University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Higher education faculty and reflective practice

(USC Thesis Other)

Higher education faculty and reflective practice

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

Higher Education Faculty and Reflective Practice
by
Jason Wayne Womack

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
A dissertation submitted to the faculty
in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Education

May 2022

© Copyright by Jason Wayne Womack 2022
All Rights Reserved

The Committee for Jason Wayne Womack certifies the approval of this Dissertation

Maria Ott
Eric Canny
Monique Datta, Committee Chair

Rossier School of Education
University of Southern California
2022

iv
Abstract
While reflective practice is a tool used by teachers in K–12 education, nursing education, and
corporate training, faculty in higher education lack consistency of incorporating reflective
practice on their pedagogy and andragogy. The purpose of this study was to use a gap analysis to
evaluate knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that negatively impact or
positively support faculty members’ use of reflective practice on their teaching. Semi-structured,
qualitative interviews were conducted with 11 full-time faculty members of a university in the
Southeast United States. Two research questions guided the conceptual framework of this study:
(a) What are faculty members’ knowledge and motivation influences related to reflective
practice? and (b) How does the culture of the organization influence faculty members’ reflective
practice? Generalizable themes were identified through analysis of the interviews. The results
indicate gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organization influences that impede faculty
members’ use of reflective practice on their teaching methods. Recommendations offered in
Chapter Five are intended to influence stakeholders incorporating reflective practice. Findings
suggest the need to incorporate training and job aids as well as encourage a culture of reflection
to ensure that all faculty reflect on their teaching.
Keywords: Reflective practice, reflection, pedagogy, andragogy, higher education faculty

v
Acknowledgments
To my dissertation chair, Dr. Datta, and my committee members, Dr. Ott and Dr. Canny:
your faith in me and the process got me to the finish line. Dr. Ott, thank you for that call during
the summer of 2018. Dr. Datta, from the first time I met you I knew I wanted you to “shred” my
papers. Dr. Canny, the view and perspective you bring to this work makes me better, stronger,
and more aware of how much I still must learn.
To Jodi, change is our constant, and mutual support for one another the foundation upon
which we walk together holding hands. I love you more than words.
To my family, you let me share my USC journey during every phone call, FaceTime, and
Zoom through the pandemic. Thank you for listening.
To Quanah and Joe, you support and love me and that inspires me to want to be better.
To my chiefs of staff, you have only known me since I’ve been working on this project,
and you love me anyway!
To Reginald Ryder, as my student success advisor you called or emailed at just the right
time over the past three years. Thank you.
To my colleagues at work, you pushed me, encouraged me, and covered for me whenever
I needed it. I was able to do all this work only because you were a part of it.
To my interview participants, each of you shared your experience and your heart; because
of you, I’m hopeful for future of higher education.
To USC OCL Cohort 15, during our immersion in September 2019 I stood and said,
“You are the community I didn’t know I needed.” Thank you to Jennifer, Andre, Candice, Lizy,
Keith, Joe, Genevieve, Trina, Norman, Jose, CJ, Rodney, Emily, Chris, Linh, Andy, Sharon,
Pete, Kacee, Natalie, Stacey, Kevin, Patty, and Amy.
vi
Table of Contents
Abstract .......................................................................................................................................... iv
Acknowledgments........................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. ix
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................. x
List of Abbreviations ..................................................................................................................... xi
Chapter One: Introduction to the Study .......................................................................................... 1
Background of the Problem ................................................................................................ 2
Importance of Addressing the Problem .............................................................................. 4
Organizational Context and Mission .................................................................................. 5
Organizational Goal ............................................................................................................ 7
Description of Stakeholder Groups ..................................................................................... 7
Stakeholder Group for the Study ........................................................................................ 8
Stakeholder Groups Performance Goals ............................................................................. 9
Purpose of the Project and Research Questions ................................................................ 10
Importance of the Study .................................................................................................... 10
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology .................................................. 11
Definition of Terms........................................................................................................... 11
Organization of the Study ................................................................................................. 12
Chapter Two: Review of the Literature ........................................................................................ 13
Defining Reflective Practice ............................................................................................. 13
Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis Theoretical Framework ........................................ 29
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences .............................. 30
vii
Conceptual Framework ..................................................................................................... 44
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 47
Chapter Three: Methodology ........................................................................................................ 48
Research Questions ........................................................................................................... 48
Overview of Design .......................................................................................................... 48
Research Setting................................................................................................................ 49
The Researcher.................................................................................................................. 49
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 50
Instrumentation ................................................................................................................. 52
Data Collection Procedures............................................................................................... 53
Data Analysis .................................................................................................................... 54
Credibility and Trustworthiness ........................................................................................ 54
Ethics ................................................................................................................................ 56
Chapter Four: Findings ................................................................................................................. 58
Participants ........................................................................................................................ 59
Findings Research Question 1 .......................................................................................... 60
Findings of Assumed Knowledge Influences ................................................................... 61
Summary of Findings for Knowledge Needs.................................................................... 72
Findings of Assumed Motivation Influences .................................................................... 72
Summary of Findings for Motivation Needs .................................................................... 80
Findings of Assumed Organization Influences ................................................................. 80
Summary of Findings for Organizational Influences........................................................ 87
Summary ........................................................................................................................... 88
viii
Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion......................................................................... 89
Discussion of Findings ...................................................................................................... 89
Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences ........................................... 94
Integrated Recommendations............................................................................................ 97
Limitations and Delimitations......................................................................................... 101
Recommendations for Future Research .......................................................................... 102
Connection to the Rossier Mission ................................................................................. 103
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................... 104
References ................................................................................................................................... 106
Appendix A: Invite for Interview Participation (Emailed Directly to Faculty at TLC) ............. 128
Appendix B: Interview Protocol ................................................................................................. 129

