Number of Citations: 0

Submitted: 28 January 2025
Accepted: 16 June 2025
Published online: 6 January, TAPS 2026, 11(1), 22-31
https://doi.org/10.29060/TAPS.2026-11-1/OA3633

Hannah Woodall^1,2, Linda Furness^1,2, Robert Heffernan^1,2, Kay Brumpton¹, Janani Pinidiyapathirage^1,2 & Brendan Carrigan^1,2

¹Rural Clinical School, Griffith University, Toowoomba, Australia; ²Rural Medical Education Australia, Toowoomba, Australia

Abstract

Introduction: Reflection offers many benefits for medical students, improving self-awareness and integration of theory into real situations. However, like any skill, reflection must be learned and practiced. Reflective learning is also influenced by the workplace, particularly in students’ clinical training years. This study explored the factors perceived by educators to influence reflective learning amongst medical students undertaking a rural longitudinal integrated clerkship (LIC).

Methods: All educators within the LIC program were invited to participate. Educators come from both a medical and nursing background. Two focus groups (FG) were conducted. FG were facilitated by experienced researchers. Transcripts were analysed by two researchers using Braun and Clark’s approach to thematic analysis.

Results: Eleven educators participated in two focus groups (six medical educators; five nursing educators). Educators perceived that reflective learning was influenced at three levels: student, educator and institution. These findings aligned with workplace learning theory. Educator and institutional influences were identified as “affordances” which support or hinder reflection. Supportive affordances included labelling of reflection, multidisciplinary collaborative learning, and the longitudinal nature of the rural model. Hindering affordances included using artificial reflective assessments. Educators also identified characteristics of the individual student which may contribute to student decision-making about reflection.

Conclusion: This study provides a deeper understanding about educator experiences of reflective learning within LIC settings. The findings provide insights into the ways in which educators, educational institutions and student workplace settings may support or hinder reflective practice. This study also highlighted the potential for the LIC model to support reflective practice.

Keywords:           Reflective Practice, Undergraduate Medical Education, Rural Medical Education, Longitudinal Integrated Clerkship, Workplace Learning

Practice Highlights

• Educator factors including labelling and positive modelling of reflection may support reflective learning in clinical settings. Modelling of negative attitudes to reflection may hinder reflection in such settings.
• Institutional factors including the LIC model, allowing time for reflective activities and prioritising activities which promote genuine reflection may support reflection in clinical placements. Conversely, allowing limited time for reflection and focussing on written reflective activities may hinder reflection in these same settings.
• Despite educator and institutional factors, students must still choose to engage in reflection.

I. INTRODUCTION

Reflection is a vital skill for medical students, particularly as they transition from theoretical learning environments into clinical settings (Greenhill et al., 2017). In clinical settings, students must learn to translate theory into practice and integrate ethics, communication, professionalism, and culture into real-life situations (Malau-Aduli et al., 2020; Schön, 1995). Reflection supports students to make this transition and become reflective practitioners.

The relationship between reflection and learning is well established (Sandars, 2009). Dewey (1910) proposed that knowledge is created through reflection on experience, through which learners resolve doubt and make sense of situations. This early work has been reshaped, and advanced, with reflection recently defined as: “a metacognitive process that occurs before, during and after situations with the purpose of developing greater understanding of both the self and the situation so that future encounters with the situation are informed from previous encounters” (Sandars, 2009).

This definition proposes a broad understanding of reflection as “thinking about thinking” (metacognition) which occurs at all stages of an experience (before, during and after) (Flavell, 1979; Sandars, 2009). This definition recognises that reflection considers the situation, empirical knowledge and the drivers of the actions of “self” (Sandars, 2009). Such reflection allows past experience to shape future encounters (Kolb, 2014). Through reflection, students actively consider their experiences and examine their skills, beliefs, or assumptions to make sense of complex situations (Bradbury et al., 2010; Chambers et al., 2011; Fernandez et al., 2015; Sandars, 2009). This process moves beyond introspective reflection, instead requiring students to participate in “critical reflection”, whereby learners critically and intentionally consider their experience, knowledge and practice to shape and improve future encounters (Ash & Clayton, 2009).

