Christopher John's Model Of Reflective Practice

In day to day life, people often reflect on events no matter how big or small the issues are. Reflection is a reviewing process of people’s experience, in order to describe, analyse, and evaluate to reshape people’s action of doing (Reid 1993). Reflective practice is essential for practitioners especially for health professionals, who interact with people that may be going through a changing in their life, so reflective practice enable practitioners to learn the experience and improve their service delivery to their full potential (Alsop 2000). Moreover, it can also help to link up new knowledge and practical skills to continue professional development. Using a reflective model, it structured the experience so that it can lead practitioners
Johns’ (2013) stated that the framework was designed to allow practitioners to look deep and wide into the experience and gain insights that do not show themselves easily. The model in 2013 version (Edition 16) is divided into five phases: preparatory, descriptive, reflective, anticipatory and insight phases. The order of cue questions is arranged to enhance the flow of thoughts, moving from an initial and significant perception towards gaining insight. If the guiding question does not fit into a particular situation, it allows flexibility for practitioners to skip the question and continue reflecting on an event. Moreover, comparing to other reflective models, Johns’ model has considered about how another party e.g. patient, colleague react and their reasons of response, instead of solely focusing the practitioner. And so, it gives practitioners a chance to view from different a person’s angle and
It is because by placing practitioners into a comfortable environment, it allows practitioners to be mentally prepared, which enhances gathering thoughts of the experience, so that practitioners can enable the flow of thoughts, as a result of an ideal quality of reflection.
The structure of the reflective model 2013 has been improved from its original version. It allows practitioners to have an easier understanding on the purpose of each phase of reflection, for example, anticipatory phase instead of learning in 1994 version. Also, Johns dropped the four sub-questions in the description in 1994 version, because Johns reported he felt that it ‘interfered with practitioners telling their stories’ (Johns,