ix
List of Tables
Table 1: Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Stakeholder Goal ........ 9
Table 2: Knowledge Influences..................................................................................................... 35
Table 3: Motivational Influences .................................................................................................. 39
Table 4: Organizational Influences ............................................................................................... 43
Table 5: Description of Interviewees: College, Position, Time Teaching, and Gender ................ 60
Table 6: Identifying Needs and Assets of Knowledge Influences ................................................ 61
Table 7: Commonly Used Terms During Interviews to Define Reflective Practice ..................... 63
Table 8: Comments Connecting Reflective Practice to Growth Mindset ..................................... 71
Table 9: Summary of Assessed Motivation Needs and Assets ..................................................... 79
Table 10: Sample Quotes by Interviewees Related to Organizational Influences ........................ 82
Table 11: Interviewees’ Comments Regarding the Cultural Setting of TLC ................................ 85
Table 12: Timeline to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization................................ 101

x
List of Figures
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................. 46

xi
List of Abbreviations
AD Administratively Determined Civilian Instructor
CBT Computer-Based Training
CD Course Director
DEIB Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging
DoD Department of Defense
KMO Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
PME Professional Military Education
TLC The Leadership College (pseudonym)
1

Chapter One: Introduction to the Study
While over the past 100 years, reflection has become an accepted practice by educators
gathering, reviewing, and analyzing their teaching experiences (Kirpalani, 2017), no
corresponding rise has taken place in the practical use of reflection by faculty members in higher
education (Steinert et al., 2019; Wu et al., 2019). Reflective practice is a process of deliberately
considering a past event while anticipating an insight to influence future action (Brookfield,
2017; Dewey, 1933; Rodgers, 2002). In the field of education, reflective practice helps faculty
develop skills they can use in the classroom (Kirpalani, 2017; Rodgers, 2002). Reflective
educators can build empathetic connections between teachers and students, which leads to more
inclusive classroom cultures (de Jong et al., 2021) and promotes andragogy more relevant to the
increasingly diverse population of adult learners in higher education (Canning, 2010). Faculty
members who reflect on their teaching are also known for collaborating more effectively with
their colleagues (Kennelly & McCormack, 2015), using conversations and peer feedback to
scaffold their professional development and academic skills (Brandenburg, 2021). Faculty in
higher education can use reflective practice to identify opportunities to develop skills in both
andragogy and pedagogy.
In 2020, the United States had more than 830,000 full-time higher education faculty
members teaching nearly 20 million undergraduate and graduate students annually (Hussar et al.,
2020). As student demographics continue to change (Gershenson et al., 2016; Kaplan & Owings,
2013), reflective practice could enable educators to actively and purposefully examine their
approach and style of instruction (Wurdinger & Allison, 2017). Researchers Khan (2017) and
Grapin and Pereiras (2019) wrote that higher education faculty will increasingly be expected to
teach more students of diverse cultural and experiential backgrounds. For these reasons,
2

