{"id":201272,"date":"2026-08-23T12:32:28","date_gmt":"2026-08-23T20:32:28","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=201272"},"modified":"2026-08-23T12:42:05","modified_gmt":"2026-08-23T20:42:05","slug":"the-jason-arday-thesis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/?p=201272","title":{"rendered":"The Jason Arday Doctoral Thesis: ‘An Exploration of Peer-Mentoring Among Student Teachers’ to Inform Reflective Practice Within the Context of Action Research’"},"content":{"rendered":"

Jason Arday<\/a> (1985-2026) died at his home in Battersea<\/a> on August 14, nine days after resigning from the University of Cambridge<\/a>. He was 41. The Metropolitan Police<\/a> treated the death as unexpected and not suspicious. His family said he had faced sustained abuse. Simon Baron-Cohen<\/a> (b. 1958), who knew him at Cambridge, said he had watched Arday\u2019s mental health deteriorate.<\/p>\n

What survives him is a 401-page PhD thesis<\/a> deposited in a university repository, a panel finding that examined that document and called what it found honest and reasonable error, and two universities that have questions to answer about their own conduct. The document can be read. The plagiarism finding can be tested.<\/p>\n

I (meaning ChatGPT and Claude, with Claude getting the final word) have read both theses in full and run a passage-level comparison. The results are published as an appendix to this piece, with every matched passage located by page in both documents so that anyone can check it.<\/p>\n

The thesis is called “An Exploration of Peer-Mentoring Among Student Teachers’ to Inform Reflective Practice Within the Context of Action Research<\/a>.” The stray apostrophe is on the title page. It was submitted to Liverpool John Moores University in July 2015 and reports a year-long peer-mentoring intervention with four physical education trainee teachers, analyzed through interpretive phenomenological analysis. Paula Zwozdiak-Myers submitted a thesis to Brunel University in June 2009 called “An Analysis of the Concept Reflective Practice and an Investigation Into the Development of Student Teachers’ Reflective Practice Within the Context of Action Research<\/a>.” The final eleven words of the two titles are the same eleven words.<\/p>\n

If you take both documents, strip the reference lists and appendices, reduce the remaining text to sequences of words with punctuation and case removed, and record every string of ten consecutive words that appears in both. Merge adjacent hits into runs. That leaves 244 matched passages covering 3,971 words, or 3.04 percent of Arday’s 130,000-word body.<\/p>\n

Arday-Zwozdiak-Myers-overlap-index.<\/a><\/p>\n

Arday’s chapter two, a literature review of reflective practice, runs 12.12 percent verbatim against her. His chapter three, a literature review of mentoring in initial teacher education, runs 0.00 percent. Nineteen and a half thousand words, and not one matched string of ten. She has no chapter on mentoring.<\/p>\n

The standard defense of overlap in a narrow field is that scholars writing on the same topic reach for the same phrases, that the discipline has house language, that a reviewer who counts ten-word coincidences will find them anywhere. If that were the explanation here, the two literature chapters would look alike. They are adjacent, written by the same man in the same months, drawing on the same field of educational research, at the same register. One is at twelve percent. The other is at zero. <\/p>\n

Within chapter two the correspondence is sequential. Across 119 matched passages, the correlation between position in his text and position in hers is +0.87. Chapter one is +0.93. Chapter four is +0.99. Chapter five is +0.82. As he moves forward through his thesis he moves forward through hers in step. <\/p>\n

Anticipating the obvious objection, I applied two controls. For each run I measured what fraction sits inside quotation marks in his text, which catches passages where both authors quote the same third party. Then I checked whether the same author-and-year citation appears within 170 characters of the run in both documents, which catches passages where both are paraphrasing a source they each credit. Sixty-nine runs and 1,351 words clear one of those bars. One hundred and seventy-five runs and 2,620 words clear neither. Two percent of the thesis, then, consists of her sentences presented as his with no quotation mark and no shared source. That is the number to argue about.<\/p>\n

Three locations in his thesis do more damage than the rest, because a shared literature review admits an innocent reading and these do not.<\/p>\n

The first is in section 4.6.3, Participant Recruitment and Selection, on his page 152. He describes holding discussions with two professional colleagues, and continues that the procedure was followed to derive insights from colleagues knowledgeable and experienced in the field and to ensure his own perspective was open to scrutiny and challenge and not merely imposed onto the student teachers and mentoring intervention. Her page 110 carries the same sentence, ending instead that her stance was not merely imposed onto the framework. She is describing how she built a conceptual model. He is describing how he recruited four human beings into a study. A literature review can be copied out of carelessness. A description of what you personally did cannot come from anywhere but you.<\/p>\n

The second is on his page 264, inside the findings chapter, reporting what those four participants said. Her page 215 reads that student teachers believed pupil learning and development was attributable to their personal improvement in three main areas, and lists three. His reads five main areas, and lists the same three, in the same order, in the same words. He changed the numeral and left the enumeration alone. The sentence promises five and delivers three. The sentence immediately before it carries her categories of pupil progress or achievement, pupil behavior patterns and pupil affective states; his renders the third as pupil effective states.<\/p>\n

Consider what has to be true for that sentence to exist. A finding about eighty student teachers and thirteen dissertation supervisors at Brunel has been carried across, applied to four physical education trainees in Liverpool, and adjusted at a single digit to fit the new study. The adjustment was not carried through to the list. There is no citation to have gotten wrong. It is a claim about what his own participants told him, in the words of a claim about what hers told her.<\/p>\n

The third is his chapter seven, the conclusion, which is the second-densest chapter in the thesis at 5.83 percent. Passages 213 through 232 in the appendix walk through her conclusion in order. His section 7.4, Limitations of the Study, runs off her pages 268 and 269. His 7.10, Recommendations for Further Research, runs off her 270 and 271. His 7.13, Final Remarks, runs off her 272 through 274. The closing sentence of the catalogue, twenty-four words on providing student teachers an opportunity to engage in contextually focused research activity, is the closing move of both documents.<\/p>\n

There is a further category of problem that has nothing to do with her.<\/p>\n

At his page 60 he quotes McKernan (1996: 259-260) on critical theorists and grand theory. She quotes the same author at the same pages. In her version the theorists are obsessed with the use and development of grand theory. In his they are infatuated by its utilisation, and a parenthetical citation to Skinner 1990 has been inserted, which corresponds to nothing in his reference list. At his page 61 he quotes Zeichner and Liston (1987: 23) describing the liberated person. Her version ends with the person completely taking charge of his own life. His ends with the individual maintaining complete autonomy of their professional existence. Both are inside quotation marks. Both carry the page number.<\/p>\n

Whatever the relationship to Zwozdiak-Myers, this is misquotation of Zeichner, Liston, McKernan and Elliott. A synonym pass has been run over text presented as the verbatim words of named scholars at named pages. My automated controls flagged both of these as shared quotations of a third party, which is the machine being fair and getting it backward. They are shared quotations in which the words attributed to the third party differ.<\/p>\n

At his page 58, thirty-two words on Habermas are reproduced with a single substitution, generation for configuration. Two sentences later he cites Bernstein at 1976: 209, the same author at the same page she cites. Richard Bernstein (1932-2022) does not appear in his reference list at all. A page reference to a book you have not read arrives one way.<\/p>\n

Arday cites Zwozdiak-Myers fourteen times in the body and lists both her thesis and her 2012 handbook in his references. Twice he misspells her name, which defeats a reader trying to follow the trail, though carelessness explains that. This is not concealment of a source. It is a failure to mark where his sentences stop and hers begin, sustained across seven chapters.<\/p>\n

The empirical material appears to be his. Four participants under pseudonyms are quoted 57, 53, 37 and 39 times, and the transcripts carry hesitation, self-interruption and the texture of real speech. One teacher trainer makes a point about ad hoc mentor assignment by saying something like Jason you’re the mentor this week. Nobody manufactures that. I ran a duplicate-sentence pass across the whole body and found three repetitions in 146,000 words, which is low.<\/p>\n

The prose is his too, and it argues against wholesale copying more than anything else. It contains a consistent grammar of error. Creditability for credibility. Inventions for interventions. Elude for allude. Fieman-Nemsar for Feiman-Nemser. A possessive apostrophe on student teachers in nearly every position that does not call for one, including the title. At one point, the post-modernised vehicular of teaching. His fourth participant appears as Becks eighteen times, Beckz seventeen times and Rebecca four times. That is a man writing badly.<\/p>\n

And the reuse is localized. Her exposition of Dewey, her exposition of Sch\u00f6n, her King and Kitchener material, her Baxter Magolda table: none of it appears in his language. He extends LaBoskey to three categories where she uses two. Two percent of his thesis is her uncredited prose. Ninety-eight percent is not.<\/p>\n

Liverpool John Moores investigated after Jack Grove of Times Higher Education submitted what he has described as a 63-page report on the Zwozdiak-Myers overlap, part of 97 pages of evidence sent to both LJMU and Cambridge. Dave Harris, emeritus professor at Plymouth Marjon, had raised concerns with both institutions in 2023. The panel called the problems honest and reasonable error and said the doctorate stands. Arday cited that finding as vindication until his death, and his defenders cite it still.<\/p>\n

Honest and reasonable error is a serviceable description of a citation placed at the end of a paragraph rather than a sentence, or a quotation mark dropped in a late draft. It does not describe a quotation whose interior words have been changed while its page reference is retained. It does not describe a methodology section that narrates another researcher’s procedure. It does not describe a findings sentence that says five and lists three.<\/p>\n

So the question for Liverpool John Moores: Did the panel examine pages 152, 264, 343 and 353 of the thesis it awarded, against pages 110, 215, 269 and 274 of the thesis it was given? If it did, it should explain how it reached its conclusion. If it did not, it should say which passages it examined and why the ones that carry the weight were not among them. The university has said it will not review its own role. That position becomes harder to hold the more precisely the passages are identified, which is why I have published the locations.<\/p>\n

