1. Reflection and veterinary students Veterinary graduates are expected to be reflective practitioners able to direct their own continuing professional development It is essential that the undergraduate curriculum encourages and supports them in the process of reflection to become such a professional LIVERPOOL Electronic PDP system – LUSID Reflection is not assessed NOTTINGHAM Electronic in house portfolio Reflection is assessed

2. LUSID PORTFOLIO (Liverpool) Aims of the PDP portfolio Improve peer and tutor feedback Encourage self-directed study Train and support students to engage in reflection Integrate EMS and University experiences Integrate with the RCVS professional development phase LUSID (Liverpool University Student Interactive Database) provides a series of structured, linked pages to support students through the PDP process. These include the encouragement of reflection, self analysis in learning and competency contexts, the setting of goals and the recording of achievements.

5. PDP Process Set Goals (learning outcomes) Audit skills Reflect on achievements and experiences Group discussion on placements Reflection on discussion Action plan

6. Liverpool – no assessment of reflection Private reflection encouraged Progressive ‘teaching’ of reflection through course Formative feedback only Group discussion to encourage verbal reflection

7. References ‘against’ assessment Sumison. J, Fleet. A. (1996). Reflection: Should we assess it? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 21 (2), 121-130. Richardson. G, Maltby. H. (1995). Reflection on Practice: Enhancing student learning. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 22, 235-242. Ixer. G. (1999). There is no such thing as reflection. British Journal of Social Work, 29, 513- 527. Richardson. R. (1995). Humpty Dumpty: Reflection and reflective nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 21, 1044-1050. Stewart. S, Richardson. B. (2000). Reflection and its place in the curriculum: Should it be assessed? Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education. 25 (4), 370-380. Schon. D.A. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York, Basic Books.

8. Nottingham Portfolio Flexible – “Learning tool” designed around learning outcomes Reflective, goal setting Variety of evidence Assessed annually – formative and summative Tutor-student dialogue key component Specific reflection teaching Electronic, not yet online Aims of the Nottingham portfolio Many – most important is to assist students in their learning Aligns with student centred nature of curriculum

11. Nottingham – assessing reflection Must pass element of professionalism module Annual summative assessment, ongoing formative assessment through tutor Reflective ability/outcomes, not content Descriptive -> Dialogic-> Critical (Hatton and Smith ) Feedback – pass/fail/outstanding PLUS qualitative component Communication is key – what do the students think you are doing? Are they bought in to the process? Private reflection still encouraged

12. References ‘for’ assessment Driessen EW, van Tartwijk J, Overeem K, Vermunt JD, van der Vleuten CPM (2005) Conditions for successful reflective use of portfolios in undergraduate medical education. Medical Education 39, 1230-1235 “Summatively assess the end product” Harris S, Dolan G, Fairbairn G (2001) Reflecting on the use of student portfolios. Nurse Education Today 21, 278-286 “Danger of not being used effectively if not assessed” Fade S (2004) Reflection and assessment. The Development of critical reflection in the health professions. LTSN occasional paper number 4. “If they are important then they should be assessed” Our own feedback from staff and students

13. Conclusion There is no easy answer! Communication with stakeholders is key Your experiences are welcomed……