educators should incorporate regular and critical reflection into their routines, which could help
faculty change the learning experience for diverse learners or see gaps between how they teach
and the results their students achieve. This study addresses how faculty in one institution of
higher education practice reflection.
Background of the Problem
Reflective practice supports and influences the learning process of professionals in all
fields. Though widely accepted as a way to initiate one’s own personal development, reflective
practice does not have one exclusive definition for its action, process, or outcome (Chan & Lee,
2021). The words reflection and reflective practice often appear in discussions on the subject.
One way to define reflective practice is the application of purposeful and deliberate thought to
gain insight or additional perspective on something that happened (Dewey, 1933; Klar et al.,
2021). Reflecting is the act of deliberately considering a past event, thinking about what
happened as a way of conceptualizing a problem from another perspective (Dewey, 1933; Kolb,
1984; Schön, 1983). Reflective practice can help one gain greater insight about one’s
effectiveness as they manage the complex nature of working alongside other people in
professional environments.
Often cited as the father of reflection in education, Dewey (1933) proposed that educators
who do not reflect on their teaching may miss important observations, such as how students
relate to the material presented by the teacher or interact with their peers in the classroom.
Brookfield (2017) contributed to the literature on reflective practice by identifying reflection as a
way to frame faculty members’ classroom teaching and management strengths and weaknesses,
potentially identifying developmental opportunities through such reflective practice. Over the
past 50 years, frameworks have emerged offering specific models for reflective practice (Gibbs,
3

1988; Kolb, 1984; Schön, 1987). Educators who use reflective practice augment professional
development activities to improve their classroom skills (Brandenburg, 2021; Maksimovic &
Osmanovic, 2018) and even build their interpersonal collaboration skills with peers as well as
their students (Bruno & Dell’Aversana, 2018; McCarthy, 2011; Patton & Parker, 2017). In
essence, educators who reflect are more engaged with their teaching and more effective in the
classroom.
As a professional development strategy, reflective practice can help faculty grow their
classroom skills. Through the application of thought and reflection, educators may experience a
deeper understanding of and connection to their teaching practice (Sutton et al., 2015). Though
no standardized reflection practice is taught universally to faculty in higher education (Kirpalani,
2017), research suggests that educators naturally reflect on their teaching (Aas, 2017; Kreibich et
al., 2020; Steinert et al., 2019). As previously noted, reflection increases teachers’ efficacy and
ability as they deliberate on their classroom teaching experiences from multiple perspectives
(Anderson, 2019; Tan, 2021) and gain insight from one another through peer collaboration
(Benade, 2015). Educators who fail to reflect on their teaching might continue using dated or
ineffective teaching strategies (Brookfield, 2017), and educators who do not reflect and
collaborate with others may lose their enthusiasm or feel like they are working in a silo
(Calderhead, 1989). Teachers who reflect on their experience in the classroom can build their
teaching skills by self-identifying potential areas for improvement (Hannah & Carpenter-Song,
2013; Jeppesen & Joyce, 2018). Studies have shown that educators who fail to reflect can
experience lower self-efficacy in their teaching skills (Machida & Schaubroeck, 2011;
Walkington, 2005) and attenuated positive influence on the students they teach (Comer, 2016;
4

Fox et al., 2019). Reflection is a tool that helps faculty self-identify gaps in their performance,
creating a need to develop their professional skills.
Importance of Addressing the Problem
While professionals in multiple fields use reflective practice, educators have practiced
incorporating reflection into their teaching for many years. Reflective practice is connected to
increased improvement in workplace performance. Increasingly, reflection has been incorporated
into professional development programs in industries such as nursing education (Caldwell &
Grobbel, 2013), leadership development (Cote, 2017; George, 2015; Lencioni, 2002), and
primary through secondary teacher training programs (Weikel, 2019). In a study of five faculty
members teaching nearly 100 students, Northcote (2009) found that when teachers incorporated
reflection into their daily routine, they reported feeling a closer connection to their craft of
teaching and leading and were able to self-identify skills to continue improving as educators. By
reflecting on their pedagogy, educators can identify changes that would benefit themselves and
their students.
Higher education, however, tends to place less focus on faculty members’ use of
reflective pedagogical practice (Chan & Lee, 2021). The dearth of a reflective practice among
faculty in higher education is important to evaluate for various reasons. Faculty members who
practice critical reflection will continue building upon professional skills that can increase their
performance and promote their teaching effectiveness in the classroom (Titus & Gremler, 2010).
Recent studies found that some higher education faculty members met and discussed the changes
in cultural, ethnographic, and gender representation in the classroom (Monarrez & Washington,
2020); and that the scholars who study these changes are publishing research and presenting at
conferences (Diego-Medrano & Salazar, 2021). Reflective practice can be a tool that higher
5

