pith. sign in

arxiv: 2504.20956 · v2 · pith:5CHYV7RVnew · submitted 2025-04-29 · 💻 cs.SE

The Development of Reflective Practice on a Work-Based Software Engineering Program: A Longitudinal Study

Matthew Barr , Syed Waqar Nabi , Oana Andrei This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-22 18:14 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.SE
keywords reflective practicework-based learningsoftware engineering educationlongitudinal studyreflective assignmentsreflection frameworksprofessional skill development
0
0 comments X

The pith

Students in a work-based software engineering program show steadily more advanced reflection over four years, with every final-year student able to reconstruct experiences to guide future practice.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The study tracks reflective practice in students completing a four-year work-based Software Engineering degree by coding a sequence of their reflective assignments. Two established models are applied to measure how often students move from basic description to integration of knowledge, appropriation of skills, and reconstruction of their own practice. Trends appear clearly across the years, with more complex forms of reflection appearing far more often in later submissions. Workplace tasks and university coursework are described by students as mutually reinforcing in these reflections. By the end of the program all participants demonstrate the capacity to use past experiences to shape what they will do next.

Core claim

Longitudinal coding of student reflections using Boud et al.'s Model of Reflective Process and Bain et al.'s 5R Framework shows that sophisticated reflection—particularly integration, appropriation, and reconstruction—increases markedly from year one to year four. All students in the final year reconstruct their experiences to inform future practice, and many also engage in meta-reflection on the value of reflecting itself. The analysis further indicates that workplace experience and academic study function as complementary sources of insight.

What carries the argument

Longitudinal coding of reflective assignments with Boud et al.'s Model of Reflective Process and Bain et al.'s 5R Framework to track shifts in depth and type of reflection across four years.

If this is right

  • Sophisticated reflection becomes markedly more prevalent in later program years.
  • Workplace experience and university study are experienced as mutually supportive for reflective development.
  • Every student reaches the stage of reconstructing experiences to shape future practice by graduation.
  • Meta-reflection on the act of reflecting itself appears in some final-year submissions.
  • Structured reflection may be worth adding to conventional software engineering degrees.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Programs without a work placement could test whether adding regular reflective assignments produces similar gains in reconstruction ability.
  • The appearance of meta-reflection suggests students may begin to treat reflection as a reusable professional tool rather than a course requirement.
  • Direct comparison of reflection depth between work-based and campus-only cohorts would clarify how much the workplace context contributes to the observed progression.

Load-bearing premise

Coding reflective assignments with the two chosen models produces a reliable and unbiased record of genuine growth in students' reflective abilities.

What would settle it

Re-coding the full set of assignments by independent coders yields no consistent rise in reconstruction or integration scores across the four years, or final-year students fail to produce any examples of using past experience to plan future actions when prompted directly.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.20956 by Matthew Barr, Oana Andrei, Syed Waqar Nabi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The percentage of student reports that contained evidence of each element of Boud [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The prevalence of each stage of the 5R model of reflection, as identified in reports submitted by students across four years of the program. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

This study examines the development of reflective practice among students on a four-year work-based Software Engineering program. Using two established models of reflection - Boud et al.'s Model of Reflective Process and Bain et al.'s 5R Framework for Reflection - we analyse a series of reflective assignments submitted by students over four years. Our longitudinal analysis reveals clear trends in how students' reflective abilities evolve over the course of the program. We find that more sophisticated forms of reflection, such as integration of knowledge, appropriation of skills, and reconstruction of practice, increase markedly in prevalence in later years. The complementary nature of workplace experience and university study is highlighted in students' reflections, demonstrating a key benefit of the work-based learning approach. By the final year, all students demonstrate the ability to reconstruct their experiences to inform future practice. Our findings provide insight into how reflective practice develops in Software Engineering education and suggest potential value in incorporating more structured reflection into traditional degree programs. The study also reveals instances of meta-reflection, where students reflect on the value of reflection itself, indicating a deep engagement with the reflective process. While acknowledging limitations, this work offers a unique longitudinal perspective on the development of reflective practice in work-based Software Engineering education.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper reports on a longitudinal study of reflective practice development among students in a four-year work-based Software Engineering program. By coding reflective assignments using Boud et al.'s Model of Reflective Process and Bain et al.'s 5R Framework, the authors identify increasing trends in sophisticated reflection over the years, with all final-year students demonstrating reconstruction of experiences to inform future practice. The study highlights the benefits of combining workplace experience with university study and instances of meta-reflection.

