ABSTRACT
This article represents a quite specific form of practical writing; it is a detailed account of a particular piece of practice, which explains the rationale for the practice, the history of its development, how exactly it works, and the results of its review after the first year. As such it is substantially useful and helpful to others in similar or analogous practice contexts. The genre, however, does not leave much room for critical self-reflexivity, in a sense strange in a piece so committed to reflective practice. I kept wondering what went wrong when, what flaws and problems there are in this way of working, what, if any, negative responses were offered in the first year review. Maybe none!