There is a second question. Arday said publicly that he had a single formal supervision meeting, with most guidance delivered by text and phone. If that is accurate, a doctoral student was left alone with a source thesis on his own topic for three years. Nobody who read chapters four, five and seven with attention could have failed to notice that the voice changes. The panel’s own language, error rather than misconduct, is an implicit finding about supervision, and the institution has not followed its own reasoning to the place it leads.<\/p>\n

The third question is Cambridge’s. When the allegations reached the university in June 2023, the head of policy, governance and integrity replied that the work predated Arday’s appointment and fell outside the university’s remit. The head of the Faculty of Education replied that Arday had spoken movingly about racism and health difficulties and that he had her full support. Cambridge appointed him on the strength of that work. An institution that hires on a body of scholarship has an interest in whether the scholarship is sound, and the position that pre-appointment work is somebody else’s problem is not one Cambridge would take about a candidate it wished to be rid of.<\/p>\n

Two journals have already issued corrections to Arday papers, and both notices treated what they found as missing references. Social Sciences added citations to a single prior study across the abstract, introduction, methods, four subsections of the results, the discussion and the conclusions of a 2018 paper, and then recorded that the scientific conclusions were unaffected. A correction spanning every section of a paper is a description of the paper.<\/p>\n

The passages are located. Anyone can check them. <\/p>\n

The full catalogue of 244 matched passages, with page locations in both theses, chapter and section assignments, and control flags for shared quotation and shared citation, is published here:<\/p>\n

Text overlap between Jason Arday (2015) and Paula Zwozdiak-Myers (2009): full passage catalogue<\/p>\n

Compiled August 23, 2026. 244 matched passages, located in both documents, with chapter, section and control flags. Both theses are openly deposited: Arday at Liverpool John Moores (researchonline.ljmu.ac.uk), Zwozdiak-Myers at Brunel (bura.brunel.ac.uk, handle 2438\/4316).<\/p>\n

Method<\/p>\n

Text was extracted from both PDFs with pdftotext. Reference lists and appendices were excluded from both, leaving 130,476 words of Arday body text and 103,671 of Zwozdiak-Myers. Both streams were lowercased, stripped of punctuation, hyphens and possessive markers, and reduced to word sequences. Every sequence of ten consecutive words appearing in both documents was recorded. Adjacent hits were merged into runs. A run of ten words is the reporting floor; the mean run here is 16 words and the longest is 76.<\/p>\n

Page numbers are the printed page numbers in each thesis, not PDF sheet numbers. In Arday the two coincide. In Zwozdiak-Myers the front matter is numbered in roman. Where a Zwozdiak-Myers page is given in roman, the match falls in her contents or her list of tables, which means the matching text is a heading or a table caption rather than body prose.<\/p>\n

Two controls are applied to each run. The first is the proportion of the run that sits inside quotation marks in Arday’s text, which identifies passages where both authors quote the same third party. The second is whether the same author-and-year citation appears within 170 characters of the run in both documents, which identifies passages where both authors are paraphrasing a source they each cite. A run is marked as controlled if it is at least 60 percent inside quotation marks in Arday or shares a citation with Zwozdiak-Myers at that point. 69 runs totalling 1,351 words are controlled. 175 runs totalling 2,620 words are not.<\/p>\n

Line breaks and page-break artifacts have been removed from the quoted spans. Where a page number fell inside a run it has been deleted. Ellipses are the authors’ own except where noted.<\/p>\n

Distribution<\/p>\n

Front matter runs 2,678 words and contains 2 matched passages totalling 29 words, 1.08 percent of the chapter. After controls, 2 passages and 29 words remain, 1.08 percent.<\/p>\n

Ch1 Background and Introduction runs 6,227 words and contains 18 matched passages totalling 243 words, 3.90 percent of the chapter. After controls, 16 passages and 222 words remain, 3.57 percent.<\/p>\n

Ch2 Review of Literature on Reflective Practice in Education runs 16,848 words and contains 119 matched passages totalling 2042 words, 12.12 percent of the chapter. After controls, 67 passages and 936 words remain, 5.56 percent.<\/p>\n

Ch3 Review of Literature on Mentoring in Education runs 19,524 words and contains 0 matched passages totalling 0 words, 0.00 percent of the chapter. After controls, 0 passages and 0 words remain, 0.00 percent.<\/p>\n

Ch4 Methodology for Research Study runs 23,864 words and contains 11 matched passages totalling 201 words, 0.84 percent of the chapter. After controls, 9 passages and 155 words remain, 0.65 percent.<\/p>\n

Ch5 Research findings runs 35,081 words and contains 31 matched passages totalling 434 words, 1.24 percent of the chapter. After controls, 27 passages and 374 words remain, 1.07 percent.<\/p>\n

Ch6 Discussion runs 16,508 words and contains 31 matched passages totalling 454 words, 2.75 percent of the chapter. After controls, 26 passages and 379 words remain, 2.30 percent.<\/p>\n

Ch7 Conclusions and Recommendations runs 9,746 words and contains 32 matched passages totalling 568 words, 5.83 percent of the chapter. After controls, 28 passages and 525 words remain, 5.39 percent.<\/p>\n

Chapter 3, on mentoring in initial teacher education, contains no matched passage of ten words or longer. Zwozdiak-Myers has no chapter on mentoring. This is the control for the whole exercise: if the chapter 2 figure reflected shared disciplinary phrasing rather than transcription, the two literature chapters would look alike. They do not.<\/p>\n

Passages of particular note<\/p>\n

Entry 147 sits in Arday’s section 4.6.3, Participant recruitment and selection, and describes his own research procedure in Zwozdiak-Myers’s words describing hers. Her sentence ends by saying her stance was not merely imposed onto the framework. His ends by saying it was not merely imposed onto the student teachers and mentoring intervention. She is describing how she built a conceptual framework. He is describing how he recruited people.<\/p>\n

Entries 172 and 173 sit in his findings chapter at page 264, reporting what his four participants said. Her sentence at page 215 reports that student teachers believed pupil learning and development was attributable to their personal improvement in three main areas, and lists three. His says five main areas and lists the same three, in the same order, in the same words. The adjacent sentence carries her three categories of pupil progress, pupil behaviour patterns and pupil affective states; his renders the third as pupil effective states.<\/p>\n

Entry 151 is the opening of his findings chapter. The chapter title, the section number, the section title and the first six words of the first sentence are identical to hers.<\/p>\n

Entries 218 and 221 sit in section 7.4, Limitations of the study, and run off her pages 268 and 269 in sequence. Entries 213 to 232 walk through her conclusion chapter in order: his 7.4 against her 268 to 269, his 7.10 Recommendations for further research against her 270 to 271, his 7.13 Final Remarks against her 272 to 274.<\/p>\n

Entries 60 and 66 are both marked as controlled, because in each case the matching words fall inside quotation marks in Arday and both authors cite the same source. They deserve separate attention for the opposite reason. At entry 60 her quotation from McKernan (1996: 259-260) has critical theorists obsessed with the use and development of grand theory; his has them infatuated by its utilisation, with a parenthetical citation to Skinner 1990 that corresponds to nothing in his reference list. At entry 66 her quotation from Zeichner and Liston (1987: 23) ends with the person taking charge of his own life; his ends with the individual maintaining complete autonomy of their professional existence. The controls flag these as shared quotations of a third party. They are shared quotations in which the words attributed to the third party differ.<\/p>\n

Entry 46 reproduces her sentence on Habermas for thirty-two words, changing generation to configuration. Two sentences later both texts cite Bernstein at 1976: 209. Bernstein does not appear in Arday’s reference list.<\/p>\n

Chapter 2 shows sequential correspondence. Across the 119 matched passages in that chapter, the correlation between position in Arday and position in Zwozdiak-Myers is +0.87. Chapter 1 is +0.93, chapter 4 is +0.99 and chapter 5 is +0.82. As he advances through his text he advances through hers.<\/p>\n

The catalogue<\/p>\n

Entries run in Arday’s reading order.<\/p>\n

Front matter<\/p>\n

[1] Arday p. 3 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. iii \u00b7 17 words<\/p>\n

Arday: Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve particular interests……57 2.7 Reflective practice as an<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve particular interests………..32 2.6 Reflective practice as an<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[2] Arday p. 11 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. viii \u00b7 12 words<\/p>\n

Arday: Table 4.1: Key characteristics and assumptions underpinning positivist and interpretive approaches to research<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Table 4.1: Key characteristics and assumptions underpinning positivist and interpretive approaches to research<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

Ch1 Background and Introduction<\/p>\n

[3] Arday p. 17 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 1 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: been adopted in designing a particular model of initial teacher education, for the purpose of developing<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: been adopted in designing a particular model of initial teacher education for the purpose of developing<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[4] Arday p. 17 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 1 \u00b7 22 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: Student teachers are unique individuals and differ in their personal biographies and prior experiences, disposition to enquiry, cognitive and perceptive abilities, communication,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Student teachers are unique individuals and differ in their personal biographies and prior experiences, disposition to enquiry, cognitive and perceptive abilities, communication<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[5] Arday p. 18 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 1 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: teaching is a highly complex activity and the dynamics operating in any given classroom environment will be<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Teaching is a highly complex activity and the dynamics operating in any given classroom environment will be<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[6] Arday p. 20 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: demanding tasks, which might be approached in a number of different ways.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: demanding tasks, which might be approached in a number of different ways.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[7] Arday p. 20 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: in the basic knowledge and skills of teaching; Loughran (1996) argues<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: in the basic knowledge and skills of teaching, Loughran (1996: 3) argues<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Loughran 1996.<\/p>\n

[8] Arday p. 20 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: understanding of the relationship between teaching and learning may influence practice.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: understanding of the relationship between teaching and learning may influence practice,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Loughran 1996.<\/p>\n