Reflection is not an automatic or passive process, but requires time, willingness, and skills (Ash and Clayton, 2009; Chambers et al., 2011). Current reflective learning education has been criticised for its reliance on formulaic and written reflections, which may lead to contrived, inauthentic attempts (de la Croix & Veen, 2018). Similarly, while reflective models and frameworks (e.g. Boud, Driscoll or Gibbs) provide useful tools, a narrow focus on reflective models or assessment matrices can paradoxically reduce opportunities for authentic reflection (Boud et al., 1985; Dewey, 1910; Driscoll, 1994; Gathu, 2022; Gibbs, 1988). Evidence increasingly supports diverse reflective methods to enable learners to identify their own personal systems for reflection (de la Croix & Veen, 2018; MacAskill et al., 2023).

Student reflective learning is also impacted by the transition from university-based to workplace-based learning that occurs as students move into clinical settings. Workplace learning is a cooperative process between workplace and learner (Billett, 2001, 2016). In this duality, the workplace or clinical placement offers “affordances” such as formal training, mentoring or the underlying values and culture of the organisation, which may enable or hinder learning (Billett, 2001, 2016). However for meaningful learning to occur, a learner must elect to engage with these workplace opportunities (Billett, 2001). Engagement decisions may be shaped by many factors, including knowledge, values and motivations (Billett, 2001). Where these factors align with what the workplace affords, skill development and mastery will be promoted (Billett, 2001).

Our study was conducted within the context of a rural Longitudinal Integrated Clerkship (LIC) for medical students in Queensland, Australia. Rural longitudinal placements have been reported to foster reflective practice amongst students (Bates et al., 2013; Daly et al., 2013; Gaufberg et al., 2014; Greenhill & Poncelet, 2013; Nyaradi et al., 2025). However, educators in our program have expressed concerns that student reflections were often superficial and may not foster lifelong reflective practice. Given these concerns, a greater understanding of educator perspectives on student reflection is needed.

The student perspective in this context has been explored previously and identified that students valued scaffolding of reflective activities to assist them in learning to reflect, particularly at the beginning of their placement or where they were unsure what to reflect on in a specific situation (MacAskill et al., 2024). However, to gain a more comprehensive view of the placement setting, the perspectives of educators must be considered. Educators bring experience drawn from multiple student cohorts and observe student educational, clinical and interpersonal interactions over the course of a year (Hirsh et al., 2007; Norris et al., 2009). In the rural LIC context, these insights are gained not only through their formal work as educators but also through their roles as health professionals co-located with the students in small rural hospitals. This external perspective provided by educators offers valuable insights into the development of reflective practices and abilities of the students during their clinical placement. This study aimed to identify the factors that educators perceive as influencing reflective learning within a rural LIC program. Additionally, it explores effective methods for supporting student reflection and facilitating the development of authentic reflective practice.

II. METHODS

A. Setting

This study explored reflective learning in the Griffith University “Longlook” program, a rural LIC in south-east Queensland, Australia. Medical students in the Griffith Medical program, a four-year postgraduate medical degree, can elect to participate in Longlook for one or both of their clinical years (years three and four). Longlook students are placed in rural locations for one or two years and meet learning goals across multiple disciplines within a longitudinal placement rather than through isolated blocks (Fuller et al., 2021). Students live in communal accommodation within these rural locations.

The Longlook model affords students continuity of relationships with supervising clinicians and patients (Fuller et al., 2021; The Consortium of Longitudinal Integrated Clerkships [CLIC], 2020; Worley et al., 2016). Approximately 50 students participate in this program each year at one of eight rural clinical training sites (Carrigan et al., 2023).

Longlook is unique in being delivered in partnership with a rural not-for profit organisation, Rural Medical Education Australia (RMEA). Students are supported by generalist educators from both a medical and nursing background who are co-located with students in the hospital sites. Longlook medical educators are rural generalists, who are trained as general practitioners and also provide care within emergency medicine and/or obstetrics, anaesthetics or other hospital services within their local setting (Department of Health and Aged Care [DHAC], 2021). Longlook clinical nurse educators have advanced training to work in rural generalist hospitals and support education delivery within the LIC. Both nursing and medical educators attend monthly training sessions with the students at a central location throughout the academic year in addition to supporting medical students at their respective local sites.

