The focus of this presentation is Norwegian student teachers´ field experiences in two Zambian schools. Since autumn 2007 4-8 student teachers in their third or fourth year of study have a four week practicum in two Zambian schools and spend one week at a teacher education institution. In pairs they stay together with one cooperating teacher and her or his class while the headteacher is responsible for the mentoring. I find it appropriate to mention that I know the context since I have visited the two schools twice during practice periods. Back in Norway the student teachers write obligatory reflective reports from their experiences. The reports are center of my research interest, asking the question: How do student teachers, in written texts, reflect on their experiences from Zambian schools?   

Reflection has become a key concept and a key activity in teacher education. Programs (Korthagen, 2001) and supervision models (Handal & Lauvås, 1983) are developed to promote reflection. A Norwegian study (Sundli 2001) shows that the reflection process is hard to facilitate through oral mentoring. Hoel (2002) sees writing as the most important facilitator of reflection and asserts that the difference between oral and written situations with respect to time is crucial, the process of writing takes more time and gives more room for reflection.  However, research concerning the connection between writing and reflection differ in findings. Van der Leeuw (2006) concludes that the learning potential of daily reflection reports written during field practice is low. Firing’s (2007) research connected to higher education for officers in the Norwegian air force shows that using writing as a tool helped the reflection transcend the specific and achieve an analytical and logical character and brought reflection from an emotional starting point to a more cognitive stage. The officers wrote in two steps, daily spontaneous logs and reflective logs later on.   

There are different definitions of the term reflection. Dewey (1910) emphasizes reflection as a meaning making process, and Korthagen (2001) defines it as” the mental process of trying to structure or restructure an experience, a problem, or existing knowledge or insight” (p. 51). Søndenå (2002) extends this by using the concept powerful reflection to exceed what is already thought about ideas and actions. Reflections must move beyond mirroring of the known and exceed previous experiences. Reflection is powerful when student teachers reflect beyond the here-and-now situation. “Fruitful unrest” contributes to understand, discuss and develop their thinking. In arguing for cross-cultural field practice, Pence and Macgillivray (2008) assert that stepping outside one’s comfort zone and reflecting on one’s reaction can help student teachers become more flexible and reflective practitioners. They argue that the importance of self-reflection as part of an international field experience cannot be overstated. International learning experiences make student teachers more reflective and develop critical inquiry skills upon their return (Robertson & Webber, 2000). Williard-Holt (2001) found that international field experience helped her student teachers to have more patience and empathy, increased their cultural understanding and made them less prone to prejudge students.

Firing, K. (2007). Praksis i profesjonsutdanning; å gjøre eller å lære? Hvordan loggskriving kan utgjøre en forskjell. [Field experiences in education for professions; to do or to learn? How writing logs can make a difference, in Norwegian]. Tidsskriftet FoU i praksis, 1(1), 59-72. Handal, G., & Lauvås, P. (1983). På egne vilkår. [On their own conditions, in Norwegian]. Oslo: Cappelen Akademisk Forlag as Hoel, T. L. (2002). Interaction and learning potential in E-mail messages. In E. Maagerø & B. Simonsen (Eds.), Learning genres. Learning through genres (pp. 15-38). Kristiansand: Høyskoleforlaget. Korthagen, F. (2001). Linking practice and theory: the pedagogy of realistic teacher education. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). Interview: introduktion til et håndværk. [Interview: introduction to a craft, in Danish]. København: Hans Reitzel. Pence, H. M., & Macgillivray, I. K. (2008). The impact of an international field experience on preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(1), 14-25. Robertson, J. M., & Webber, C. F. (2000). Cross-cultural leadership development. International Journal of leadership in Education, 3(4), 315-330. Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. M. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Sundli, L. (2001). Veiledning i lærerutdanningens praksis - mellom refleksjon og kontroll. [Mentoring in the practice field of teacher education, in Norwegian]. Unpublished Dissertation. Oslo: Høgskolen i Oslo, Avdeling for lærerutdanning. Søndenå, K. (2002). Tradisjon og Transcendens, ei fenomenologisk studie av refleksjon i norsk førskulelærarutdanning. [Tradition and transcendence, a phenomenological study of refelction in Norwegian pre-school teacher education, in Norwegian]. Unpublished dissertation. Göteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis. van der Leeuw, B. T. (2006). Schrijftaken in de lerarenopleiding: een etnografie van onderwijsvernieuwing. Heeswijk-Dinther: Esstede Willard-Holt, C. (2001). The impact of a short-term international experience for preservice teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(4), 505-517