[9] Arday p. 20 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: as it positions the direct, concrete experience of professional practice<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: as it positions the direct, concrete experience of professional practice<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[10] Arday p. 20 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: skills and areas of knowledge required for successful teaching, but rather<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: skills and areas of knowledge required for successful teaching, but rather<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[11] Arday p. 21 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 2 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 1.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: to investigate and improve the effectiveness of their own teaching<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to investigate and improve the effectiveness of their own teaching.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[12] Arday p. 21 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 6 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 1.2 Purpose of the thesis<\/p>\n

Arday: standards serve to identify the knowledge, skills and understanding student teachers must<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Standards serve to identify the knowledge, skills and understanding student teachers must<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[13] Arday p. 22 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 6 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 1.2 Purpose of the thesis<\/p>\n

Arday: how this research experience might influence the development of student teachers’ reflective<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: How this research experience might influence the development of student teachers\u201f reflective<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[14] Arday p. 28 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 1.6 Structure of the thesis<\/p>\n

Arday: guided the direction and purpose of this study. Chapter 2: Review of Literature<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: guided the direction and purpose of this study. Chapter 2: Review of Literature<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[15] Arday p. 28 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 \u00b7 10 words<\/p>\n

Arday: This chapter identifies key characteristics attributed to reflective practice by<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: This chapter identifies key characteristics attributed to reflective practice by<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[16] Arday p. 28 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 \u00b7 19 words<\/p>\n

Arday: scholars, teacher educators, and researchers in the field of teacher education by examining the concept as: a discourse, involving<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: scholars, teacher educators and researchers in the field of teacher education by examining the concept as: a discourse, involving<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[17] Arday p. 28 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 \u00b7 12 words<\/p>\n

Arday: of thinking, distinguishable from routine practice and underpinned by the development of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: of thinking, distinguishable from routine practice and underpinned by the development of<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[18] Arday p. 29 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 7 \u00b7 26 words<\/p>\n

Arday: the direction of this research study. This is followed by an exploration of how reflective practice has been developed and researched within initial teacher education programmes<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the direction of this research study. This is followed by an exploration of how reflective practice has been developed and researched within initial teacher education programmes,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[19] Arday p. 29 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 8 \u00b7 11 words<\/p>\n

Arday: Chapter 4: Research methodology and design of this study This chapter details<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Chapter 4: Research methodology and design of this study This chapter details<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[20] Arday p. 30 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 8 \u00b7 10 words<\/p>\n

Arday: Evidence gathered to inform the research questions is presented within<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Evidence gathered to inform the research questions is presented within<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

Ch2 Review of Literature on Reflective Practice in Education<\/p>\n

[21] Arday p. 35 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 9 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: Reflective practice can be described as phenomenological, in that a given phenomenon is studied through direct experience,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice can be described as phenomenological, in that a given phenomenon is studied through direct experience,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[22] Arday p. 36 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 9 \u00b7 28 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: the reflective practitioner (Schon, 1983, 1987), teacher as researcher (Hopkins, 2002; McKernan, 1996; Ruddock and Hopkins, 1985; Stenhouse, 1975) and reflective teaching (Calderhead, 1989; Cruickshank, 1987; Dewey, 1910, 1933; Grimmett et al., 1990; Smith, 1980; Van Manen, 1977; Zeichner and Liston,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the reflective practitioner (Schon, 1983, 1987), teacher as researcher (Hopkins, 2002; McKernan, 1996; Ruddock and Hopkins, 1985; Stenhouse, 1975) and reflective teaching (Calderhead, 1989; Cruickshank, 1987; Dewey, 1910, 1933; Grimmett et al, 1990; Smith, 1980; van Manen, 1977; Zeichner and Liston,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Dewey 1910, Schon 1983, Stenhouse 1975.<\/p>\n

[23] Arday p. 36 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 9 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: about the benefits of reflective practice in the professional development of student teachers<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: about the benefits of reflective practice in the professional development of student teachers<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[24] Arday p. 36 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 9 \u00b7 20 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: However, an exploration of conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of these terms reveals a number of variations (Calderhead, 1989; Furlong and Maynard,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: However, an exploration of conceptual and theoretical underpinnings of these terms reveals a number of variations (Calderhead, 1989; Furlong and Maynard,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Furlong 1995.<\/p>\n

[25] Arday p. 40 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 16 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: what the student teacher claims to know. For some student teachers this<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: what the student teacher claims to know. For some student teachers this<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Korthagen 2005.<\/p>\n

[26] Arday p. 42 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 \u00b7 23 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in light of the grounds that support it and the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: active, persistent, and careful consideration of any belief or supposed form of knowledge in light of the grounds that support it and the<\/p>\n

Control: 100 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Dewey 1933.<\/p>\n

[27] Arday p. 42 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34-35 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: the concept of critical reflection implies the acceptance of a particular ‘ideology’.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the concept of critical reflection implies the acceptance of a particular ideology,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[28] Arday p. 46 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 17-18 \u00b7 38 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: When reflective practice is characterised as a discourse, it becomes evident through the way student teachers use language and frame questions about aspects of their teaching and experience that different kinds of reflection on practice can be identified<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: When reflective practice is characterised as a discourse, it becomes evident through the way student teachers use language and frame questions about aspects of their teaching and experience, that different kinds of reflection on practice can be identified.<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Ghaye 1998.<\/p>\n

[29] Arday p. 46 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 \u00b7 64 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: The typology devised by Ghaye and Ghaye (1998: 34) recognises useful qualitative distinctions, which can be drawn between reflective conversations: \uf0b7 Descriptive reflection on practice – is personal and retrospective; \uf0b7 Perceptive reflection on practice – links teaching to feelings; \uf0b7 Receptive reflection on practice – relates personal views to others’ views; \uf0b7 Interactive reflection on practice – links learning with future action; \uf0b7 Critical reflection on practice – places individual teaching within a broader ‘system’.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: The typology devised by Ghaye and Ghaye (1998: 34) recognises useful qualitative distinctions, which can be drawn between reflective conversations: Descriptive reflection on practice – is personal and retrospective Perceptive reflection on practice – links teaching to feelings Receptive reflection on practice – relates personal views to others\u201f views Interactive reflection on practice – links learning with future action Critical reflection on practice – places individual teaching within a broader “system<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Ghaye 1998.<\/p>\n

[30] Arday p. 47 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 \u00b7 24 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: highlighting qualitative distinctions in student teachers’ reflective practice have shown critical reflective conversations are far less frequent than descriptive reflective conversations, as their principle<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: highlighting qualitative distinctions in student teachers\u201f reflective practice have shown critical reflective conversations are far less frequent than descriptive reflective conversations, as their principle<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Tsangaridou 2005.<\/p>\n

[31] Arday p. 47 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 \u00b7 18 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: on the development of subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Hatton and Smith, 1995; Macdonald and Brooker, 1999; Tsangaridou,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: on the development of subject matter knowledge and pedagogical content knowledge (Hatton and Smith, 1995; Macdonald and Brooker, 1999; Tsangaridou,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Tsangaridou 2005.<\/p>\n

[32] Arday p. 47 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 18 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.2 Defining Reflective Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: within the wider professional landscape of ideological and political contexts.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: within the wider professional landscape of ideological and political contexts.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[33] Arday p. 49 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 89 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 2.2.1 Types of Reflection<\/p>\n

Arday: practice and outwardly at the social conditions in which these practices are situated<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: practice and outwardly at the social conditions in which these practices are situated,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[34] Arday p. 53 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 29 \u00b7 33 words \u00b7 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience<\/p>\n

Arday: conceptualisation of reflective action and its subsequent interpretation within initial teacher education concerns whether reflection is limited to thought processes about action, or is more inextricably bound within an action (Noffke and Brennan,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: conceptualisation of reflective action and its subsequent interpretation within initial teacher education concerns whether reflection is limited to thought processes about action, or is more inextricably bound within an action (Noffke and Brennan,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Grant 1984.<\/p>\n

[35] Arday p. 53 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience<\/p>\n

Arday: the student teachers’ featured in this study, as they engage in the reflective processes inherent within<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the student teachers featured in this study as they engage in the reflective processes inherent within<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Gore 1995, Manen 1977.<\/p>\n

[36] Arday p. 53 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 \u00b7 18 words \u00b7 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience<\/p>\n

Arday: as; planning, adapting materials, developing courses, arranging subject matter content, teaching and evaluating’ can be described as technical,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: as “planning, adapting materials, developing courses, arranging subject matter content, teaching and evaluating\u201f can be described as technical<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Manen 1977.<\/p>\n

[37] Arday p. 53 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience<\/p>\n

Arday: level of technical reflection is characterised by the application of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: level of technical reflection is characterised by the application of<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[38] Arday p. 53 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience<\/p>\n

Arday: is to resolve concerns about aspects of their own practice,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: is to resolve concerns about aspects of their own practice<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[39] Arday p. 53 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 \u00b7 29 words \u00b7 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience<\/p>\n

Arday: interpretation of technical reflection and the first level of reflective teaching identified by Grimmett et al., (1990), which applies research findings to practice and essentially represents thoughtfulness about action. Van<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: interpretation of technical reflection and the first level of reflective teaching identified by Grimmett et al. (1990), which applies research findings to practice and “essentially represents thoughtfulness about action\u201f. Van<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Grimmett 1990, Tinning 1995.<\/p>\n

[40] Arday p. 53 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 30 \u00b7 23 words \u00b7 2.3 Thinking and reflective experience<\/p>\n

Arday: level of practical reflection is characterised by the process of analysing and clarifying assumptions, experiences, goals, meanings and perceptions which underpin practical actions<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: level of practical reflection is characterised by the process of analysing and clarifying assumptions, experiences, goals, meanings and perceptions which underpin practical actions.<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Grimmett 1990.<\/p>\n