Griffith University medical students are taught and practice reflective practice framed through the MaRIS model. MaRIS applies contemplative pedagogy to medical student teaching to foster a culture of affective reflection (Chan et al., 2020). The year 3 and 4 curricula include two forms of reflective assessment. The first is a written reflection on the student’s topic of choice, completed by all students in both year levels. The second is a series of case presentations (twenty-four in year 3 and six in year 4) which include reflection on the case as well as consideration of ethical, legal, professional or other non-biomedical issues.

B. Research Team

The research team has broad experience across medical education and clinical practice. HW is an academic GP. KB, BC and RH are clinicians and medical educators who have been involved in the development and implementation of the Longlook program. BC and RH lead the 3^rd and 4^th year student programs. LF is an occupational therapist with expertise in education and reflective learning within the allied health context. JP is an experienced health researcher and RMEA director of research. The research team reflected upon the assumptions brought to the study, namely that reflective learning is important but existing approaches do not appear to engage students in genuine reflection. The background of research team members allows an active interpretation of the results based on experience within medical education and clinical practice (Olmos-Vega et al., 2023).

C. Participants

All educators within the Longlook program were invited to participate (eight medical educators, six nursing educators). Participants were not recruited from outside of this program due to the challenges of comparing this unique context with other education settings.

D. Study Design

A constructivist case study research paradigm was used to ensure methodological congruence and forefront the experiences and voices of the research participants. Constructivist perspectives reflected the desire to explore the participants’ constructions of their lived experiences as educators (Shannon-Baker, 2023). The case study approach enabled the team to understand and describe the experiences of educators within the setting of a rural LIC by purposively selecting educators within the program (Hall et al., 2008). In accordance with the constructivist approach, semi-structured focus groups were used to capture educators’ collective experiences and enable rich data generation based on interactions between participants (Gill & Baillie, 2018).

Two focus groups were conducted between August and December 2022. The potential for power differentials between medical and nursing educators led to the decision to separate focus groups, ensuring that the perspectives of both groups could be explored freely. The medical educator (ME) focus group was conducted by a ME, while the clinical nurse educator (NE) focus group was facilitated by a clinical nurse educator. Focus groups lasted approximately one hour and were conducted in person during student teaching days. Informed written consent was obtained from all participants prior to the focus group. The focus groups explored educator views on reflective learning activities, an evaluation of current reflective methods, and how reflective learning could be improved. The interview guide is attached in Appendix 1.

Focus group data recordings were transcribed using Sonix™ and uploaded to NVivo™ for coding. Braun and Clarke’s 6-step approach to thematic analysis was adopted to generate codes and themes inductively from the transcribed data, aligning with the qualitative approach to data generation and in keeping with the constructivist paradigm underpinning the research design (Braun & Clarke, 2006). Two researchers (HW and LF) worked independently on analysis before coming together to define and decide on the most significant themes, applying the principals of thematic analysis in a non-linear and iterative way.

The research team sought to ensure the trustworthiness of the data through acknowledging their own background and assumptions, providing thick descriptions of the data and its context, and through independent analysis by team members from different backgrounds (Ahmed, 2024).

E. Ethics

Ethical approval was obtained from the Griffith University Human Research Ethics Committee (GU 2021/376).

III. RESULTS

Eleven educators were recruited to participate in this study, including six with a medical background, and five with a nursing background. Factors perceived by educators to impact student reflective practice occurred at three levels: student, educator and institution.

A. Student Factors

The student’s pre-clinical life experience and innate ability to reflect appeared to impact their ability to engage in reflective practice. Educators perceived that some students were already skilled in reflection, while for others it was a new and challenging concept. They also perceived that student’s life experience and self-awareness impacted on their ability to reflect.

