Sooner or later in a UK nursing degree, you will be asked to “reflect on a significant incident from practice using Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle.” And sooner or later, most students discover the trap: they write a long, careful story about what happened — and get feedback that says “too descriptive, not enough analysis.” This guide fixes that. Below you will find what the Gibbs cycle actually is, what markers want at each of its six stages, and then a complete worked example written out in full, so you can see the difference between telling the story and reflecting on it.
Everything in the example is fictional and fully anonymised — as your own placement writing must always be.
What is the Gibbs reflective cycle?
Graham Gibbs published his reflective cycle in Learning by Doing (1988), and it has become the default reflection model in UK nursing and healthcare education. Its six stages form a loop:
- Description — what happened?
- Feelings — what were you thinking and feeling?
- Evaluation — what was good and bad about the experience?
- Analysis — what sense can you make of the situation?
- Conclusion — what else could you have done?
- Action plan — if it arose again, what would you do?
The point of the cycle is in its later stages. Description and feelings together should be the shortest part of your reflection. Evaluation, analysis, conclusion and the action plan — where you bring in evidence, guidelines and theory — are where the marks are. A useful rule of thumb: if stages 1 and 2 are more than a third of your word count, you are writing a diary, not a reflection.
Two other models are worth knowing, because some universities prefer them: Driscoll’s model (What? So what? Now what? — simpler, three stages) and Johns’ Model of Structured Reflection (more guided questions, often used with supervision). This guide uses Gibbs because it is the most commonly set; the writing principles transfer to all three.
The worked example
Scenario (fictional): A first-year nursing student on a medical ward placement realises, during a busy medication round, that she has almost prepared the wrong dose of a prescribed medicine — spotted at the final check stage, before anything reached the patient.
Stage 1: Description
During a morning medication round in my second week on a medical ward, I was working alongside my practice supervisor, preparing medicines for a bay of six patients. The ward was short-staffed and I felt under time pressure. When preparing one patient’s medicines, I selected the correct drug but initially picked up a strength of the tablet that was higher than the dose prescribed on the chart. Following the checks I had been taught, I compared the label against the prescription immediately before administration and noticed the discrepancy. I stopped, told my supervisor what had happened, and we prepared the correct dose together. The patient received the correct medication, slightly later than planned, and came to no harm.
Notice what this does: the essential facts only — where, who (no names, ever), what happened, what the outcome was. No feelings, no judgement, no analysis yet. Around 120 words is plenty.
Stage 2: Feelings
Before the round I felt anxious: medication administration felt like the highest-stakes task I had been trusted with, and I was aware of being observed. When I noticed the error I felt a flash of panic, followed by embarrassment and a strong urge to quietly correct it without saying anything, so that I would not look incompetent. I am relieved I did speak up, but I went home that evening replaying the moment and questioning whether I was suited to nursing.
Feelings can feel uncomfortable to write, but honest, specific feelings (“a strong urge to quietly correct it”) reflect far better than generic ones (“I felt nervous”). Markers are assessing your self-awareness, not your composure.
Stage 3: Evaluation
Several things went well. The final check I had been taught worked exactly as designed — the error was caught at the last line of defence, before the medicine reached the patient. I disclosed the mistake to my supervisor immediately, which aligns with the professional duty of candour the NMC Code requires (NMC, 2018). My supervisor responded supportively, which helped me stay focused for the rest of the round.
The negative aspects are equally clear. The error happened in the first place because I was rushing and distracted, and my instinct to hide it — however brief — showed that my confidence in speaking up is not yet secure. The patient’s medication was also delayed, even if only slightly.
Evaluation is a balance sheet: positives and negatives, stated plainly. Avoid blaming the environment (“the ward was too busy”) as your main point — acknowledge context, own your part.
Stage 4: Analysis
This is the longest and most important stage. Here is where evidence and theory enter:
Medication errors are among the most common patient safety incidents in healthcare, and the literature consistently identifies interruption, distraction and time pressure as contributory factors in errors at the preparation stage — precisely the conditions I was working under. Research on human factors describes how checks function as successive layers of defence, each with gaps, so that harm occurs only when the gaps align (the “Swiss cheese” model). In this incident the final check layer held, which supports the argument that systematic checking is not a ritual but a designed safety behaviour — and that skipping or rushing it under pressure removes the very layer that catches errors.
My hesitation about speaking up also has a name in the literature: psychological safety. Junior staff are less likely to raise concerns when they fear looking incompetent, yet the NMC Code (2018) explicitly requires nurses to be open and candid and to raise concerns immediately. Reading this changed how I understood the moment: speaking up was not an admission of failure but the professional behaviour the situation required, and the real risk to the patient would have been my silence.
See what changed: the writing is no longer about the incident — it is about what the incident means, connected to patient-safety evidence, human factors theory and the NMC Code. That movement, from story to sources, is the single biggest difference between a pass-level and a strong reflection.
Stage 5: Conclusion
Looking back, there are things I could have done differently. I could have reduced distraction by completing one patient’s medicines fully before moving to the next, rather than trying to keep pace with the round. I could also have told my supervisor earlier in the shift that I felt rushed, rather than only speaking up after an error. What I would not change is the disclosure itself: reporting the near miss promptly was correct, professionally required, and meant the ward team could learn from it.
The conclusion answers Gibbs’ question honestly: what else could I have done? Specific alternatives, not vague regrets (“I should have been more careful” scores nothing).
Stage 6: Action plan
If a similar situation arose, I will:
- Complete the full checking process for one patient at a time, without exception, and politely pause the round if I am interrupted mid-check.
- Tell my supervisor at the start of a shift if I feel the pace is affecting my concentration, rather than waiting for an error to force the conversation.
- Complete the medicines management e-learning on safe administration and the “five rights” before my next placement block, and ask my assessor to observe two further medication rounds to rebuild my confidence with feedback.
- Keep a brief reflective log after each placement week, so reflection becomes routine rather than something I only do after a frightening moment.
Action plans must be concrete, time-bound and checkable — things you will actually do, not qualities you will vaguely develop.
Tips that raise your reflection a grade band
- Front-load the analysis. Aim for roughly: description 10%, feelings 10%, evaluation 15%, analysis 35–40%, conclusion 10%, action plan 15%.
- Reference as you reflect. The NMC Code, NICE guidance and two or three journal sources in the analysis stage transform the piece. Reference them in your university’s style (usually Harvard — our Harvard referencing guide shows you how).
- Anonymise rigorously. No patient names or initials, no ward or trust names, no dates that identify a real event; adjust non-essential details. This is a professional requirement, not just an academic one.
- Write in the first person. “I felt”, “I decided” — reflective writing is the one academic genre where “I” is expected.
- Never invent a dramatic incident. A small, real, honestly examined moment — a near miss, a difficult conversation, a time you felt out of your depth — reflects far better than a borrowed crisis.
Need help with your reflective assignment?
Reflective writing is one of the most common things nursing students ask us about, because it is unlike every other essay you write. Our healthcare specialists can produce a model reflection built on your placement experience, structured through Gibbs (or Driscoll or Johns, if your university prefers them) and referenced to the NMC Code — so you can see the analysis done properly and learn the technique for your own writing. Prices start from £20 per 1,000 words on our pricing page; see nursing assignment help for everything we cover, from care plans to evidence-based practice, or message us on WhatsApp through our contact page for a free quote.