| Abstract: | This paper offers some perspectives on quality assurance for those who wish to retain the reflective practitioner approach to professional training. It takes its examples from teacher training, but is equally addressed to those in other professions whose work uses this approach. It contends that the way forward in finding a useful system of quality assurance which is compatible with institutional demands and the intentions of courses based upon the reflective practitioner approach, is to understand the different values that lie beneath two very different models of professionalism, and to use this understanding to seek rapprochement between them. This paper explores the industrial model of quality assurance, which currently strongly influences higher education. After contextualising the current debate about quality, this paper shows how the industrial view relates to the technical rational model of professionalism. This is contrasted with the professional artistry model of professionalism which lies at the heart of the reflective practitioner approach. Appraisal and reflection are considered and a framework for reflection is offered drawn from on‐going research. This might enable practitioners to capture data which might be used as evidence of quality. The beginnings of reciprocity between the two models are sketched, and a grim warning is issued. |
