socioeconomic standing. 
 
While I believe that this theory is a myth, some of the older generation may be apprehensive to take up learning and teaching via new technologies for fear of not understanding or being labelled a ‘Boomer’ by their students. While it is true that the new generation grows up with a device in their hands, it is not true the older generation cannot adapt and overcome. “Children knowing more than their parents have been exaggerated … Talk of digital natives obscures children's need for support in developing digital skills” (Livingstone, Haddon, Görzig, & Ólafsson, 2011). Showing that even though the older generation did not grow up with technology, it is not the case that it is not necessary to teach the digital generation how to effectively use technologies, simply because they grew up with them.
 
The literature is almost definitive in agreeing that the digital native is a myth, however this is one of the contentious topics which will continually be discussed. Studies strongly support the belief that digital natives are a myth, where growing up with certain technologies doesn’t necessarily mean that the individual will be capable of using it without further training. “… it appears they [university students] do not recognize the enhanced functionality of the applications they own and use” (Bullen, 2008, p.7), which indicates that Prensky’s original assumption that the ‘digital generation’ are able to effectively use technology without training is incorrect.  Further there is no basis to show that the older generation cannot be as/or more capable than the so-called homo zappiens (Veen, 2007).
 
As a future educator I will need to ensure that I stay up to date with current technological trends to ensure that I am able to continue to be able to actively engage my future students (Au-Yong-Oliveira, M. et al. 2018). This includes embedding technology in learning to develop student’s digital skills and aim to close the gap of digital divide.
 
References

​Au-Yong-Oliveira, M., Gonçalves, R., Martins, J., & Branco, F. (2018). The social impact of technology on millennials and consequences for higher education and leadership. Telematics and Informatics, 35(4), 954-963. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2017.10.007

Kirschner, P. A., & De Bruyckere, P. (2017). The myths of the digital native and the multitasker. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 135-142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.001

Livingstone, S., Haddon, L., Görzig, A., & Ólafsson, K. (2014). EU kids online II: A large-scale quantitative approach to the study of European children's use of the internet and online risks and safety. https://doi.org/10.4135/978144627305014533936

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
​
Veen, W., & Van Staalduinen, J. (2009). The homo Zappiens and its consequences for learning in universities. Changing Cultures in Higher Education, 323-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03582-1_24