Reflective Practice Models

A comprehensive guide to frameworks for professional development, ranging from beginner-friendly structures to complex models for deep transformation.

Foundational Models

These are generally considered beginner-friendly frameworks for structured reflection. They are excellent for quickly breaking down an event and planning immediate actions, though they may lack depth for complex personal development.

Feature Driscoll Model (1994) Kolb Cycle (1984) Gibbs Cycle (1988)
Core Structure 3 simple questions:
What? So what? Now what?		 4-stage cycle:
  • Doing
  • Reflecting
  • Making judgments
  • Testing out
 6-stage cycle:
  • Description
  • Feelings
  • Evaluation
  • Analysis
  • Conclusion
  • Action Plan
Primary Focus Quick, practical breakdown of a situation and immediate action planning. Experiential learning—how we learn by physically doing something and then conceptualizing it. A structured, step-by-step walkthrough of an event that explicitly includes emotional responses.
Complexity Very Low

Highly memorable and conversational.

 Low

Focuses on the broad cycle of learning from experience.

 Low to Medium

More steps to follow, but straightforward and linear.
Best Used For Quick, "on-the-go" reflections when you need to quickly process an event and decide the next step. Hands-on tasks where you need to test a new theory or method in practice after reflecting. Beginners who need a reliable, guided structure to break down an incident from start to finish.
Strengths Easy to remember without a reference sheet; gets straight to the point. Connects practical actions (doing/testing) with cognitive processing. Forces you to acknowledge your feelings and evaluate what went well (and what didn't).
Weaknesses Can be too brief; focuses heavily on the situation rather than your internal personal development. Does not provide deep probing questions; can result in superficial reflection. Lacks prompts for deep critical analysis, challenging assumptions, or viewing the event from other perspectives.
Includes: Driscoll, Kolb, Gibbs

Data reference: Rolfe_and_John_s_models_Sheet2.csv

Intermediate Models

These models introduce more layers and context to the reflective process, helping users transition from novice to expert by requiring more cognitive effort and consideration of broader influences.

Feature Rolfe et al.’s Framework (2001) Johns' Model (2006)
Core Structure Based on three simple questions:
What? So what? Now what?		 Based on a detailed series of prompt questions covering five "ways of knowing."
Theoretical Basis Borton’s developmental model. Carper’s four types of knowing (empirical, personal, ethical, aesthetic) plus reflexivity.
Key Focus Progressively deepening analysis of a single event (from descriptive to theoretical to action-oriented). Holistic, contextual analysis that heavily considers the environment and internal/external influences.
Complexity & Depth Medium

The questions are simple, but applying them at three different levels requires cognitive effort.

 High

It requires navigating a large number of specific, structured prompt questions.
Best Used For Practitioners looking to develop from a novice to an expert by scaling a familiar framework. Complex clinical or organizational situations where ethics, personal feelings, and environment play a big role.
Strengths Highly memorable core questions; adaptable to different levels of expertise. Extremely comprehensive; ensures no aspect of a situation (especially ethical and environmental) is missed.
Weaknesses Beginners may struggle to distinguish between the three different levels of depth. The sheer volume of questions can be confusing, rigid, and time-consuming for quick reflections.
Includes: Rolfe, Johns

Data reference: Rolfe_and_John_s_models_Sheet1.csv / Rolfe and John's models

Advanced Models

These frameworks are meant to elicit personal change, challenge deeply held beliefs, and integrate academic or peer feedback. They are suited for long-term personal and professional transformation.

Feature Atkins & Murphy (1993) Brookfield Model (2005) Mezirow Model (1981)
Core Structure / Focus Focuses on deep reflection that explicitly builds on previous experiences and challenges existing assumptions. Requires analyzing situations through four distinct "lenses": self, patients/students, colleagues, and research. A complex model focused on critically evaluating frames of reference and seeking fundamental transformation.
Complexity High High Very High

Considered a long-term model requiring significant self-motivation.
Best Used For Practitioners wanting to break bad habits or rethink deeply ingrained practices. Situations requiring diverse perspectives, especially when personal reflection needs validation from peers or literature. Profound personal development and learning from major professional dilemmas or crises.
Strengths Excellent for uncovering blind spots by forcing consideration of assumptions. Provides a very well-rounded view of an event; prevents self-centered reflection. Can lead to genuine paradigm shifts in how a practitioner operates.
Weaknesses Not suitable for quick, on-the-go reflections or absolute beginners. Not suitable if you need to quickly examine an issue from a single, specific angle. Focuses heavily on rational aspects, sometimes neglecting emotional responses; requires immense time and effort.
Includes: Atkins & Murphy, Brookfield, Mezirow

Source: Lifelong Learning with OT Blog