Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-05T05:42:23.728Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Development and validation of reflective inventories: assisting radiation therapists with reflective practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2010

Naomi Findlay ,
Shane E. Dempsey  and
Helen M. Warren-Forward
Naomi Findlay*
Affiliation:
Medical Radiation Science, School of Health Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
Shane E. Dempsey
Affiliation:
Medical Radiation Science, School of Health Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
Helen M. Warren-Forward
Affiliation:
Medical Radiation Science, School of Health Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia
*
Correspondence to: Naomi Findlay, Medical Radiation Science, School of Health Science, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW 2308, Australia. Email: Naomi.Findlay@newcastle.edu.au
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Objective: Freeform reflective writing is one way that radiation therapists can document their development. Barriers to this form of writing include the fact that some radiation therapists do not know what to write or how to begin this writing process. This paper outlines the development and validation of guided inventories called the Newcastle Reflective Inventories and the validation of the Newcastle Reflective Analysis Tool as an effective tool for assessing short-form guided reflective writing.

Method: The Newcastle Reflective Inventories consist of a series of questions that guides the user through the reflective writing process. Validation of the Newcastle Reflective Inventories involved comparing the evidence of reflection in 14 freeform journals to that of 14 inventories completed on the same topic. Validation of the Newcastle Reflective Analysis Tool included the assessment of 30 Newcastle Reflective Inventories.

Results: There was a highly statistically significant difference (p < 0.001) in the high levels of reflection evident in the inventories when compared to the lower levels of reflection in the freeform journals. Good levels of agreement were achieved between the coders.

Discussion: These results show that the Newcastle Reflective Inventories are effective tools in promoting reflective writing when compared with freeform journaling.

Keywords

guided writingjournalingradiation therapyreflectionreflective practice
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 10 , Issue 1 , March 2011 , pp. 3 - 12
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Chapman, N, Warren-Forward, H, Dempsey, S. Workplace diaries promoting reflective practice in radiation therapy. Radiography 2009; 15(2): 166–170.Google Scholar
French, H, Dowds, J. An overview of Continuing Professional Development in physiotherapy. Physiotherapy 2007; 94(3): 190–197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turley, C. Fostering reflective practice. Radiat Therapist 2009; 18(1): 66–68.Google Scholar
Van Horn, R, Freed, S. Journaling and dialogue pairs to promote reflection in clinical nursing education. Nursing Educ Perspect 2008; 29(4): 220–225.Google ScholarPubMed
Waldo, N, Hermanns, M. Journaling unlocks fears in clinical practice. RN 2009; 72(5): 26–31.Google ScholarPubMed
Milinkovic, D, Field, N. Demystifying the reflective clinical journal. Radiography 2005; 11(3): 175–183.Google Scholar
Cole, M. Reflection in healthcare practice: why is it useful and how might it be done? Work Based Learn Primary Care 2005; 3: 13–22.Google Scholar
Riley-Doucet, C, Wilson, S. A three-step method of self-reflection using reflective journal writing. J Adv Nurs 1997; 25(5): 964–968.Google Scholar
Wong, F, Loke, A, Wong, M, Tse, H, Kan, E, Kember, D. An action research study into the development of nurses as reflective practitioners. J Nursing Educ 1997; 36(10): 476–481.Google Scholar
Ibarreta, G, McLeod, L. Thinking aloud on paper: an experience in journal writing. J Nursing Educ 2004; 43: 134–137.Google Scholar
Fakude, L, Bruce, J. Journaling: a quasi-experimental study of student nurses’ reflective learning ability. Curationis 2003; 26: 49–55.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Williams, R, Wessel, J, Gemus, M, Foster-Seargant, E. Journal writing to promote reflection by physical therapy students during clinical placements. Physiother Theory Prac 2002; 18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Williams, R, Wessel, J. Reflective journal writing to obtain student feedback about their learning during the study of chronic musculoskeletal conditions. J Allied Health 2004; 33(1): 17–23.Google Scholar
Tryssenaar, J. Interactive journals: an educational strategy to promote reflection. Am J Occup Ther 1995; 49: 695–702.Google Scholar
Pee, B, Woodman, T, Fry, H, Davenport, E. Appraising and assessing reflection in students’ writing on a structure worksheet. Med Educ 2002; 36: 575–585.Google Scholar
Brackenridge, S. perceptions of reflective practice among recent Australian radiation therapy graduates. The Radiographer 2007; 54(2): 18–23.Google Scholar
Findlay, N, Dempsey, S, Warren-Forward, H. Development of the Newcastle reflective analysis tool. Focus Health Prof Educ 2009; 11(1).Google Scholar
Findlay, N, Dempsey, S, Warren-Forward, H. Validation and use of the Newcastle Reflective Analysis Tool: a three year longitudinal study of RT students reflective journals. Reflective Prac 2010; 11(1): 83.Google Scholar
Boud, DJ, Walker, D, Keogh, R. Reflection, turning experience into learning. London Kogan Page; Nichols Pub., 1985, 170.Google Scholar
Wong, F, Kember, D, Chung, L, Yan, L. Assessing the level of student reflection from reflective journals. J Adv Nursing 1995; 22(1): 48–57.Google Scholar