education faculty use to increase or improve their teaching methods to meet the expectations of
21st-century students (Demirkol & Nalla, 2018; Kirpalani, 2017; Sablan, 2014; Slade et al.,
2019). Purposeful reflective practice can be valuable to faculty members as they learn from past
events and improve their approach to teaching lessons, collaborating with fellow faculty
members, or developing or changing classroom management tactics and skills (Maksimovic &
Osmanovic, 2018). While higher education faculty can develop their professional skills and be
more impactful in the classroom, the lack of reflective practice on their teaching methods may
result in faculty using outdated teaching skills and attenuate epistemological collaboration
among teaching peers (Jewett & MacPhee, 2012; Peercy & Troyan, 2017).
Reflection is a practical tool that can influence a teacher’s efficaciousness in the
classroom and motivate them to continue developing as a professional educator (Brookfield,
2017). For example, Boyer (1990) called upon faculty members in higher education to reflect on
the influence they might have as professional educators. A call to action was supported by
researchers Giguere (2012) and Wlodarsky and Walters (2006), who suggested that reflective
practice could be useful to interpreting a situation from different perspectives. Studies have
shown that faculty who incorporate reflective practice into their teaching can increase their
understanding and awareness of a given situation (Fewster-Thuente & Batteson, 2018; Gibbs,
1988), a valuable process for faculty members seeking to improve their teaching skills. Through
reflective practice, faculty can continue to build their skills in andragogy, pedagogy, and
classroom management.
Organizational Context and Mission
The Leadership College (TLC, a pseudonym) is a government-funded undergraduate,
graduate, and professional military education (PME) center situated in the southern United
6

States. TLC was established more than 50 years ago with the core mission to graduate ethically
minded leaders prepared with the knowledge, motivation, and skills necessary to lead their
subordinates throughout the Department of Defense (DoD). Additionally, military officers from
partner nations also attend TLC. At the time of this study, the school employed more than 500
full-time faculty. As of 2020, more than 60% of full-time faculty were male. The mission of TLC
is to provide leader development education in support of the U.S. National Defense Strategy
(NDS) through nondegree and degree-granting programs in subjects including leadership,
strategy, and management. TLC’s core values include quality, reliability, honor, and a servant-
leadership mindset. Inherent to the mission of teaching leadership is the expectation that students
will reflect upon, write about, and discuss their leadership philosophy and expectations in
serving as a leader in the DoD. Faculty members at TLC have the opportunity to model the same
reflective practice and commitment to self-initiated professional development expected of
students attending the college. TLC offers PME to students through a variety of platforms and
experiences including asynchronous computer-based training (CBT) courses, one-day and multi-
week in-residence and online courses, one-year, in-residence degree-granting programs, and
multi-year terminal degree-granting programs.
Civilians and active duty military members teach full-time at TLC. While military faculty
generally teach for just one or two years, and then move to another position either at TLC or the
greater DoD, civilian faculty designated as administratively determined (AD) members serve
under multi-year term agreements, usually granted for three to five years at a time. The titles for
civilian AD faculty are like other universities follow standard titles used at the university level:
instructors, assistant professors, associate professors, and full professors; however, tenure
awarded to faculty is rare. The job duties advertised to all faculty include three main areas of
7

focus: research, teaching, and service. Similar to public and private colleges and universities
outside the DoD, annual and ongoing development is provided to all faculty in topics such as
teaching skills, adult learning theory, and assessment best practices.
Organizational Goal
TLC promotes a goal of graduating 100% of students prepared to serve as ethically
minded, transformational leaders. Transformational leaders focus on the connections between the
people in the organization and their goals and motivations (Northouse, 2019). Research shows
that traits of transformational leaders include reflection and incorporating reflective practices
into one’s learning and leadership philosophy (Carleton et al., 2018; Germain, 2017). Because
the course curriculum at TLC requires that students use reflection during their class discussions
and learning experiences, faculty members themselves must practice and model reflection and
reflective practice. This study focuses on evaluating faculty knowledge and use of reflection as
stipulated by the organizational goal that by June 2024, 100% of TLC graduates will integrate
reflective practice into their command. The stakeholder goal is that by June 2023, 100% of full-
time faculty will reflect on their teaching practices daily.
Description of Stakeholder Groups
TLC serves a diverse population of stakeholders organized into three unique groups,
including course directors, both military (Mil) and civilian AD faculty members, and in-
residence and online students. Course directors (CD) manage student enrollment, course
curriculum development, and faculty and staff for course execution. Full-time military and
civilian faculty are expected to teach, research, and publish in their field of study, and they also
engage in service-oriented duties for the college such as volunteering and performing additional
administrative duties. Annually, more than 15,000 students attend degree-granting, professional
8