[41] Arday p. 57 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. iii \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve particular interests Reflective practice<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve particular interests………..32 2.6 Reflective practice<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[42] Arday p. 57 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 32 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: ways to challenge all pupils within a mixed ability setting, might experiment with a range of approaches,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: ways to challenge all pupils within a mixed ability setting might experiment with a range of approaches<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[43] Arday p. 58 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: Interests within the social sciences and humanities, the historic hermeneutic disciplines,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Interests within the social sciences and humanities – the historic hermeneutic disciplines<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[44] Arday p. 58 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: through the interpretation and integration of ideas in order to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: through the interpretation and integration of ideas in order to<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[45] Arday p. 58 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: Moon (1999: 14) argues that the acquisition of knowledge which accommodates emancipatory interests aim to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Moon (1999: 14) argues that the acquisition of knowledge which accommodates emancipatory interests aim to<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Moon 1999.<\/p>\n

[46] Arday p. 58 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 32 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: Habermas’ model suggests reflective practice is hierarchical, that knowledge must initially be developed by instrumental or interpretive means before a critical overview of that knowledge or processes that have led to its<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Habermas\u201f model suggests reflective practice is hierarchical, that knowledge must initially be developed by instrumental or interpretive means before a critical overview of that knowledge or processes that have led to its<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[47] Arday p. 58 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 21 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: he considers methods of empirical and analytical enquiry associated with scientific explanation to provide an inadequate base for the social sciences.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: He considers methods of empirical and analytical enquiry associated with scientific explanation to provide an inadequate base for the social sciences<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[48] Arday p. 58 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: Although the fundamental mode of enquiry for the social sciences is interpretation, Habermas suggests this process,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Although the fundamental mode of enquiry for the social sciences is interpretation, Habermas suggests this process,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[49] Arday p. 58 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: from the process of critique and evaluation: specifically, the generation of questioning and understanding to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: from the process of critique and evaluation: specifically, the generation of questioning and understanding to<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[50] Arday p. 58 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: justifying social and political action on the part of the enlightened’ (Elliott,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: justifying social and political action on the part of the enlightened\u201f (Elliott,<\/p>\n

Control: 89 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Bernstein 1976, Elliott 2005.<\/p>\n

[51] Arday p. 59 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: to develop a philosophical anthropology that ‘singles out the distinctive characteristics of human social life’.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to develop a philosophical anthropology “that singles out the distinctive characteristics of human social life<\/p>\n

Control: 59 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.<\/p>\n

[52] Arday p. 59 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 33 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: what makes human social life distinctive. As such, they determine what<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: what makes human social life distinctive. As such, they determine what<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[53] Arday p. 59 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: specific outcomes. Themes common to Dewey and Habermas’ conceptualisation of reflective practice are their<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: specific outcomes. Themes common to Dewey and Habermas\u201f conceptualisation of reflective practice are their<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[54] Arday p. 59 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: and Habermas… the place of the process in the acquisition, development and consideration of knowledge<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: and Habermas…the place of the process in the acquisition, development and consideration of knowledge<\/p>\n

Control: 100 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Moon 1999.<\/p>\n

[55] Arday p. 59 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: which guides reflective practice is considered however, a distinction between their approaches becomes evident<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: which guides reflective practice is considered however, a distinction between their approaches becomes evident.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[56] Arday p. 59 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: of empowerment and political emancipation (Morrison, 1995) towards freedom, justice and the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: of empowerment and political emancipation (Morrison, 1995) towards freedom, justice and the<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Barnett 1997, Morrison 1995.<\/p>\n

[57] Arday p. 60 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 \u00b7 23 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: practice. However, Macdonald and Tinning (2003) suggest this proposition represents a claim for what Carr and Kemmis (1986) believe critical reflection should be rather than<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: practice. However, Macdonald and Tinning (2003) suggest this proposition represents a claim for what Carr and Kemmis (1986) believe critical reflection should be rather than<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Carr 1986, Macdonald 2003.<\/p>\n

[58] Arday p. 60 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: the critical reflection community about what reflection has become within contemporary educational discourse. The<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the critical reflection community about what reflection has become within contemporary educational discourse. The<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Calderhead 1989.<\/p>\n

[59] Arday p. 60 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 34 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: Wildman and Niles, 1987; Zeichner and Liston, 1996) the concept of critical reflection<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Wildman and Niles, 1987; Zeichner and Liston, 1996) the concept of critical reflection<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Zeichner 1996.<\/p>\n

[60] Arday p. 60 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: to distinguish critical reflection from other forms of reflection imposes a form of ‘academic imperialism’ which<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to distinguish critical reflection from other forms of reflection imposes a form of “academic imperialism\u201f which<\/p>\n

Control: 20 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Barnett 1997.<\/p>\n

[61] Arday p. 60 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 \u00b7 26 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: concept of critical thinking, which has been a strong feature in past decades of Western universities, will not support the climate and trends within higher education<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: concept of critical thinking, which has been a strong feature in past decades of Western universities, will not support the climate and trends within higher education.<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Barnett 1997.<\/p>\n

[62] Arday p. 60 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: Barnett applies, interprets and further develops ideas proposed by Habermas<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Barnett applies, interprets and further develops ideas proposed by Habermas<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[63] Arday p. 60-61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: capable of both critical self-reflection and critical action. He aligns this disposition with the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: capable of both critical self-reflection and critical action. He aligns this disposition with the<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[64] Arday p. 61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: to improve the quality of pupils’ educational experiences, as opposed to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to improve the quality of pupils\u201f educational experiences as opposed to<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[65] Arday p. 61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: Underpinning the goal toward becoming a critically reflective practitioner is the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Underpinning the goal toward becoming a critically reflective practitioner is the<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Clandinin 1995, Zeichner 1987.<\/p>\n

[66] Arday p. 61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35 \u00b7 21 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: as ‘one free from the unwarranted control of unjustified beliefs, unsupportable attitudes and the paucity of abilities which can prevent that<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: as one “free from the unwarranted control of unjustified beliefs, unsupportable attitudes and the paucity of abilities which can prevent that<\/p>\n

Control: 98 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Zeichner 1987.<\/p>\n

[67] Arday p. 61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 35-36 \u00b7 28 words \u00b7 2.6 Reflective practice underpins the development of forms of knowledge that serve<\/p>\n

Arday: From this premise, it could be argued that reflective conversations, which value student teachers’ lived experiences, authentic concerns, beliefs and practical theories have potential to empower and enlighten<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: From this premise, it could be argued that reflective conversations, which value student teachers\u201f lived experiences, authentic concerns, beliefs and practical theories have potential to empower and enlighten<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[68] Arday p. 61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. iii \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Reflective practice as an integral part of action research Reflective practice<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice as an integral part of action research………44 2.9 Reflective practice<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[69] Arday p. 61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: research paradigms, particularly those situated in the hermeneutics, which focus on practitioners learning<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: research paradigms, particularly those situated in the hermeneutics, which focus on practitioners learning<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Whitehead 1993.<\/p>\n

[70] Arday p. 61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: the use of contextually relevant procedures formulated by inquiring and resourceful practitioners<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the use of contextually relevant procedures formulated by inquiring and resourceful practitioners<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Stringer 1996.<\/p>\n

[71] Arday p. 61 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Professional knowledge and judgement can be developed through reflection and further<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Professional knowledge and judgement can be developed through reflection and further<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[72] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 \u00b7 30 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Bartlett and Leask, 2005: 298). McKernan (1996: 29) refers to action research as grounded curriculum theory in that theories are not validated independently of practice and then applied to curriculum, they are validated ‘through<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Bartlett and Leask, 2005: 298). McKernan (1996: 29) refers to action research as grounded curriculum theory in that “theories are not validated independently of practice and then applied to curriculum…they are validated through<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Bartlett 2005, Elliott 2005, Mckernan 1996.<\/p>\n

[73] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: student teachers come to develop their personal epistemology of practice,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers come to develop their personal epistemology of practice<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Boud 1990, Schon 1983.<\/p>\n

[74] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: engage in reflective practice, the knowledge gained and theories constructed<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: engage in reflective practice, the knowledge gained and theories constructed<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[75] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 \u00b7 29 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: by personal experiences within the context of a specific teaching situation. While advocating action research as a vehicle to validate teachers’ personal, professional and political knowledge, Gore and Zeichner<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: by personal experiences within the context of a specific teaching situation. While advocating action research as a vehicle to validate “teachers\u201f personal, professional and political knowledge\u201f Gore and Zeichner<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Gore 1995.<\/p>\n

[76] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44 \u00b7 24 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: For example, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1993: 304) identify a number of obstacles which need to be addressed before teachers can be expected to engage in research.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: For example, Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1993: 304) identify a number of obstacles which need to be addressed before teachers can be expected to engage in research:<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Cochran-Smith 1993.<\/p>\n

[77] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 44-45 \u00b7 19 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: a difficult process for teachers to learn and sustain due to its complexity and lack of congruence with the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: a difficult process for teachers to learn and sustain due to its complexity and lack of congruence with the<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Mctaggert 1997.<\/p>\n

[78] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: influence the research experiences of some student teachers featured in<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: influence the research experiences of some student teachers featured in<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[79] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 23 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Within educational discourse, action research has become a recurrent theme, as has the concern to improve and develop professional practice from within the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Within educational discourse, action research has become a recurrent theme, as has the concern to improve and develop professional practice from within the<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[80] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: to generate new insights into teaching and learning to improve practice<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to generate new insights into teaching and learning to improve practice<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Price 2001.<\/p>\n

[81] Arday p. 62 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Price (2001: 44) suggests action research is simultaneously an individual and collaborative project and Kemmis and McTaggart (1982) argue that<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Price (2001: 44) suggests action research is simultaneously an individual and collaborative project and Kemmis and McTaggart (1982; 7) argue that<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Price 2001.<\/p>\n

