The development of peer reflective supervision amongst nurse educator colleagues: An action research project

Abstract

This action research study developed the use of peer reflective supervision (PRS) amongst eight nurse educators contributing to an undergraduate Adult Nursing programme at a UK University. During the academic year (2013-14), nurse educator co-researchers met for an introductory workshop and then met regularly in pairs to facilitate each other's reflection. This provided an opportunity for nurse educators to reflect on identified issues linked to their role with a facilitative peer. Educators met three additional times in a Reflexive Learning Group (RLG), to gather data on their use of PRS. Audio-recordings from the RLGs were transcribed and analysed using Norton's (2009) thematic analysis framework. Co-researchers iteratively validated the data and an external validation group critically viewed the evidence. Overall, seven themes were generated from the three research cycles. These were: PRS as a Valuable Affirming Experience; Time Issues; Facilitation- Support, Trust and Challenge; Developing a Flexible 'Toolbox'; To Write or Not to Write; Drawing on Literature; and Requirement for Action. Findings add new evidence regarding use of a flexible toolbox of resources to develop reflection and offer practical guidance on the development of PRS. Nurse educators often experienced similar concerns, and a facilitative supervision structure allowed co-researchers to positively explore these. Recognition of work pressures and requirement for time and space for reflection was highlighted, particularly regarding writing, and exploring the literature, to develop critical analysis of experiences. The importance of action as part of the reflective process was emphasised. Co-researchers reported positive personal change as well as the opportunity to highlight issues through their reflection for further action within the organisation. The study adds constructive evidence for the use of reflection to explore professional work, make sense of experiences and develop positive action. It has transferability to a wider international audience interested in the development of reflection amongst colleagues and the use of insider research techniques to challenge and develop practice.

Moving Beyond Peer Review of Teaching: A Conceptual Framework for Collegial Faculty Development

“…CFD can be very exposing, as faculty may fear the loss of self-image, status, and even their job (Ambler et al, 2014). To increase trust, the topics discussed in CFD sessions are often held as confidential (Bulman et al, 2016). It is also beneficial if faculty can choose peers and teaching sessions to be observed (Carroll & O’Loughlin, 2014; Costello et al, 2001).…”

“…), what rules and materials (e.g., templates) are used, and whether the process includes teaching observations (e.g., de Lange & Wittek, 2018; Torres et al, 2017). Examples of relational factors of influence are the level of trust and respect between faculty colleagues, which might influence their willingness to provide honest and constructive feedback (e.g., Bulman et al, 2016; Carroll & O’Loughlin, 2014). Examples of individual factors are the faculty’s prior teaching experiences and their conceptions of learning that might influence the subjects they choose to discuss during meetings (e.g., Ambler et al, 2014; Deni & Malakolunthu, 2013).…”

“…Beside a few exceptions (A. Bell et al, 2010; Bulman et al, 2016; de Lange & Wittek, 2018), the topics addressed and discussed during CFD activities remain an enigma and are left open for speculation. Therefore, insights into the actual facts of CFD conversations—the pedagogical contents, the thematic focus, and the way participants engage with one other—are still very limited.…”

A Multi-Study Exploration of Factors That Optimize Hardiness in Sport Coaches and the Role of Reflective Practice in Facilitating Hardy Attitudes

“…Further, previous research has reported that many coaches (particularly neophyte) experience a lack of confidence in their understanding of RP, which contributes to limited engagement with the process (Burt and Morgan, 2014). From an applied perspective, therefore, in considering the development of hardiness and its attitudinal sub-components, there is a need for practitioners (e.g., sport psychologists, coach educators) to promote engagement in RP and also develop coaches' confidence and ability to reflect at critical levels of insight, which can be done through systematic training and support programs (Faull and Cropley, 2009;Bulman et al, 2016). Indeed, stress management training programs that focus on longer-term hardiness development may be supplemented by encouraging greater self-awareness, personal growth, and adaptive responses through more meaningful and critical RP (cf.…”

Kollegaveiledning i “Teacher support teams”

“…Deltakerne foreslo at veiledning gjennom TST skulle bli et tilbud ledelsen ga til alle nytilsatte, noe som kunne bidratt til rekruttering til veiledningsgruppene og vaert en støtte for de nytilsatte. Vi merket oss med interesse at saerlig de nytilsatte blant informantene understreket at de hadde behov for veiledning og støtte fra kolleger, noe som bekreftes av andre undersøkelser fra høyere utdanning (Hanssen mfl., 2017;Hendry, Bell & Thomson 2014;Bulman et. al.…”