development, and continuing education programs via a combination of in-person and both
synchronous and asynchronous virtual courses.
CDs at TLC organize and manage faculty expectations by interpreting the guidance and
expectations of the foundational documents for each course. While previously published lesson
and teaching plans are often provided to CD, they are often expected to update teaching
expectations for curriculum and create professional faculty development opportunities for
faculty. Traditional training programs provided by outside subject matter experts (SMEs) and
internal leaders cover a variety of topics such as diversity and inclusion, storytelling as a
teaching tool, and effective use of technology in the classroom. However, at the time of this
study, there were no formal training or development programs to support a practice of faculty
reflection on their teaching. Military and civilian faculty provide classroom instruction, both in
resident and via distance learning programs. Faculty at TLC are expected to spend their time
teaching (40%), publishing on research (40%), and participating in service-related projects
(20%) at the college for the student body. Students from all service components of the DoD and
foreign military services from more than 75 nations attend TLC.
Stakeholder Group for the Study
Although a complete analysis would have involved all stakeholder groups, for practical
purposes this evaluation study focused on military and civilian faculty members at TLC. The
stakeholders of focus for this study were purposefully selected faculty who teach at TLC, a
master’s degree-granting institution for military and civilian attendees. While all stakeholders
contribute to—and can benefit from—the organizational goal of facilitating professional and
faculty development in reflective practice, understanding where current military and civilian full-
time faculty stand regarding their performance goal remains important. The stakeholders’ goal is
9

that by June 2023, 100% of faculty will reflect on their teaching daily. Failure to realize this goal
may lead to the organization’s inability to develop leaders who reflect while in command.
Stakeholder Groups Performance Goals
Table 1 provides an overview of the alignment between the organizational mission of
TLC, the organizational performance goal, and the stakeholder goal.

Table 1
Organizational Mission, Organizational Performance Goal, and Stakeholder Goal
Organizational mission
TLC’s mission is to provide ongoing training and continuing education to leaders, including
undergraduate and graduate-level educational opportunities.
Organizational performance goal
By June 2024, 100% of the graduates of TLC will integrate reflective practice into their
command.
Stakeholder goal
By June 2023, 100% of full-time faculty will incorporate reflective practice on their teaching
daily.

10

Purpose of the Project and Research Questions
The purpose of this project was to evaluate the extent to which faculty members at TLC
incorporate the practice of reflection on their teaching methods. This qualitative study addresses
the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on faculty members’ use of reflective
practice in their teaching. Data collection took place through semi-structured interviews.
The research questions that guide this study were the following:
1. What are faculty members’ knowledge and motivation influences related to reflective
practice?
2. How does the culture of the organization influence faculty members’ reflective
practice?
Importance of the Study
Reflection is a technique that can be used by faculty members to assess their performance
in the classroom and identify areas for professional development as teachers. However, not all
faculty members in higher education practice reflection on their teaching (Clegg, 2000; Day,
1993). In many instances, little or no requirement is placed on teachers to reflect on their
pedagogy (Kirpalani, 2017), as governing bodies expect faculty members to work toward their
goals of teaching, research, and service as previously mentioned. Research has identified several
benefits to teachers practicing reflective thinking on their classroom experiences (Hickson, 2011;
Higgins, 2011). Accepted as a best practice for learning and development perspective, education
leaders benefit from practicing reflection. Brookfield (2017) noted that reflective teachers engage
in the following:
• Increased collaboration with peers on teaching methods;
• Reframing a classroom experience after considering the student experience; and
11

• Strengthening reflective skills and routines.
In examining teacher education practices, Hordvik et al. (2020) found that reflective
practice was one way for educators to continue developing their professional teaching and
research skills. Research has shown that reflection can help teachers build their professional
skills as educators (Hordvik et al., 2020). With training in the practice of reflection, faculty could
improve their skills in educational design, classroom teaching skills, and peer-to-peer interaction
with fellow faculty members (Fox et al., 2019; McGarr & Emstad, 2020; Peercy & Troyan,
2017).
Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology
The methodological frame for this study was Clark and Estes’ (2008) gap analysis
theoretical framework, a procedural model used to evaluate performance gaps between
organizational goals and stakeholder performance. After defining a performance outcome, one
can identify the knowledge (K), Motivation (M), and organization (O) factors that may influence
stakeholder goal achievement (Clark & Estes, 2008). The framework used for this study
provided a way to explore influences on faculty members’ use of reflective practice at TLC.
A constructivist world view guided this research. This study sought to understand the
experiences of several faculty members, using data collected through semi-structured interviews,
utilizing reflection in alignment Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model. During these
interviews, faculty members provided their perceptions and experiences of the KMO influences
on their use of reflective practice. The interview protocol included questions designed to explore
the issues of diversity and reflective practice across faculty members’ teaching experience.
Definition of Terms
Administratively determined (AD): Civilian instructor at TLC.
12