[82] Arday p. 63 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: which arise from professional practice to facilitate change and improvement<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: which arise from professional practice to facilitate change and improvement<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[83] Arday p. 63 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 24 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Gray, 2010: 347). This implies that working with peers and fellow practitioners requires sensitivity, trust and a mutual respect for the feelings and expertise of others.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Gray, 2004: 377). This implies that working with peers and fellow practitioners requires sensitivity, trust and a mutual respect for the feelings and expertise of others.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[84] Arday p. 63 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: are the goals of equity and social justice as existing practices within the school<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: are the goals of equity and social justice as existing practices within the school<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[85] Arday p. 63 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: and transformed (Carr and Kemmis, 1986; Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1993; Gore and Zeichner, 1995; Noffke,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: and transformed (Carr and Kemmis, 1986; Cochran-Smith and Lytle, 1993; Gore and Zeichner, 1995; Noffke,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[86] Arday p. 63 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: suggests that an examination of the conditions and contexts of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: suggests that an examination of the conditions and contexts of<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[87] Arday p. 63 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 22 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: in relation to: \uf0b7 Personal development; \uf0b7 Improved professional practice; \uf0b7 Improvements in the institution; \uf0b7 Contribution to the good order of society. This critical perspective<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: in relation to: personal development improved professional practice improvements in the institution contribution to the good order of society This critical perspective<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[88] Arday p. 63 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 45 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: the aims of action research as a vehicle for educational reform as<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the aims of action research as a vehicle for educational reform as<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[89] Arday p. 63 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Although action research has been recognised as a means to develop reflective practice and promote educational change,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Although action research has been recognised as a means to develop reflective practice and promote educational change,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[90] Arday p. 63-64 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 \u00b7 22 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Many studies have focused on written artefacts (portfolios, project reports, reflective journals) of teachers’ enquiries (Beyer, 1984; Bissex and Bullock, 1987; Goswami and Stillman,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Many studies have focused on written artefacts (portfolios, project reports, reflective journals) of teachers\u201f enquiries (Beyer, 1984; Bissex and Bullock, 1987; Goswami and Stillman,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Goswami 1987.<\/p>\n

[91] Arday p. 64 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 \u00b7 20 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: teachers to engage in collaborative action research as a process both for professional learning and educational reform (Cochran-Smith and Lytle,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: teachers to engage in collaborative action research as a process both for professional learning and educational reform (Cochran-Smith and Lytle,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Russell 1993, Somekh 2006.<\/p>\n

[92] Arday p. 64 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 \u00b7 24 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: four components (or domains of teaching): reflection and enquiry; learning about students; learning about pedagogical content knowledge; and, learning about social justice and democracy.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: four components (or domains of teaching): reflection and enquiry; learning about students; learning about pedagogical content knowledge; and, learning about social justice and democracy.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[93] Arday p. 64 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: student teachers’ embraced the challenge of developing morally and ethically defensible practices,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers “embraced the challenge of developing morally and ethically defensible practices<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[94] Arday p. 64 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: undertook a systematic study of their teaching which focused on<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: undertook a systematic study of their teaching which focused on<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[95] Arday p. 64 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 46 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: their understanding of teaching underpinned by the commitment to provide<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: their understanding of teaching underpinned by the commitment to provide<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[96] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: These findings could be useful for comparative purposes in relation to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: These findings could be useful for comparative purposes in relation to<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Price 2001.<\/p>\n

[97] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 18 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: finding time to reflect on their lessons; struggling to keep up with data collection; and, receiving support from<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: finding time to reflect on their lessons; struggling to keep up with data collection; and, receiving support from<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Price 2001.<\/p>\n

[98] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 20 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: although mentors could be a tremendous support for student teachers, simultaneously they could also ‘unwittingly set boundaries upon their experimentation’.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: although mentors could be a tremendous support for student teachers, simultaneously they could also “unwittingly set boundaries upon their experimentation<\/p>\n

Control: 35 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.<\/p>\n

[99] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: this study also seeks to explore whether student teachers’ experienced any such challenges<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: This study also seeks to explore whether student teachers\u201f experienced any such challenges<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[100] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: as they prepared for, engaged in and evaluated the impact of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: as they prepared for, engaged in and evaluated the impact of<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[101] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: in addition to providing an explanation as to how oneself is positioned in relation to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: in addition to providing an explanation as to how oneself is positioned in relation to<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Guba 1996.<\/p>\n

[102] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: teachers perceive action research to be a form of personal enquiry that<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: teachers perceive action research to be a form of personal enquiry that<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Guba 1996.<\/p>\n

[103] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: the study of self seems to be ideally suited to revealing<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the study of self “seems to be ideally suited to revealing<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Usher 1998.<\/p>\n

[104] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: discourse about developing a personal epistemology of professional practice guided by<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: discourse about developing a personal epistemology of professional practice guided by<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Grimmett 1990.<\/p>\n

[105] Arday p. 65 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 47 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: insights into the actions of teachers, not only as educators but also as adults, who<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: insights into the actions of teachers, not only as educators but also as adults who<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[106] Arday p. 66 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 48 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: with Belenky et al., (1986: 227) notion of ‘connected teaching’ as a means to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: with Belenky et al “s (1986 227) notion of “connected teaching\u201f as a means to<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[107] Arday p. 66 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 48 \u00b7 27 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: through self-study there are ‘new possibilities for qualitative research to focus on the everyday practices by which individuals constantly construct and reconstruct their sense of individual identity’.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Through self-study there are “new possibilities for qualitative research to focus on the everyday practices by which individuals constantly construct and reconstruct their sense of individual identity<\/p>\n

Control: 86 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.<\/p>\n

[108] Arday p. 66 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 48 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: student teachers to have the courage to teach in ways<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers to have the courage to teach in ways<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[109] Arday p. 67 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Validation – determining the authenticity of the ideas and feelings which have resulted,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: validation – determining the authenticity of the ideas and feelings which have resulted,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[110] Arday p. 67 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: taking ownership of new insights and learning to inform future<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: taking ownership of new insights and learning to inform future<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[111] Arday p. 67 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: the description of a particular teaching situation, incorporates the view that reflective practice involves<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the description of a particular teaching situation, incorporates the view that reflective practice involves<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Boud 1999.<\/p>\n

[112] Arday p. 67 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: unrecognisable as reflective practice. Some staff within placement schools for example, asked student teachers to reflect by<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: unrecognisable as reflective practice. Some staff within placement schools for example, asked student teachers to reflect by<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Boud 1999.<\/p>\n

[113] Arday p. 67 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Further, the emphasis placed on the need for personal disclosure was often<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Further, the emphasis placed on the need for personal disclosure was often<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[114] Arday p. 67 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: to be beyond the capacity of some student teachers (Boud,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to be beyond the capacity of some student teachers. Boud<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[115] Arday p. 68 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: that when student teachers engage in reflective practice, they should probe and explore the following<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: that when student teachers\u201f engage in reflective practice, they should probe and explore the following<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Korthagen 2005.<\/p>\n

[116] Arday p. 68 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 49 \u00b7 41 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: questions: \uf0b7 What was the context? \uf0b7 What did I want? \uf0b7 What did I do? \uf0b7 What was I thinking? \uf0b7 How did I feel? \uf0b7 What did the pupils want? \uf0b7 What did the pupils do? \uf0b7 What were the pupils thinking? \uf0b7 How did the pupils feel?<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: questions: What was the context? What did I want? What did I do? What was I thinking? How did I feel? What did the pupils want? What did the pupils do? What were the pupils thinking? How did the pupils feel?<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Korthagen 2005.<\/p>\n

[117] Arday p. 68 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 50 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Provide the basis for observations and reflections; 2. Observations and reflections are distilled and assimilated into abstract concepts;<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: provide the basis for observations and reflections; observations and reflections (2) are distilled and assimilated into abstract concepts<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[118] Arday p. 68 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 50 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: Produce new possibilities for action, which can be actively tested; 4. Through experimentation,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: produce new possibilities for action, which can be actively tested (4) through experimentation,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[119] Arday p. 69 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 50 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: on the notion that experiential learning is a process, which involves<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: on the notion that experiential learning is a process, which involves<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[120] Arday p. 69 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 50 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.7 Reflective practice as an integral part of action research<\/p>\n

Arday: is distinguished by attending to the organisation and construction of learning<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: is distinguished by attending to the organisation and construction of learning<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[121] Arday p. 75 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: involves reflecting both on the means and ends of educational goals and values<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: involves reflecting both on the means and ends of educational goals and values<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[122] Arday p. 75-76 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58 \u00b7 76 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: very clear links can be drawn between reflective practice and assuming responsibility for professional development: ‘When embracing the concept of reflective teaching, there is often a commitment by teachers to internalise the disposition and skills to study their teaching and become better at teaching over time, a commitment to take responsibility for their own professional development. This assumption of responsibility is a central feature of the idea of a reflective teacher’ (Zeichner and Liston, 1996: 6). Another interpretation<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Very clear links can be drawn between reflective practice and assuming responsibility for professional development: When embracing the concept of reflective teaching, there is often a commitment by teachers to internalise the disposition and skills to study their teaching and become better at teaching over time, a commitment to take responsibility for their own professional development. This assumption of responsibility is a central feature of the idea of a reflective teacher (Zeichner and Liston, 1996: 6) Another interpretation<\/p>\n

Control: 58 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Eraut 1994, Zeichner 1996.<\/p>\n

[123] Arday p. 76 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58 \u00b7 19 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: of professional practitioners when they demonstrate: \uf0b7 a moral commitment to serve the interests of students by reflecting on their<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: of professional practitioners when they demonstrate: a moral commitment to serve the interests of students by reflecting on their<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Eraut 1994.<\/p>\n