Significance. If the methodological details support the reliability of the coding, this study provides important empirical evidence on the evolution of reflective abilities in software engineering education. The longitudinal design and use of established reflection models are strengths, offering insights that could guide the incorporation of reflective practices in both work-based and traditional SE programs. The finding of meta-reflection indicates deep engagement with the process.

major comments (1)
  1. [Methods] Methods: The description of the content analysis does not report the number of coders, coder training or calibration procedures, inter-rater reliability metrics (such as Cohen's kappa), or how disagreements on borderline cases were resolved. Because the central claim that 'by the final year, all students demonstrate the ability to reconstruct their experiences' rests directly on the coded instances of reconstruction, the absence of these details leaves the reliability of the universal claim unverified.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: The claim of 'clear trends' and 'all students' would be strengthened by stating the cohort size and the total number of assignments coded.
  2. [Results] Results: Quantitative summaries (e.g., percentage of assignments showing each level of the 5R framework or Boud stages per year) are needed to substantiate the described increase in sophisticated reflection.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive feedback on our manuscript. The comment on methodological transparency is well-taken, and we will revise the paper to provide the requested details on the content analysis process.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Methods] Methods: The description of the content analysis does not report the number of coders, coder training or calibration procedures, inter-rater reliability metrics (such as Cohen's kappa), or how disagreements on borderline cases were resolved. Because the central claim that 'by the final year, all students demonstrate the ability to reconstruct their experiences' rests directly on the coded instances of reconstruction, the absence of these details leaves the reliability of the universal claim unverified.

    Authors: We agree that these details are important for verifying the reliability of the coding, especially given the central claim about reconstruction in the final year. The submitted manuscript omitted a full account of the coding procedures. In the revised version we will expand the Methods section with a new subsection that reports the number of coders, the training and calibration steps followed, the process for resolving disagreements through discussion and consensus, and any inter-rater reliability statistics that were computed. This addition will directly address the concern and improve the transparency of the study. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: empirical coding of external frameworks

full rationale

The paper performs a longitudinal qualitative content analysis of student reflective assignments by applying two pre-existing external models (Boud et al.'s Model of Reflective Process and Bain et al.'s 5R Framework). No mathematical derivations, equations, fitted parameters, or predictions appear in the reported chain. The central claim—that sophisticated reflection increases and all final-year students demonstrate reconstruction—is presented as an observed trend from the coded data rather than a quantity defined in terms of itself or forced by self-citation. The frameworks are cited as established literature from independent authors; no load-bearing uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported from the present authors' prior work. The study is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and exhibits no reduction of results to inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The analysis depends entirely on the validity of two pre-existing educational frameworks for categorizing reflection; no numerical parameters are fitted and no new theoretical entities are postulated.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Boud et al.'s Model of Reflective Process and Bain et al.'s 5R Framework provide valid and comprehensive categories for measuring the development of reflective practice in this educational setting.
    The entire longitudinal trend analysis is performed by mapping student text to these two models.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5748 in / 1289 out tokens · 73858 ms · 2026-05-22T18:14:27.130937+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

21 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Reflective learning: Key to learning from experience,

    E. M. Boyd and A. W. Fales, “Reflective learning: Key to learning from experience,” Journal of Humanistic Psychology , vol. 23, no. 2, p. 99–117, Apr. 1983

    work page 1983

  2. [2]

    Dewey, How we think

    J. Dewey, How we think . Buffalo, NY: Prometheus Books, 1933

    work page 1933

  3. [3]

    Rodgers and V

    C. Rodgers and V . K. LaBoskey, Reflective Practice . Singapore: Springer, 2016, p. 71–104. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10.1007/ 978-981-10-0369-1 3

    work page 2016

  4. [4]

    A model of work-based learning,

    J. A. Raelin, “A model of work-based learning,” Organization Science, vol. 8, no. 6, p. 563–578, Dec. 1997

    work page 1997

  5. [5]

    Burden and J.-P

    H. Burden and J.-P. Stegh ¨ofer, Teaching and Fostering Reflection in Software Engineering Project Courses . Singapore: Springer Singapore, 2019, p. 231–262. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-981-13-2751-3 12

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Supporting reflective practice in software engineering education through a studio-based approach,

    C. N. Bull and J. Whittle, “Supporting reflective practice in software engineering education through a studio-based approach,” IEEE Software, vol. 31, no. 04, pp. 44–50, jul 2014

    work page 2014

  7. [7]

    The reflective software engineer: Reflective practice,

    T. Dyb ˚a, N. Maiden, and R. Glass, “The reflective software engineer: Reflective practice,” IEEE Software, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 32–36, 2014

    work page 2014

  8. [8]

    Embedding reflection and learning into agile software development,

    J. Babb, R. Hoda, and J. Nørbjerg, “Embedding reflection and learning into agile software development,” IEEE Software , vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 51–57, 2014

    work page 2014

  9. [9]