Professional military education (PME): PME is the overall term to designate educational
and training programs offered to military and civilian personnel in the United States Department
of Defense (USDoD), including undergraduate and graduate education.
Reflective practice: The process of reflecting on and thinking about instruction and
instructional methods used in the classroom (Dewey, 1933; Rodgers, 2002).
TLC civilian administratively determined (AD) instructor: Civilians teaching at TLC.
TLC military cadre: Active duty military members teaching at TLC.
Organization of the Study
This study is organized into five chapters. Chapter One presents the key concepts and
terminology commonly used in discussions about the practice of reflection by faculty members
in higher education. The first chapter introduced the problem of practice and its importance to
the stakeholder group of this study. It also acquaints the reader with the organizational context as
well as this study’s research goals, theoretical and conceptual frameworks, and definitions.
Chapter Two provides a review of the current literature addressing the scope of the study,
exploring reflective practice, introducing theories of knowledge and motivation, and identifying
organizational influences on higher education faculty members’ use of reflective practice.
Chapter Three details the assumed needs of the study to include a method for designing a semi-
structured interview protocol, choosing participants, scheduling the interviews, and data
collection and analysis. Chapter Four assesses and analyzes the data and findings. Chapter Five
offers three recommendations based on data and the literature to close the gaps and implement
solutions to achieve the stakeholder goal.
13

Chapter Two: Review of the Literature
Chapter Two reviews the literature relating to the use of reflective practice relevant to
TLC’s stakeholder goal that, by June 2023, 100% of faculty will reflect on their teaching daily.
The chapter begins by defining reflective practice, followed by an overview of the evolution of
reflection, focusing on reflective practice in professional fields, especially focused on education.
The second section reviews the literature on the use of reflective practice in support of continual
professional development, specifically on how teachers in higher education practice reflection
and the potential benefits of incorporating such reflection. The final section identifies assumed
and perceived knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences in evaluating faculty
members’ use of reflective practice at TLC.
Defining Reflective Practice
To benefit from reflective practice, one must define it, understand what it means to
reflect, and identify effective ways to think reflectively. Merriam-Webster’s dictionary defines
the intransitive verb to reflect in the following way: “to think about quietly and calmly”
(Merriam-Webster, n.d., Definition 2). Dewey (1933), Mezirow (1998), and Rodgers (2002)
described reflective practice as actively and deliberately focusing one's attention on an
experience with the intent to learn from what happened and use that knowledge to take different
or perhaps more productive action in the future. Studies on the subject evince a variety of
reasons to practice reflection, many elucidating the benefits of thinking about an experience.
Pollard (2010) and Schön (1983) claimed that one can gain insight by reviewing a specific
occurrence deliberately. Reflective practice is a process an educator can use not only to describe
an event, but also to identify a lesson-learned, an insight gained, or to see their teaching from
another perspective (Brookfield, 2017; Schön, 1987). Personal and professional development
14

programs have incorporated reflection over the past several decades. Models of reflective
practice propose that one think about and learn from an event to change or inform future action
or to influence decision-making (Collins & Porras, 2004; Hesselbein, 2011; Mezirow, 1998).
While there are many theories and definitions of reflection, scholars generally agree that
reflective practice is thinking about the past to improve actions to be taken in the future.
Reflection and reflective practice are personal and might stem from one’s experience
during formal training and education or possibly through informal mentoring they may have
received. Dewey (1933) posited that thinking about an experience is a natural phenomenon. In a
study incorporating reflective practice in organizational learning and change, Keevers and
Treleaven (2011) used the analogy of looking in a mirror. Considering reflective practice from
the perspective of a self-image is echoed in research by Fox et al. (2019), who cautioned against
the tendency to use reflection as a self-affirming process, only noticing what one wants to see.
Effective reflection begins with exploring one’s own inner experience with the deliberate
intention to gain a fuller, deeper understanding of an experience (Carleton et al., 2018; Holmes,
2017). For reflective practice to be valuable, one must identify different perspectives from which
to study a past event (Calderhead, 1989; Comer, 2016; Hébert, 2015). Engaging in reflection in
personal and deliberate ways increases the practice’s usefulness to the educator.
Learning from reflection is a crucial step in the reflection process is the action one takes
when one looks back on an experience with a critical eye. Boud et al. (1985) postulated that
through reflection, one can reconstruct a past event, learn from the experience, change their
perspective, and plan to take a different action in the future. Educators can use reflective practice
to review and analyze their classroom experiences, a process shown to help educators identify
pedagogical skills they can work on to improve their teaching efficacy (Brookfield, 2017;
15