[124] Arday p. 76 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58-59 \u00b7 24 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: and their progress and deciding how best it can be fostered or promoted; \uf0b7 a professional obligation to review periodically the nature and effectiveness of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: and their progress and deciding how best it can be fostered or promoted a professional obligation to review periodically the nature and effectiveness of<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[125] Arday p. 76 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: practical knowledge both by personal reflection and through interaction with others.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: practical knowledge both by personal reflection and through interaction with others<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[126] Arday p. 76 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: Standards in schools is explicitly stated in terms of the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Standards in schools is explicitly stated in terms of the<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[127] Arday p. 76 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: Further components within the Standards encompass both theoretical and experiential knowledge,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Further components within the Standards encompass both theoretical and experiential knowledge<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[128] Arday p. 76-77 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 \u00b7 28 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: identified by Eraut. The interrelationship between the concepts of professional development proposed by Hoyle and John, of knowledge, autonomy and responsibility have been summarised by Furlong et al<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: identified by Eraut. The interrelationship between the concepts of professional development proposed by Hoyle and John, of knowledge, autonomy and responsibility have been summarised by Furlong et al<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Furlong 2000.<\/p>\n

[129] Arday p. 77 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: that it is important for student teachers to clearly express and frequently<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: that it is important for student teachers to clearly express and frequently<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[130] Arday p. 77 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 59 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: educational values, not in isolation and abstraction, but in collaboration with<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: educational values, not in isolation and abstraction but in collaboration with<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Nixon 1995.<\/p>\n

[131] Arday p. 77 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 60 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: notes the difficulty often faced by teachers lies not in<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: notes “the difficulty often faced by teachers lies not in<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[132] Arday p. 77 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 60 \u00b7 24 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: discourse suggests that some student teachers’ school-based teaching experiences could be incongruent, as values expressed in principle might not necessarily be demonstrated in practice<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: discourse suggests that some student teachers\u201f school-based teaching experiences could be incongruent, as values expressed in principle might not necessarily be demonstrated in practice.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[133] Arday p. 77 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 60 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 2.12 Moving toward autonomy<\/p>\n

Arday: experience autonomy in relation to making professional judgements and decisions,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: experience autonomy in relation to making professional judgements and decisions<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[134] Arday p. 79 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 80 \u00b7 43 words \u00b7 2.14 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: encompass ‘some notion of reflection in the process of professional development, but at the same time, disguise a vast number of conceptual variations, with a range of implications for the organisation and design of teacher education courses’. Furthermore, teacher educators, researchers and other<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: encompass “some notion of reflection in the process of professional development, but at the same time, disguise a vast number of conceptual variations, with a range of implications for the organisation and design of teacher education courses\u201f. Furthermore, teacher educators, researchers and other<\/p>\n

Control: 78 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.<\/p>\n

[135] Arday p. 80 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 81 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 2.14 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: examined the characteristics which key theorists, researchers and practitioners have attributed to this phenomenon.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: examined the characteristics which key theorists, researchers and practitioners have attributed to this phenomenon.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[136] Arday p. 80 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 81 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 2.14 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: Reflective practice has been conceptualised as a creative process in that student teachers<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice has been conceptualised as a creative process in that student teachers<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[137] Arday p. 81 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 82 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 2.14 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: take responsibility for their own professional development is prevalent not only in the governments’ agenda but<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: take responsibility for their own professional development is prevalent not only in the governments\u201f agenda but<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[138] Arday p. 81 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 82 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.14 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: of reflective practice has become ‘a generic pedagogical principle’ (Tsangaridou and<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: of reflective practice has become “a generic pedagogical principle\u201f (Tsangaridou and<\/p>\n

Control: 39 percent inside quotation marks in Arday; shared citation: Sullivan 1997.<\/p>\n

[139] Arday p. 81 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 82 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 2.14 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: of reflection, in addition to developing student teachers’ reflective capabilities and<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: of reflection, in addition to developing student teachers\u201f reflective capabilities and<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

Ch4 Methodology for Research Study<\/p>\n

[140] Arday p. 137 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 101 \u00b7 32 words \u00b7 4.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: which supports the twin focus to educational research as: attitudinal- a distinctive way of thinking about educational phenomena; and action- a systematic means of investigating educational phenomena proposed by Morrison (2003). Decisions that<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: which supports the twin focus to educational research as: attitudinal – “a distinctive way of thinking about educational phenomena\u201f and action – “a systematic means of investigating educational phenomena\u201f proposed by Morrison (2002: 3). Decisions that<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Strauss 1998.<\/p>\n

[141] Arday p. 137 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 101 \u00b7 20 words \u00b7 4.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: the selection of research methodology, Bell (2010) argues are dependent upon the nature of the enquiry and kind of information sought.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the selection of research methodology, Bell (2005) argues, are dependent upon the nature of the enquiry and kind of information sought.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[142] Arday p. 138 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. viii \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 4.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: Table 4.1: Key characteristics and assumptions underpinning positivist and interpretive approaches to research<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Table 4.1: Key characteristics and assumptions underpinning positivist and interpretive approaches to research<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[143] Arday p. 138 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 103 \u00b7 28 words \u00b7 4.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: Positivist Approach Interpretive Approach Assumptions: Assumptions: \uf0b7 Social facts have an objective reality \uf0b7 Reality is socially constructed \uf0b7 Primacy of method \uf0b7 Primacy of subject matter \uf0b7 Variables can be identified and<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Positivist approach Interpretive approach Assumptions: Assumptions: Social facts have an objective reality Reality is socially constructed Primacy of method Primacy of subject matter Variables can be identified and<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[144] Arday p. 138 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 103 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 4.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: perspectives Approach Approach \uf0b7 Begins with hypotheses and theories \uf0b7 Ends with hypotheses and grounded<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: perspectives Approach: Approach: Begins with hypotheses and theories Ends with hypotheses and grounded<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[145] Arday p. 142 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 105 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 4.4 Research Design<\/p>\n

Arday: used to investigate ‘contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: used to investigate “contemporary phenomenon within its real-life context, especially when the boundaries between<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Yin 2003.<\/p>\n

[146] Arday p. 152 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 110 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 4.6.3 Participant recruitment and selection<\/p>\n

Arday: the researcher held numerous discussions with two professional colleagues who<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the researcher held numerous discussions with two professional colleagues who<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[147] Arday p. 152 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 110 \u00b7 27 words \u00b7 4.6.3 Participant recruitment and selection<\/p>\n

Arday: this procedure was followed not only to derive insights advanced by professional colleagues who were knowledgeable and experienced within the field but also to ensure that the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: This procedure was followed not only to derive insights advanced by professional colleagues who were knowledgeable and experienced within the field but also to ensure that the<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[148] Arday p. 152 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 110 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 4.6.3 Participant recruitment and selection<\/p>\n

Arday: particular perspective and stance was open to scrutiny and challenge and not merely imposed onto the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: particular perspective and stance was open to scrutiny and challenge and not merely imposed onto the<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[149] Arday p. 155 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. ? \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 4.6.4 Pilot study open-ended questionnaires and considerations<\/p>\n

Arday: the development of student teachers’ reflective practice within the context of action research<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the development of student teachers’ reflective practice within the context of action research<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[150] Arday p. 155 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 111 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 4.6.4 Pilot study open-ended questionnaires and considerations<\/p>\n

Arday: embedded within the framework along with the student teachers’ descriptive, comparative and critical reflective conversations provided<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: embedded within the framework along with the student teachers\u201f descriptive, comparative and critical reflective conversations, provided<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

Ch5 Research findings<\/p>\n

[151] Arday p. 200 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 159 \u00b7 11 words<\/p>\n

Arday: Chapter 5: Research findings 5.1 Introduction The purpose of this study was to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Chapter 5: Research findings 5.1 Introduction The purpose of this study was to<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[152] Arday p. 200 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 159 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 5.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: Reflective practice has been defined as: a disposition to enquiry incorporating<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice has been defined as: a disposition to enquiry incorporating<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[153] Arday p. 200 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 106 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 5.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: structure or restructure actions, knowledge, theories or beliefs that inform teaching for the purpose of personal professional<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: structure or restructure actions, knowledge, theories or beliefs that inform teaching for the purpose of personal professional<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[154] Arday p. 201 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 159 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 5.2 Professional learning support<\/p>\n

Arday: reflective practice provided a focal point for analysing evidence gathered from student teachers’<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: reflective practice provided a focal point for analysing evidence gathered from student teachers<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[155] Arday p. 201 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 159 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 5.2 Professional learning support<\/p>\n

Arday: in their reference and are not intended to convey gender bias (Capel and Moss, 2005: 437). Research findings have<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: in their reference\u201f and are not intended to “convey gender bias\u201f (Capel and Moss, 2005: 437). Research findings have<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Capel 2005.<\/p>\n

[156] Arday p. 202 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 160 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 5.2 Professional learning support<\/p>\n

Arday: The main research findings of this study are drawn together in a<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: The main research findings of this study are drawn together in a<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[157] Arday p. 214 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 176 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 5.3.5 Mentor-Mentee Relationships<\/p>\n

Arday: knowledge from a range of sources as they seek to improve their teaching<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: knowledge from a range of sources as they seek to improve their teaching.<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Stenhouse 1975.<\/p>\n

[158] Arday p. 224 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 165 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 5.4 Exploring the potential for initiating and implementing peer-mentoring among<\/p>\n

Arday: basis, from a range of sources and perspectives as they<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: basis, from a range of sources and perspectives as they<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[159] Arday p. 234 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 169 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 5.5 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: student teachers’ recorded personal thoughts, perceptions and modifications to their plan of action<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers\u201f recorded personal thoughts, perceptions and modifications to their plan of action<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[160] Arday p. 259 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 174 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: Several improvements to personal practice are signalled in the above<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Several improvements to personal practice are signalled in the above<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[161] Arday p. 260 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 174 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: ability to systematically evaluate and search for reasons behind the outcomes of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: ability to systematically evaluate and search for reasons behind the outcomes of<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[162] Arday p. 260 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 176 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: is the capacity and commitment to link theoretical principles underpinning aspects of pedagogy with<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: is the capacity and commitment to link theoretical principles underpinning aspects of pedagogy with<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[163] Arday p. 260 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 176 \u00b7 22 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: own practice (Eraut, 1994; Stenhouse, 1975; 1983). Student teachers can draw on knowledge from a range of sources as they seek to improve their teaching.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: own practice (Eraut, 1994; Stenhouse, 1975, 1983). Student teachers can draw on knowledge from a range of sources as they seek to improve their teaching.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[164] Arday p. 260 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 163 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: Through descriptive and comparative reflective discourse the student teacher raises a<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Through descriptive and comparative reflective discourse the student teacher raises a<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[165] Arday p. 261 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 178 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: and endeavour to link that knowledge to a specific context.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: and endeavour to link that knowledge to a specific context,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[166] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 189 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: which gives rise to modified practice through systematic, self-reflective enquiry,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: which gives rise to modified practice through systematic, self-reflective enquiry<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[167] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 189 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: teaching approaches and strategies which worked effectively and discard or further refine those<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: teaching approaches and strategies which worked effectively and discard or further refine those<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[168] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 189 \u00b7 20 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: In this way, student teachers ground theory in their own teaching and build a repertoire of exemplars, images and metaphors<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: In this way, student teachers ground theory in their own teaching and build a repertoire of exemplars, images and metaphors<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Schon 1983.<\/p>\n

