A new model of reflection: are some elements missing from its design?

Editor– I read with great interest the recent article by Nguyen et al. The authors distilled the essential features common to a number of major conceptions of reflection and developed an overlapping definition and helpful conceptual model of that construct. The new model highlights five core components, embedded in the proposed definition of reflection, and two extrinsic elements that influence the occurrence of reflection. It is noteworthy that personal motivation was included neither as a constituent nor as a nurturing element in this model of reflection. However, the authors relate the surge of reflection in medical education with the need to ‘learn in ways that foster autonomy’. Self-determination theory distinguishes autonomy as one of the three innate psychological needs of human beings, satisfaction of which is required for the maintenance of autonomous or self-regulated motivation. Self-determination theory claims that autonomous motivation is the kind of motivation that drives deep learning and academic performance. As Nguyen et al. imply, mindful mentoring and a supportive educational environment can engender reflective learning, perhaps by enhancing learners’ autonomous motivation. In my view, autonomous motivation – as a state of the person undergoing reflection – is an instrumental factor in fostering reflection in learning. Indeed, a significant correlation has been reported between reflective learning (as measured by the Reflectionin-Learning Scale) and autonomous motivation (as measured by the Academic Motivation Scale). Hence, I suggest that the quality of the learner’s motivation adds to understanding of how reflection comes into being.