Cornish & Jenkins, 2012). Further, studies have shown that educators who reflect collaboratively
might benefit by sharing stories and perspectives on their classroom experiences with one
another, further expanding their teaching skills (Hickson, 2011). Indeed, the literature on
reflective practice expands from use in education and has influenced professional development
programs in other industries (Gibbs, 1988; Schön, 1983). For educators who seek opportunities
to continually develop their skills, deliberate reflection can serve as a catalyst for improvement.
The Evolution of Reflective Practice
Reflection helps gain understanding through experience, utilizing a philosophical and
sociological approach. As an educational theorist and practitioner, Dewey (1933) wrote
extensively about the impact teachers have, focusing on the importance of thinking about their
past actions to develop greater awareness of and connection to the students they teach and the
pedagogy they use. Dewey (1933) maintained that reflective thinking is deliberately
contemplating what one believes to be true, seeking information or insight that supports one’s
knowledge of the way things are, and remaining opening to new understandings. Professionals
can use reflective practice to mine past experiences as rich sources of information to improve
actions in the future (Dewey, 1933; Feigl, 1945; Tomlinson, 1997). Over the past century, a
constructivist approach has been used by scholars to advocate for incorporating educators’ past
experiences to improve future actions.
Since Dewey (1933) presented a working definition of the term reflection, academics and
professionals have continued to explore the influence of reflective practice. In particular to the
field of primary and secondary education, Dewey (1933) described reflection as a way for
teachers to review classroom experiences, ideally without judgment, with the intention of
deepening their understanding of what happened and using that reflection to improve or change
16

their teaching methodologies. Dewey (1933) postulated that reflective thought served educators
as a portal through which to gain insight and deepen understanding of how their beliefs and
empirical knowledge impact their actions.
Reflective practice has been identified as a personal and professional development skill.
Schön (1983, 1987) researched ways that civic leaders, legal professionals, and business
managers practiced reflection-on-action as well as reflection-in-action. Specific to education,
over the course of a 3-year study Olteanu (2017) focused on mathematics teachers’ use of
reflective practice and utilized what Schön later described as reflection-for-action, the
culmination of reflective practice as one looks to the future and anticipates using some insight or
knowledge gained from a past experience (Comer, 2016). While incorporating reflective practice
is popular in teacher, leader, and even nursing development programs, it is employed differently
depending on one’s experience with reflection and training in theories and models of reflective
practice.
Educators can benefit by including a reflective practice in their teaching routine. In an
extensive literature review of more than 60 empirical and nonempirical articles, Chan and Lee
(2021) identified the importance of faculty in higher education being fluent in the application of
reflective practice. Chan and Lee (2021) identified reflection-on-action as a way educators think
about past events to better understand their teaching philosophy and improve their teaching
skills. More recently, Brookfield (2017) championed reflecting critically on one’s experience and
actions, using focused attention to identify the connection between an educator’s experience and
their path of continual professional development.
However, there is no standardized protocol or expectation for how educators, especially
faculty in higher education, practice reflection. Leigh (2016) promoted reflective practice as a
17