“You’re teaching, for some people, something that they’re doing already and then for others, … you are actually trying to teach, you know, an unnatural kind of process.” ME3

“Everybody has really different life experiences and the way that they bring those life experiences to the way that they either talk to somebody or treat a patient or think about, diagnose, diagnostics or anything like that, you know, all of those life experiences will contribute to that in some way. So I guess it’s just also that self-awareness of who you are and where you came from and how that’s influencing the way that you are interacting and thinking about other people as well.” NE4

“An increasing number of students that come rural, actually, it is a practice for them, and they will actually journal and reflect on their day most days… I don’t know whether something that they’re, they’ve been taught to do in years one and two, or whether it’s something that they’ve it’s just been a practice of theirs from something else” NE5

Educators perceived clinical exposure as significantly impacting the quality of student reflections, with students new to the placement reflecting on the newness of their experience, while students who had been on the placement for several weeks or months reflected on their capabilities and strategies for improving their practice. Educators witnessed the evolution of student’s reflective skills and described deepening complexity of reflections, incorporating the socio-cultural context of rural healthcare, during the LIC program.

“At the beginning, the reflection was just, this is all new and different. And now the reflection is more about what was done well and how they contributed and how they could do better or could do things differently.” ME1

“By the end of it, they’ve learnt so much that the reflective practice is actually more where they’re thinking…They’re now more thinking about reflecting on their practice and how they’re going to be a better doctor.” NE2

“I think with the rural generalist model, when people are learning in these kind of, in rural towns, that application to a bigger context is a bit probably easier for them to learn and to see. So we probably do have an opportunity to actually get them to understand that more and reflect on that more.” ME6

Educators also described informal reflection occurring outside of the clinical environment. The immersion in a rural LIC setting and shared accommodation was felt to provide greater informal opportunities for reflection.

“I think about the students in the accommodation building this year and I think about the students in the accommodation building last year, and last year there was lots of reflective practice, just informally, in the accommodation building. This year, it was very limited, and that’s, you know, different personalities” ME1

“I wonder within the rural context whether our students are naturally doing it [reflecting] at night when they go home and talk to each other a little bit anyway.” ME6 

B. Educator Factors

Educators recognised the importance of role modelling and their own reflective practice to support student reflection. The approach and attitude of medical educators towards reflection was felt to be particularly significant. Educators linked this with the “hidden curriculum”; the informal learning that occurs through witnessing attitudes and behaviours of educators and supervisors (Hafferty & O’Donnell, 2014).

“I wonder if the groaning about, and negativity to reflective practice is in the hidden curriculum in that as a profession, we groan and have a negative attitude to reflective practice.” ME2

“I’m not sure whether we as doctors do as much active reflecting as we probably should as well and show how important that is.” ME6

“It [reflection] probably also needs to be better embraced amongst the medical community itself. Because, yeah, because there’s a lot of doctors out there that’ll think it’s a bit airy fairy or bit of a waste of time. And I suppose when you’re trying to be a doctor, a doctor’s opinion is going to have a higher standing than a nurse’s opinion” NE4

Educators also acknowledged that reflection is not always labelled when it occurs, which may impact student reflective activities.

“I hear lots of philosophical conversations coming from my colleagues with medical students… I’ve never heard any of them termed as reflection.” ME3 

“You asked if we use the word reflection, and I think we all try and shy away from it.” ME5 

Educators reported that educators and students engaging in collaborative reflection provided a positive influence, as an example of educators modelling reflection.

“One thing I try and do with the students is every week we catch up and I ask them all the question, “What was the most interesting thing you saw this week?” …. I always try and do one as well to model firstly that I’m still learning. This was interesting to me because I missed the diagnosis, actually, and I need to work on that or for whatever reason and be part of the collective “we’re all learning together” ME5 

Collaborative reflection as part of multidisciplinary educator teams was also considered significant. Educators from different disciplines are involved in the Longlook program, with educators proposing that different disciplines may bring different reflective skills. Nurse educators identified that they may be able to contribute more to this aspect of student learning and wondered if medical educators may benefit from professional development in this area.

“Perhaps the nurse educators are better positioned to talk to them about reflective practice …Because perhaps the medical educators don’t do it well, either.” NE5 

“If there are some struggling, because [medical educator] doesn’t have the time. Maybe I could just work with them… What’s been going on? Have that sort of informal thing just to prompt them to reflect a little bit more” NE4

“Maybe …some professional development for the medical educators as well, just to see how comfortable they are with it” NE5

Participants identified that this process of learning together requires a safe learning environment in which trust and vulnerability from both sides allows educators and students to learn to reflect together. 