    Metacognitive challenges to support self-reflection of students in online software engineering education,

    D. Pedrosa, M. M. Fontes, T. Ara ´ujo, C. Morais, T. Bettencourt, P. D. Pestana, L. Morgado, and J. Cravino, “Metacognitive challenges to support self-reflection of students in online software engineering education,” in 2021 4th International Conference of the Portuguese Society for Engineering Education (CISPEE) . IEEE, 2021, pp. 1–10

    work page 2021

  10. [10]

    The institute of coding accreditation standard: Exploring the use of a professional skills framework to address the UK skills gap,

    D. S. Bowers, A. Hayes, T. Prickett, T. Crick, K. Streater, and C. Sharp, “The institute of coding accreditation standard: Exploring the use of a professional skills framework to address the UK skills gap,” in Proceedings of the 2023 Conference on United Kingdom & Ireland Computing Education Research, Swansea, Wales, UK, September 7-8, 2023 , T. Astarte, ...

    work page doi:10.1145/3610969.3611121 2023

  11. [11]

    Reflection in teacher education: Towards def- inition and implementation,

    N. Hatton and D. Smith, “Reflection in teacher education: Towards def- inition and implementation,” Teaching and Teacher Education, vol. 11, no. 1, p. 33–49, Jan. 1995

    work page 1995

  12. [12]

    Evaluating reflective writing to guide curricular improvements in health informatics education,

    C. Lokker and R. Jezrawi, “Evaluating reflective writing to guide curricular improvements in health informatics education,” Reflective Practice, vol. 23, no. 1, p. 44–56, Jan. 2022

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    D. Boud, R. Keogh, and D. Walker, Promoting Reflection in Learning: a Model. London: Routledge, Sep. 2013, p. 23

    work page 2013

  14. [14]

    Assessing the level of student reflection from reflective journals,

    F. K. Wong, D. Kember, L. Y . F. Chung, and L. Y . CertEd, “Assessing the level of student reflection from reflective journals,” Journal of Advanced Nursing, vol. 22, no. 1, p. 48–57, 1995

    work page 1995

  15. [15]

    J. D. Bain, R. Ballantyne, C. Mills, and N. C. Lester, Reflecting on Practice: Student Teachers’ Perspectives . Flaxton, Queensland: Post Pressed, 2002

    work page 2002

  16. [16]

    Reflective thinking in an efl writing course: To what level do portfolios improve reflection in writing?

    M. Farahian, F. Avarzamani, and Y . Rajabi, “Reflective thinking in an efl writing course: To what level do portfolios improve reflection in writing?” Thinking Skills and Creativity , vol. 39, p. 100759, Mar. 2021

    work page 2021

  17. [17]

    Are integrated portfolio systems the answer? an evaluation of a web-based portfolio system to improve preservice teachers’ reflective thinking skills,

    D. Oner and E. Adadan, “Are integrated portfolio systems the answer? an evaluation of a web-based portfolio system to improve preservice teachers’ reflective thinking skills,” Journal of Computing in Higher Education, vol. 28, no. 2, p. 236–260, Aug. 2016

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    Developing a work-based software engineering degree in collaboration with industry,

    M. Barr and J. Parkinson, “Developing a work-based software engineering degree in collaboration with industry,” in Proceedings of the 1st UK & Ireland Computing Education Research Conference, UKICER 2019, Canterbury, UK, September 5-6, 2019 , J. Carter, B. A. Becker, and N. C. C. Brown, Eds. ACM, 2019, pp. 9:1–9:7. [Online]. Available: https://doi.org/10....

    work page doi:10.1145/3351287.3351292 2019

  19. [19]

    Assessing work-based learn- ing in the senior years of a software engineering graduate apprenticeship program,

    S. W. Nabi, O. Andrei, M. Barr, Q. Cutts, J. Maguire, A. Morrison, J. Parkinson, D. Somerville, and T. Storer, “Assessing work-based learn- ing in the senior years of a software engineering graduate apprenticeship program,” in Proceedings of the 37th IEEE International Conference on Software Engineering Education and Training (CSEE&T 2025) . Ottawa, Canad...

    work page 2025

  20. [20]

    Using thematic analysis in psychology,

    V . Braun and V . Clarke, “Using thematic analysis in psychology,” Qualitative Research in Psychology , vol. 3, no. 2, p. 77–101, Jan 2006

    work page 2006

  21. [21]

    COMPSCI4085P Workplace Assessment Year 4,

    U. of Glasgow Course Catalogue, “COMPSCI4085P Workplace Assessment Year 4,” 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.gla.ac.uk/ coursecatalogue/course/?code=COMPSCI4085P

    work page 2025