[169] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 189 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: they draw upon to frame each unique teaching situation (Schon<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: they draw upon to frame each unique teaching situation (Schon<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Schon 1983.<\/p>\n

[170] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 196 \u00b7 22 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: capacity and commitment to critically reflect on their own teaching and act upon insights gained to inform future planning, improvement and development.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: capacity and commitment to critically reflect on their own teaching and act upon insights gained to inform future planning, improvement and development.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[171] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 \u00b7 18 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: as they studied their own teaching was their capacity to enhance the quality of pupil learning and development<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: as they studied their own teaching was their capacity to enhance the quality of pupil learning and development<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[172] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: in three main areas: pupil progress or achievement, pupil behaviour patterns and pupil<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: in three main areas: pupil progress or achievement, pupil behaviour patterns and pupil<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[173] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: student teachers’ believed that pupil learning and development was attributable to their personal improvement in<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Student teachers believed that pupil learning and development was attributable to their personal improvement in<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[174] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 \u00b7 29 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: main areas: greater understanding, insight and awareness about the principles and procedures of pedagogy; thinking more about aspects of teaching and their enhanced knowledge of pupil difference and diversity.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: main areas: greater understanding, insight and awareness about the principles and procedures of pedagogy; thinking more about aspects of teaching and their enhanced knowledge of pupil difference and diversity.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[175] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: perceived by student teachers to have been influenced as they studied<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: perceived by student teachers to have been influenced as they studied<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[176] Arday p. 264 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 215 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 5.9 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: and commitment to seek alternative perspectives and possibilities to inform their teaching:<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: and commitment to seek alternative perspectives and possibilities to inform their teaching<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[177] Arday p. 285 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 224 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 5.12 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: Summary This chapter has investigated the development of student teachers’ reflective practice<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Summary This chapter has investigated the development of student teachers\u201f reflective practice<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[178] Arday p. 285 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 224 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 5.12 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: within the context of action research. The perceptions of student teachers,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: within the context of action research. The perceptions of student teachers<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[179] Arday p. 285 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 225 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 5.12 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: Interview transcripts were also analysed to identify qualitative distinctions in the types of reflective<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Interview transcripts were also analysed to identify qualitative distinctions in the types of reflective<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[180] Arday p. 285 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 225 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 5.12 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: The range between the number of descriptive, comparative and critical reflective conversations used varied,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: The range between the number of descriptive, comparative and critical reflective conversations used varied<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[181] Arday p. 286-287 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 225-226 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 5.12 Summary<\/p>\n

Arday: These research findings and their implications are discussed in the next chapter. Chapter 6: Discussion<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: These research findings and their implications are discussed in the next chapter. Chapter 6: Discussion<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

Ch6 Discussion<\/p>\n

[182] Arday p. 287 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 226 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 6.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: Introduction This chapter discusses the main findings of this study and considers how<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Introduction This chapter discusses the main findings of this study and considers how<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[183] Arday p. 287 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 106 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 6.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: of this study, has been defined as a disposition to enquiry incorporating the process<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: of this study has been defined as: a disposition to enquiry incorporating the process<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[184] Arday p. 288 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 227 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 6.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: this chapter is to discuss the main research findings pertinent to both research questions within<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: this chapter is to discuss the main research findings pertinent to both research questions within<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[185] Arday p. 294 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 231 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: This finding indicates not only that a range of research instruments were<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: This finding indicates not only that a range of research instruments were<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[186] Arday p. 294 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 231 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: was gathered from a range of perspectives which supports the argument<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: was gathered from a range of perspectives, which supports the argument<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[187] Arday p. 294 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 231 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: the need to gather evidence from multiple perspectives or lenses for triangulation purposes,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the need to gather evidence from multiple perspectives or lenses for triangulation purposes<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[188] Arday p. 294 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 231 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: this was in line with the approach adopted in other research studies for developing reflective practice in<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: This was in line with the approach adopted in other research studies for developing reflective practice in<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[189] Arday p. 296 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 233 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: feedback derived from multiple sources and multiple perspectives effectively to gauge their own practice during<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: feedback derived from multiple sources and multiple perspectives effectively to gauge their own practice during<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[190] Arday p. 296 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 233 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: Some findings however, which emerged from the student teachers’ perceptions raise several anomalies. For example,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Some findings however, which emerged from the student teachers\u201f perceptions raise several anomalies. For example,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[191] Arday p. 296 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 235 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: procedures is recognised as an integral component of professional development<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: procedures is recognised as an integral component of professional development<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Stenhouse 1975.<\/p>\n

[192] Arday p. 297 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 236 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: This needs to be investigated further, particularly as these processes<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: This needs to be investigated further, particularly as these processes<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[193] Arday p. 297 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 236 \u00b7 19 words \u00b7 6.3 Evaluating early experiences of the initial teacher training programme of study and<\/p>\n

Arday: These areas need to be investigated further, particularly in relation to exploring strategies that might support the more descriptive<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: These areas need to be investigated further, particularly in relation to exploring strategies that might support the more descriptive<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[194] Arday p. 299 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 240 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 6.4 Studying teaching for personal improvement through reflection<\/p>\n

Arday: construct knowledge and use that knowledge to link theory with their own practice<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: construct knowledge and use that knowledge to link theory with their own practice.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[195] Arday p. 301 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 4 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 6.4 Studying teaching for personal improvement through reflection<\/p>\n

Arday: themselves as teachers, their teaching, subject matter, pupils, and their roles and responsibilities within the classroom<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: themselves as teachers, their teaching, subject matter, pupils, and their roles and responsibilities within the classroom<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[196] Arday p. 301 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 244 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 6.4 Studying teaching for personal improvement through reflection<\/p>\n

Arday: the student teachers’ might have allowed their preconceived values and<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: the student teachers might have allowed their preconceived values and<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[197] Arday p. 301 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 244 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 6.4 Studying teaching for personal improvement through reflection<\/p>\n

Arday: their own teaching should personal theories and beliefs remain unchallenged,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: their own teaching should personal theories and beliefs remain unchallenged.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[198] Arday p. 301 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 245 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: student teachers’ identified a number of ways through which they considered alternative<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers\u201f identified a number of ways through which they considered alternative<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[199] Arday p. 305 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 246 \u00b7 24 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: Boud (1999: 125) recognised that the emphasis placed on the need for personal disclosure in discussion forums was often found to be beyond the capacity of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Boud (1999: 125) recognised that the emphasis placed on the need for personal disclosure in discussion forums was often found to be beyond the capacity of<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Boud 1999.<\/p>\n

[200] Arday p. 305 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 246 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: MacDonald and Brooker (1999: 59) perceived potential barriers in student teachers’ uneasiness in working with the personal.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Macdonald and Brooker (1999: 59) perceived potential barriers in student teachers\u201f uneasiness in working with the personal.<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Macdonald 1999.<\/p>\n

[201] Arday p. 305 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 246 \u00b7 23 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: particularly in relation to creating an environment of trust so that suggestions made by informed others can be perceived as constructive and non-threatening<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: particularly in relation to creating an environment of trust so that suggestions made by informed others can be perceived as constructive and non-threatening.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[202] Arday p. 306 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: The capacity and commitment to consider alternative perspectives and possibilities<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: The capacity and commitment to consider alternative perspectives and possibilities<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[203] Arday p. 306 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: as an important element of student teacher professional development (Brookfield,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: as an important element of student teacher professional development (Brookfield,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Dewey 1910.<\/p>\n

[204] Arday p. 306 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: Results in this study showed the perspectives and lenses (Brookfield, 1995) most commonly identified by student teachers<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Results in this study showed the perspectives and lenses (Brookfield, 1995) most commonly identified by student teachers<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Brookfield 1995, Dewey 1910.<\/p>\n

[205] Arday p. 306 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: student teachers’ considered alternative perspectives and possibilities to inform their own<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers\u201f considered alternative perspectives and possibilities to inform their own<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[206] Arday p. 306 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 \u00b7 21 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: Within this dimension a number of findings raise the question as to whether some student teachers might have experienced barriers in<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Within this dimension a number of findings raise the question as to whether some student teachers might have experienced barriers in<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[207] Arday p. 307 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249 \u00b7 19 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: This raises both ethical and professional issues. These concerns could be linked and, in part, might explain why some<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: This raises both ethical and professional issues. These concerns could be linked and, in part, might explain why some<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[208] Arday p. 307 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 249-250 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: These areas need further investigation, particularly in relation to finding out what causes might underpin these perceived<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: These areas need further investigation, particularly in relation to finding out what causes might underpin these perceived<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[209] Arday p. 307 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 250 \u00b7 27 words \u00b7 6.5 Establishing a Community of Practice<\/p>\n

Arday: and discovering ways to overcome them, so that student teachers and experienced teachers can engage in dialogue to explore alternative perspectives and possibilities, in all matters concerning<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: and discovering ways to overcome them, so that student teachers and experienced teachers can engage in dialogue to explore alternative perspectives and possibilities, in all matters concerning<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[210] Arday p. 312 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 252 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 6.6 Developing Trust within Peer-Mentoring<\/p>\n