 “Because they’re [students] so used to being such high performers, being in a position where you’re not performing so well definitely puts them in a vulnerable position…” NE1 

“I think that depends on trust. That’s probably the key thing. And the relationship that exists, so it wouldn’t be a natural thing at the start of a year to do it with an educator.” ME3 

C. Institutional Factors

Finally, educators identified organisational factors related to the university curriculum which impacted student reflective learning. Time constraints within the medical school program meant that reflective activities were omitted when time was tight.

“When you’ve only got like two hours to get through six people [presenting case-based discussions], you may not be able to sort of expand on some of those reflections, as interesting as they might be to discuss as a group.” NE1 

Educators felt that students required institutions, assessors and educators to set clear expectations for reflection.

“We could probably do a better job of actually setting that standard with orientation” ME2

“Do it [reflective teaching] as a sort of combined nurse-educator to the students reflective practice session. “This is what we’re going to expect for the year.” Maybe then they’ll start off a little bit better instead of gradually getting better if they know what we are expecting. NE3

Educators also expressed concern that assessing reflection may create an engineered environment that may reduce the opportunities for deep reflective learning.

“I do worry that in assessment that people will just write the minimum of what they have to do because they don’t see it as a priority.” ME6 

“I think the main thing about doing it as a formal assessment is that it’s hard to actually sit down and put it in writing in a formal way that the university wants to hear, basically, though. Doing it as a practice is a good thing, but having to write it like an assignment makes it hard work.” NE2

“It should be sort of mandated that in some capacity they do it, but maybe not so much in a “you’ve got to do it and I’ve got to tick the box and say that, you know, you’ve passed or whatever” ME5

Educators instead suggested reflective activities to focus on real-world situations to encourage authentic reflection.

“Why are we doing this as a single one off reflective about a random event that may or may not be true and we just add reflection onto a true in situ real world case and assess it across an entire year” ME1

“Could they knock off one of the CEXs [clinical evaluation exercises] and have a reflective piece like that is just a reflection for each block that they do? NE3

IV. DISCUSSION

This study identified student, educator and institutional factors that were perceived by educators to enable or inhibit student reflective learning. Enabling factors included labelling of reflection, provision of a trusting environment, multidisciplinary collaborative reflective learning, allowing time for reflective activities and the longitudinal nature of the rural model. Inhibiting factors included the use of artificial reflective assessments. Two elements were identified which may either inhibit or enable reflective learning: student factors (both life experience and experience of reflection) and modelling. Students’ previous positive experiences of reflection or established life experience was perceived to enhance student reflection. Conversely, reflective activities may be inhibited by a student’s lack of experience or previous negative experiences of reflection. In addition, modelling could be inhibitory or enabling depending on whether positive or negative attitudes towards reflection were modelled to students.

A. Workplace Reflective Learning

Educator insights align with workplace learning theory which describes “affordances” through which workplaces support or hinder learning (Billett, 2001, 2016). The educator and institutional factors identified can be viewed as “affordances” for reflective learning. Educator modelling and labelling of reflective practice in the clinical setting provide opportunities for students to learn. Similarly, the development of a trusting environment, allowing time for reflection and encouraging real-world reflections provide opportunities for students to reflect.

However, workplace learning theory also recognises that, despite the number and quality of affordances, individuals have choice about whether to engage in learning activities (Billett, 2001, 2016). Educators identified student factors which may improve engagement with reflection. This study was conducted in a post-graduate medical program with students from diverse backgrounds and with different experiences and reflective skills. These elements may impact individual decisions to engage. This observation aligns with workplace learning theory’s identification that, even with the same affordances, learners may make different choices when it comes to engagement.

B. Educator Reflective Ability

Educators strongly focused on the impact of their own practice in these focus groups, identifying areas for improvement in their clinical and educator roles. Medical educators highlighted the impact of their own, often negative, views of reflection and failure to label reflective activities. Nurse educators realised that they may have a key role in reflective learning and identified practical strategies to increase their involvement.

