Rolfe's Reflective Model: What, So What, Now What Explained

What is Rolfe's reflective model?

Rolfe's reflective model, developed by Gary Rolfe, Dawn Freshwater, and Melanie Jasper and published in their 2001 book Critical Reflection in Nursing and the Helping Professions: A User's Guide, is a simplified framework for reflective practice based on three questions: What, So What, and Now What. The model adapts Terry Borton's original 1970 framework, which also formed the basis of Driscoll's model, but Rolfe and colleagues developed a more detailed set of prompts beneath each of the three core questions to guide practitioners through a deeper and more structured reflection.

The model is widely used in UK nursing, midwifery, and allied health programmes, as well as in social work and education. Its simplicity and flexibility make it accessible to students who are new to reflective writing, while the additional sub-questions beneath each stage provide sufficient depth for more advanced academic reflections. It is particularly well suited to reflective practice portfolios, placement journals, and continuing professional development (CPD) records.

The three stages of Rolfe's model

Rolfe's model is built around three deceptively simple questions. The power of the model lies not in the questions themselves but in the sub-questions that Rolfe and colleagues proposed beneath each one, which guide the practitioner towards increasingly critical engagement with their experience.

Stage 1: What?

The first question, "What?", addresses the descriptive dimension of reflection. The practitioner sets out the facts of the experience: what the situation was, what they did, what the outcome was, and what they noticed about the reactions of others involved. Sub-questions beneath "What?" include: What was my role in the situation? What were the consequences of my actions? What was good or bad about the experience? What feelings did the situation evoke?

Rolfe and colleagues were explicit that the "What?" stage should not become a lengthy narrative retelling of events. Description is the starting point of reflection, not its substance. At degree level, this stage typically occupies no more than 10 to 15 per cent of the total word count, leaving the majority of the space for the analytical and action-planning stages that follow.

Stage 2: So What?

The second question, "So What?", addresses the analytical and theoretical dimension of the reflection. Sub-questions at this stage include: So what does this tell me about my assumptions? So what broader principles can be drawn from this experience? So what theoretical frameworks or research evidence are relevant to understanding what occurred? So what does this reveal about the knowledge and skills I bring to my practice?

This is the stage where the academic rigour of the reflection is most apparent. In nursing and healthcare assignments, the "So What?" stage requires the practitioner to draw on published clinical evidence, professional guidelines, and established theoretical frameworks to contextualise and explain the experience. A student reflecting on a medication administration incident, for example, might draw on patient safety literature, the NMC Code, and models of clinical decision-making to explain what occurred and why it matters. The depth of engagement with academic literature at this stage is the primary determinant of the academic grade awarded.

Stage 3: Now What?

The third question, "Now What?", addresses the action-planning dimension of the reflection. Sub-questions include: Now what do I need to do to improve my practice? Now what broader implications does this experience have for the way I work? Now what would happen if I changed my approach in a specific way? Now what support or learning do I need to seek out?

As with other reflective frameworks, the "Now What?" stage should be specific and realistic rather than vague and aspirational. An effective action plan identifies a concrete skill, a concrete development activity, and a timeframe within which the development will be sought. The action plan also connects the current reflection to a broader trajectory of professional growth, demonstrating that the practitioner is not merely learning from this individual experience but actively building the capacity for ongoing reflective practice.

How Rolfe's model differs from Driscoll's model

Rolfe's model and Driscoll's model are both derived from Borton's (1970) original three-question framework and share the same core structure: What, So What, Now What. The principal difference between them lies in the level of detail and the theoretical framing. Driscoll's model, as revised in 2007, is more explicitly structured around professional supervision and continuing professional development, with guidance notes that draw on established models of reflective practice from the supervision literature.

Rolfe and colleagues' model, by contrast, places greater emphasis on the sub-questions beneath each stage and on the relationship between reflection and the development of professional knowledge. The model is particularly influenced by Schon's concept of the reflective practitioner and by critical social science perspectives on professional education. In practice, both models are highly similar in application, and students working with either framework should prioritise the depth and quality of their engagement with each stage rather than the specific vocabulary of the model.

Applying Rolfe's model in a university assignment

When applying Rolfe's model in an assignment, students should use the three core questions as the structural framework while drawing on the sub-questions to deepen their engagement at each stage. The sub-questions are not intended to be answered mechanically in sequence; rather, they are prompts to support a more probing and critical engagement with the experience being reflected upon.

A common error in assignments using Rolfe's model is treating the three stages as equally weighted. The "So What?" stage should occupy the majority of the word count, as it is the stage where theoretical engagement, critical analysis, and academic evidence are most prominent. The "What?" stage should be concise and factual, and the "Now What?" stage should be specific and future-oriented.

Students in nursing and healthcare programmes should note that Rolfe's model is particularly aligned with the NMC's requirements for reflective practice and professional development. The emphasis on sub-questions that probe assumptions, knowledge, and the implications of experience for future practice mirrors the NMC's expectations for reflective accounts submitted as part of revalidation. Students needing support with applying Rolfe's model in nursing or other healthcare assignments can find expert guidance through GradeQuill's reflective writing help.

Rolfe versus Gibbs and Driscoll

For students who have freedom to choose their reflective framework, the decision between Rolfe, Gibbs, and Driscoll should be guided by the nature of the assignment and the depth of reflection required. Rolfe's model is best suited to assignments that require a deep critical interrogation of assumptions and professional knowledge, particularly those that draw on the tradition of critical reflection associated with Schon and Mezirow. Gibbs is better suited to assignments that require a clearly staged and structured analysis of a specific incident, particularly in programmes that place high value on the evaluation and analysis stages. Driscoll is best suited to shorter reflective pieces and practice-based portfolios where a concise but structured reflection is required.

Whichever model is selected, the fundamental standards of reflective writing remain the same: description should be brief, analysis should be theoretically grounded, and the action plan should be specific and verifiable.