Arday: would suggest that they exhibited the capacity and commitment to<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: would suggest that they exhibited the capacity and commitment to<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[211] Arday p. 318 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 256 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 6.7 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: they showed both the capacity and commitment to enhance the quality of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: they showed both the capacity and commitment to enhance the quality of<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[212] Arday p. 318 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 256 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 6.7 Critically and collaboratively reflecting on teaching and peer-mentoring at the end of<\/p>\n

Arday: need to be investigated further, particularly in relation to possible barriers which might influence<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: need to be investigated further, particularly in relation to possible barriers which might influence<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

Ch7 Conclusions and Recommendations<\/p>\n

[213] Arday p. 330 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 7.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: the following conclusions were drawn from the findings of this study and relate to the research questions,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: The following conclusions were drawn from the findings of this study and relate to the research questions<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[214] Arday p. 330 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 7.1 Introduction<\/p>\n

Arday: Caution should be exercised concerning the generalisability of these conclusions beyond the student teachers and<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Caution should be exercised concerning the generalisability of these conclusions beyond the student teachers and<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[215] Arday p. 343 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 268 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: reflective practice within the context of action research from this study, the results should be<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: reflective practice within the context of action research from this study, the results should be<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[216] Arday p. 343 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 268 \u00b7 29 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: due to a number of limitations. These are based on elements of the research methodology and design of this study, as well as the realisation that it is not<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: due to a number of limitations. These are based on elements of the research methodology and design of this study, as well as the realisation that it is not<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[217] Arday p. 343 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 268 \u00b7 16 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: with certainty whether the development of reflective practice would have occurred as a natural consequence of<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: with certainty whether the development of reflective practice would have occurred as a natural consequence of<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[218] Arday p. 343 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 \u00b7 38 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: The paucity of substantive research studies in initial teacher education and the diverse nature of those studies that have been undertaken to examine the development of student teachers’ reflective practice, particularly within physical education initial teacher education, make<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: The paucity of substantive research studies in initial teacher education and the diverse nature of those studies that have been undertaken to examine the development of student teachers\u201f reflective practice, particularly within physical education initial teacher education, make<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[219] Arday p. 343 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: the sample size in this study was relatively small as participants<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: The sample size in this study was relatively small as participants<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[220] Arday p. 343 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 \u00b7 25 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: England. Although, results of this study might be relatable to student teachers following similar courses in initial teacher education, they may be difficult to generalise<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: England. Although results of this study might be relatable to student teachers following similar courses in initial teacher education, they may be difficult to generalise.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[221] Arday p. 343-344 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 \u00b7 30 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: challenge associated with qualitative research studies is that of interpretation. It was realised that there are several ways in which interpretation has potential to influence the results of this research,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: challenge associated with qualitative research studies is that of interpretation. It was realised that there are several ways in which interpretation has potential to influence the results of this research.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[222] Arday p. 344 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: informed by the theoretical underpinnings, which have been advanced in the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: informed by the theoretical underpinnings, which have been advanced in the<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[223] Arday p. 344 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 \u00b7 17 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: scholars; teacher educators and practitioners over past decades, in addition to discussions with professional colleagues, the framework<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: scholars, teacher educators and practitioners over past decades, in addition to discussions with professional colleagues, the framework<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[224] Arday p. 344 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 \u00b7 33 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: Evidence gathered to inform this study relied upon the research participants’ understanding of what information was being asked of them. Although research instruments designed for use in this study were assessed for fitness<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Evidence gathered to inform this study relied upon the research participants\u201f understanding of what information was being asked of them. Although research instruments designed for use in this study were assessed for fitness<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[225] Arday p. 344 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 269 \u00b7 21 words \u00b7 7.4 Limitations of the study<\/p>\n

Arday: to influence student teachers’ responses should be noted. Evidence gathered to inform this study also relied upon the research participants’ judgements<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to influence student teachers\u201f responses should be noted. Evidence gathered to inform this study also relied upon the research participants\u201f judgements.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[226] Arday p. 346 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 265 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice<\/p>\n

Arday: these student teachers’ recognise the interdependent nature of reflecting on practice and<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: these student teachers\u201f recognise the interdependent nature of reflecting on practice and<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[227] Arday p. 347 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 265 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice<\/p>\n

Arday: commitment to engage in on-going professional development in order to improve<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: commitment to engage in ongoing professional development in order to improve<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[228] Arday p. 347 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 58 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice<\/p>\n

Arday: to study their teaching and become better at teaching over time’.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to study their teaching and become better at teaching over time,<\/p>\n

Control: 100 percent inside quotation marks in Arday.<\/p>\n

[229] Arday p. 347 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 265 \u00b7 15 words \u00b7 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice<\/p>\n

Arday: with an invaluable point of departure and means through which this intention might be realised<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: with an invaluable point of departure and means through which this intention might be realised.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[230] Arday p. 349 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 267 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 7.8 Considerations towards reflective practice<\/p>\n

Arday: and identified as a key attribute of extended professionals (Stenhouse,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: and identified as a key attribute of extended professionals (Stenhouse,<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Eraut 1994, Stenhouse 1975.<\/p>\n

[231] Arday p. 350 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 270 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 7.10 Recommendations for further research<\/p>\n

Arday: context of action research, replication of this study is highly recommended. Replication with<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: context of action research, replication of this study is highly recommended. Replication with<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[232] Arday p. 350 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 270-271 \u00b7 27 words \u00b7 7.10 Recommendations for further research<\/p>\n

Arday: for comparison purposes. Replication in other subject areas can also add validity to these findings. A larger sample is suggested so that findings can be generalised. The<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: for comparison purposes. Replication in other subject areas can also add validity to these findings. A larger sample is suggested so that findings can be generalised. The<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[233] Arday p. 350 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 271 \u00b7 12 words \u00b7 7.10 Recommendations for further research<\/p>\n

Arday: was designed to capture pedagogical moments in the context of the student<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: was designed to capture pedagogical moments in the context of the student<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Macdonald 2003.<\/p>\n

[234] Arday p. 350 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 271 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 7.10 Recommendations for further research<\/p>\n

Arday: MacDonald and Tinning, 2003). To that end, an exploration of their<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Macdonald and Tinning, 2003: 89). To that end, an exploration of their<\/p>\n

Control: shared citation: Macdonald 2003.<\/p>\n

[235] Arday p. 351 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 271 \u00b7 25 words \u00b7 7.10 Recommendations for further research<\/p>\n

Arday: A shared understanding and cooperation between universities and schools is necessary for supporting the professional development of student teachers. Results of this study suggest there<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: A shared understanding and cooperation between universities and schools is necessary for supporting the professional development of student teachers. Results of this study suggest there<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[236] Arday p. 351 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 271 \u00b7 18 words \u00b7 7.10 Recommendations for further research<\/p>\n

Arday: which has the potential to influence the experiences of some student teachers. Thus, possible ways in which school-based<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: which has the potential to influence the experiences of some student teachers. Thus, possible ways in which school-based<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[237] Arday p. 352 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 \u00b7 14 words \u00b7 7.13 Final Remarks<\/p>\n

Arday: drawn from the findings of this study and relate to the research questions posed.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: drawn from the findings of this study and relate to the research questions posed.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[238] Arday p. 352 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 \u00b7 10 words \u00b7 7.13 Final Remarks<\/p>\n

Arday: caution should be exercised concerning the generalisability of these conclusions,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Caution should be exercised concerning the generalisability of these conclusions<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[239] Arday p. 352 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 7.13 Final Remarks<\/p>\n

Arday: student teachers. Few studies have examined how student teachers learn the<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: student teachers. Few studies have examined how student teachers learn the<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[240] Arday p. 353 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 272 \u00b7 21 words \u00b7 7.13 Final Remarks<\/p>\n

Arday: reflective practice, as defined in this study, can be situated at the heart of these learning processes. This research has therefore<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: Reflective practice, as defined in this study, can be situated at the heart of these learning processes. This research has therefore<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[241] Arday p. 353 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 273 \u00b7 22 words \u00b7 7.13 Final Remarks<\/p>\n

Arday: to the research currently available in educational literature, which focuses on the impact strategies used to develop reflective practice in student teachers,<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: to the research currently available in educational literature, which focuses on the impact strategies used to develop reflective practice in student teachers,<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[242] Arday p. 353 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 273 \u00b7 11 words \u00b7 7.13 Final Remarks<\/p>\n

Arday: influenced their capacity and commitment to: (1) study their own teaching for<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: influenced their capacity and commitment to: study their own teaching for<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[243] Arday p. 353 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 273 \u00b7 13 words \u00b7 7.13 Final Remarks<\/p>\n

Arday: critically reflect on their own teaching; and, (5) continue to improve their own teaching.<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: critically reflect on their own teaching; and, continue to improve their own teaching.<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n

[244] Arday p. 353 \u00b7 Zwozdiak-Myers p. 274 \u00b7 24 words \u00b7 7.13 Final Remarks<\/p>\n

Arday: To this end, providing student teachers with an opportunity to engage in contextually focused research activity which enables them progressively to become more effective<\/p>\n

Zwozdiak-Myers: To this end, providing student teachers with an opportunity to engage in contextually focused research activity which enables them progressively to become more effective<\/p>\n

Control: none. Presented as Arday’s own prose with no citation shared with Zwozdiak-Myers at this point.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Jason Arday (1985-2026) died at his home in Battersea on August 14, nine days after resigning from the University of Cambridge. He was 41. The Metropolitan Police treated the death as unexpected and not suspicious. His family said he had … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[43259,42838],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-201272","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-jason-arday","category-nathan-cofnas"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/201272","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=201272"}],"version-history":[{"count":8,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/201272\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":201282,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/201272\/revisions\/201282"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=201272"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=201272"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lukeford.net\/blog\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=201272"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}