These insights arose through profound reflective discussions during the focus groups. Educators reflected deeply on their own challenges, experiences and struggles with reflection. They reflected on the impact of their own practice and attitudes on their students. Educators then collectively discussed changes to future practice including modelling positive examples of reflection, labelling reflective activity or actively participating in student reflective activities. While this process occurred in an iterative and conversational manner, it clearly demonstrates reflective skills. However, this process was not labelled as reflection at any point in either group.

This demonstration of reflective ability is especially meaningful since educators, particularly medical educators, expressed concerns that they lacked reflective skills. The focus group discussions suggest that educators have reflective skills but may not be attuned to recognise reflection when it occurs.

C. The Rural LIC Model

The rural LIC model was identified as an affordance for reflective learning. The long-term student-educator and student-student relationships in the rural LIC setting were felt to enable the development of a trusting environment in which students and educators feel safe to reflect honestly. The rural longitudinal setting was also felt to enable greater opportunities for reflection through communal living arrangements. These benefits were seen as supporting reflection in medical students and align with previously reported benefits of the LIC model including relationship continuity, a holistic perspective on the patient and their experience, and self-awareness (Carrigan et al., 2023; Gaufberg et al., 2014; Mylopoulos et al., 2020; Purea et al., 2022).  

D. Limitations

This study considered the educator perspective only. A study exploring the student perspective in this setting has previously been published (MacAskill et al., 2024).

The limited sample size of this study was related to the limited pool of educators in this program. Limitations in numbers of rural medical educators is a widespread problem. Most medical educators are located in urban centres (McGrail et al., 2023). Given the unique context of this study (rural LIC), it was not possible to recruit more widely within different programs.

E. Future Research

The significance of the LIC model in this setting highlights an important lesson for medical education more broadly. This study demonstrates the importance of trust for reflection, and how these elements are facilitated through models such as the LIC. Further study is needed to explore how trust can be developed in the context of shorter-term student-educator relationships. This study also did not include a comparator group within a more traditional block-mode setting but this may be a useful area for future enquiry. Further studies to explore reflection within other LIC models and within other collaborative multidisciplinary learning environments would be useful to more fully understand the role of such models in reflective learning. Finally, further study to explore the drivers of student engagement in reflective learning would improve our understanding of why some students do not engage despite affordances.

F. Implications for Practice

This study was conducted to identify how reflective practice could be improved in this rural medical education setting. Educators identified that students who are not naturally reflective, lack life experience or exhibit limited self-awareness were less likely to engage in reflective practice. Engagement may also relate to educator factors such as the labelling of reflective activities and students experiencing modelling of positive attitudes towards reflection.

Educators identified that the relationships formed through the rural LIC model may support students to reflect but also noted that educators should ensure that they label reflection where it occurs, and model positive and authentic reflective practice to their students. This study also highlighted the potential strengths of different clinical disciplines and emphasised the benefits of multidisciplinary educator teams. Encouraging nurse and medical educators to teach and reflect together may improve reflective skills of the educator and student cohort.

V. CONCLUSION

This study sought the perspectives of educators on student reflective learning within a rural longitudinal integrated clerkship. Findings aligned with workplace learning theory, with “affordances” identified which facilitated or hindered reflective learning. These affordances predominantly related to educator factors including modelling and labelling of reflection, and institutional factors including the time allowed for reflection and the nature of reflective activities. Elements of a rural LIC model provide affordances to develop deeper reflective learning and highlight the extended opportunities provided by this model.

Notes on Contributors

Hannah Woodall designed the study with Robert Heffernan, Kay Brumpton, Janani Pinidiyapathirage and Brendan Carrigan. Hannah Woodall was responsible for data collection and worked with Linda Furness to analyse the data. Hannah Woodall was responsible for development and editing of the manuscript.

Linda Furness worked with Hannah Woodall to analyse the data and was involved in interpreting the results. Robert Heffernan was involved in conceptualisation of the study and interpretation of the data. Kay Brumpton was involved in study design and development of study materials. Kay Brumpton participated in making sense of the data, contributing theoretical background to the analysis. Janani Pinidiyapathirage was involved in development of the study protocol and materials and contributed to interpreting the data. Brendan Carrigan was involved in study development and interpretation of the collected data. All authors have read and approved the final manuscript.

Ethical Approval

Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the Griffith University Human Research Ethics Committee (GU 2021/376).

Data Availability

The datasets analysed during the current study are not publicly available due to participants’ potential identifiability due to the small dataset. Data is available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. 

Acknowledgement

The writers acknowledge Dr Claire D Nicholls (University of Southern Queensland) for her assistance in reviewing the research methods section of this manuscript.

Funding

The authors would like to acknowledge the funding received through the Rural Health Multidisciplinary Training (RHMT) program grant of the Australian Government that supported the salaries of HW, LF, RH, KB, JP and BC during this study.

Declaration of Interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

Ahmed, S. K. (2024). The pillars of trustworthiness in qualitative research. Journal of Medicine, Surgery, and Public Health, 2, Article 100051. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.glmedi.2024.100051

Ash, S. L. & Clayton, P.H. (2009). Generating, deepening, and documenting learning: The power of critical reflection in applied learning. Journal of Applied Learning in Higher Education, 1(1), 25-48. https://doi.org/10.57186/jalhe_2009_v1a2p25-48

Department of Health and Aged Care. (2021). National rural generalist pathway. Australian Government. https://www.health.gov.au/initiatives-and-programs/national-rural-generalist-pathway

Bates, J., Konkin, J., Suddards, C., Dobson, S., & Pratt, D. (2013). Student perceptions of assessment and feedback in longitudinal integrated clerkships. Medical Education, 47(4), 362-374. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12087

Billett, S. (2001). Learning through work: Workplace affordances and individual engagement. Journal of Workplace Learning, 13(5), 209-214. https://doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000005548

Billett, S. (2016). Learning through health care work: Premises, contributions and practices. Medical Education, 50(1), 124-131. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12848

Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (Eds.). (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. Taylor & Francis Group. https://lccn.loc.gov/84016507

Bradbury, H., Frost, N., Kilminster, S., & Zukas, M. (2010). Beyond reflective practice: New approaches to professional lifelong learning. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203873175

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Carrigan, B., Bass, L., Pinidiyapathirage, J., Walters, S., Woodall, H., & Brumpton, K. (2023). Connectivity is the key to longer rural placement: Retaining students on rural longitudinal integrated clerkships. Medical Teacher, 46(2), 225-231. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2023.2243025

Chambers, S. L. K., Brosnan, C., & Hassell, A. B. (2011). Introducing medical students to reflective practice. Education for Primary Care, 22(2), 100-105. https://doi.org/10.1080/14739879.2011.11493975

Chan, K. D., Humphreys, L., Mey, A., Holland, C., Wu, C., & Rogers, G. D. (2020). Beyond communication training: The MaRIS model for developing medical students’ human capabilities and personal resilience. Medical Teacher, 42(2), 187-195. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2019.1670340

Daly, M., Roberts, C., Kumar, K., & Perkins, D. (2013). Longitudinal integrated rural placements: A social learning systems perspective. Medical Education, 47(4), 352-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12097

de la Croix, A., & Veen, M. (2018). The reflective zombie: Problematizing the conceptual framework of reflection in medical education. Perspectives on Medical Education, 7(6), 394-400. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-018-0479-9

Dewey, J. (1910). How we think. D C Heath. https://doi.org/10.1037/10903-000

Driscoll, M. P. (1994). Psychology of learning for instruction. Allyn & Bacon.

Fernandez, S. C., Chelliah, K. K., & Halim, L. (2015). A peek into oneself: Reflective writing amongst undergraduate medical imaging students. Reflective Practice, 16(1), 109-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2014.982524

Flavell, J. H. (1979). Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive–developmental inquiry. American Psychologist, 34(10), 906. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906

Fuller, L., Lawson, M., & Beattie, J. (2021). The impact of clerkship model and clinical setting on medical student’s participation in the clinical workplace: A comparison of rural LIC and rural block rotation experience. Medical Teacher, 43(3), 307-313. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2020.1839032

Gathu, C. (2022). Facilitators and barriers of reflective learning in postgraduate medical education: A narrative review. Journal of Medical Education and Curricular Development, 9. https://doi.org/10.1177/23821205221096106

Gaufberg, E., Hirsh, D., Krupat, E., Ogur, B., Pelletier, S., Reiff, D., & Bor, D. (2014). Into the future: Patient-centredness endures in longitudinal integrated clerkship graduates. Medical Education, 48(6), 572-582. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12413

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Great Britain Further Education.

Gill, P., & Baillie, J. (2018). Interviews and focus groups in qualitative research: An update for the digital age. British Dental Journal, 225(7), 668-672. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2018.815

Greenhill, J., & Poncelet, A. N. (2013). Transformative learning through longitudinal integrated clerkships. Medical Education, 47(4), 336-339. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12139

Greenhill, J., Richards, J. N., Mahoney, S., Campbell, N., & Walters, L. (2017). Transformative learning in medical education: Context matters, a South Australian longitudinal study. Journal of Transformative Education, 16(1), 58-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/1541344617715710

Hafferty, F. W., & O’Donnell, J. F. (2014). The hidden curriculum in health professional education. Dartmouth College Press. https://muse.jhu.edu/book/36816.

Hall, S. L., Forrester, S., & Borsz, M. (2008). A constructivist case study examining the leadership development of undergraduate students in campus recreational sports. Journal of College Student Development, 49(2), 125-140. https://doi.org./10.1353/csd.2008.0010

Kolb, D. (2014). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development, second edition (2nd edition ed.). PH Professional Business.

MacAskill, W., Chua, W., Woodall, H., & Pinidiyapathirage, J. (2023). Beyond the written reflection: A systematic review and qualitative synthesis of creative approaches to reflective learning amongst medical students. Perspectives on Medical Education, 12(1), 361-371. https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.914

MacAskill, W., Woodall, H., Nicholls, C. D., Brumpton, K., & Pinidiyapathirage, J. (2024). Enhancing reflective practice using prompts in Online Submission of Case Reports (OSCAR): An exploratory study among medical students in rural longitudinal integrated clerkships. Perspectives on Medical Education, 13(1), 654-665. https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.1416

Malau-Aduli, B. S., Roche, P., Adu, M., Jones, K., Alele, F., & Drovandi, A. (2020). Perceptions and processes influencing the transition of medical students from pre-clinical to clinical training. BMC Medical Education, 20(1), 279. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-020-02186-2

McGrail, M. R., Doyle, Z., Fuller, L., Gupta, T. S., Shires, L., & Walters, L. (2023). The pathway to more rural doctors: The role of universities. Medical Journal of Australia, 219(S3), S8-S13. https://doi.org/10.5694/mja2.52021

Mylopoulos, M., Kulasegaram, K., Weyman, K., Bernstein, S., & Martimianakis, M. A. (2020). Same but different: Exploring mechanisms of learning in a longitudinal integrated clerkship. Academic Medicine, 95(3), 411-416. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002960

Olmos-Vega, F. M., Stalmeijer, R. E., Varpio, L., & Kahlke, R. (2023). A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149. Medical Teacher, 45(3), 241-251. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287

Purea, P., Brumpton, K., Kumar, K., & Pinidiyapathirage, J. (2022). Exploring the learning environment afforded by an Aboriginal community controlled health service in a rural longitudinal integrated clerkship. Education for Primary Care, 33(4), 214-220. https://doi.org/10.1080/14739879.2022.2054371

Sandars, J. (2009). The use of reflection in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 44. Medical Teacher, 31(8), 685-695. http://doi.org/10.1080/01421590903050374

Schön, D. A. (1995). Reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Taylor and Francis Group. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315237473

Shannon-Baker, P. (2023). Philosophical underpinnings of mixed methods research in education. In R. J. Tierney, F. Rizvi, & K. Ercikan (Eds.), International encyclopaedia of education (4^th ed., pp. 380-389). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.11037-1

The Consortium of Longitudinal Integrated Clerkships. (2020). CLIC – The Consortium of Longitudinal Integrated Clerkships. CLIC. https://clicmeded.com

Worley, P., Couper, I., Strasser, R., Graves, L., Cummings, B. A., Woodman, R., Stagg, P., & Hirsh, D. (2016). A typology of longitudinal integrated clerkships. Medical Education, 50(9), 922-932. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13084

*Hannah Woodall
190 Hume Street, Toowoomba, QLD, 4350
Email: h.woodall@griffith.edu.au