way to self-assess one’s own approach from multiple perspectives to identify different ways of
teaching, assessing, or making the classroom more student-centered (Pedrosa-de-Jesus et al.,
2017). The many models and theories of reflective practice provide educators myriad pathways
to incorporate reflection into their professional development process (Keevers & Treleaven,
2011; Pedrosa-de-Jesus et al., 2017; Watts, 2019).
Increasingly, demands on faculty to manage their responsibilities and improve their
pedagogical abilities make it more challenging to pause and reflect. Dewey (1933) suggested that
the timing of reflection was as important as the action of reflecting itself, theorizing that effective
reflective practice occurs soon after an experience. He proceeded to describe reflective practice
as a way of expanding one’s perspective, learning from what happened, and further developing a
teaching style. Many scholars have promoted Dewey’s (1933) theory as an approach based on
experience as the starting point of practicing reflection, followed by conceptualization of the past
event, and finally creating an experiment for the next time a similar event occurs (Greenberger,
2020; Noteborn et al., 2012; Rodgers, 2002). Because of the many demands on faculty members’
time, they must incorporate reflective practice into their daily duties.
Reflection and Professional Development
Effective reflective practice occurs as one thinks about an experience through a critical or
developmental lens. While scholars agree that reflective practice begins with deliberate
consideration of a past experience, contemporary approaches to reflective practice promote a
more holistic review of one’s experiences (Greenberger, 2020; Griffin, 2003). While Schön
(1983, 1987) established reflection-on-action as a primary factor in professional development,
educators might find it difficult to reflect by the end of the day. In a study of more than 30
faculty members over a 3-year period, Jeppesen and Joyce (2018) found that a lack of time and
18

inefficient or nonexistent time management strategies were primary barriers to higher education
faculty members incorporating reflective practice into their teaching. Although the number of
hours a higher education faculty member works each week varies widely, research suggests that
teachers in higher education are working more than 8 hours a day. For example, in a series of
interviews with 30 academics at Boise State University, Ziker et al. (2014) found that faculty
members worked more than 10 hours per day. To make the most of incorporating a reflective
practice, faculty in higher education must focus on the benefits of initiating an inquiry-based
process into their teaching routine.
Research on reflective practice continues to point toward the value of using experiences
to inform future action to serve educators as well as professionals in other industries such as
nursing and organizational leadership. Educators and other professionals in organizational
change and leader development have noted the positive impacts of incorporating reflection in the
learning process (Hickson, 2011; Higgins, 2011). Active demonstration of reflection as an
ongoing learning process is one way for professionals to build a growth mindset (Dweck, 2008),
one that is increasingly necessary as the landscape of the workplace becomes more diverse
(Grech, 2021). However, some scholars continue to debate both the efficacy of reflective practice
on a past action and the expected outcomes of reflective practice itself (Griffin, 2003; Hébert,
2015).
It is noteworthy that professionals outside education utilize reflection as a learning
process. For example, nursing programs often require students to formally reflect on what they
have learned and on how they apply that knowledge to their emerging skills as health care
professionals (Bussard, 2017). Often, personal reflective practice is performed by an individual
maintaining a written journal or by engaging in formal peer feedback and collaboration session
19

(Jewett & MacPhee, 2012; Martin, 2010). Research shows that business management and leader
development programs often incorporate different kinds of reflective activities such as
introspective journaling (Ashby, 2006; Giguere, 2012) or collaborative peer-level discussion
forums devoted to identifying and discussing lessons gleaned from past experiences (Krutka et
al., 2014; Parsons & Stephenson, 2005). While scholars agree that reflection is a productive
practice, everyone must clarify what reflection means to them personally and how they will
practice it.
Nursing and Reflective Practice
Some medical programs have incorporated reflective practice into their curriculum. In
nursing education, reflection-on-action has been shown to help beginning nurses and nurse
practitioners build upon their professional skill development (Grech, 2021; Lubbe & Botha,
2020). For example, Caldwell and Grobbel (2013) wrote about nursing students who reflected on
what they learned and how they practiced caring for patients. Experienced practitioners who
teach a formal curriculum to younger professionals can promote and model reflection as a tool
for personalized learning and professional development (Bussard, 2017; Caldwell & Grobbel,
2013). Research studies by Legare and Armstrong (2017) and Naicker and van Rensburg (2018)
demonstrated that student nurses who practiced reflection tended to focus more on an experience
and explored multiple perspectives to understand the learning event. Another study found that,
through this process, student nurses were able to self-identify weaknesses and room for
improvement (Legare & Armstrong, 2017). Furthermore, researchers studying nursing programs
that encourage reflective practice found that nurses who reflect and openly discuss their
perceptions of an experience might gain insights that strengthen their innovative and critical
thinking skills (Cornish & Jenkins, 2012; Naicker & Van Rensburg, 2018). In their 2018 study,
20

Naicker and van Rensburg noted that deliberate reflection combined with focused peer
collaboration resulted in a more psychologically safe learning environment for peers—one that
not only built upon their professional competence but also increased their knowledge of the
emerging trends in healthcare. As a professional development practice, reflection helped
beginning nurses scaffold their learning experience.
Sometimes, a knowing-doing gap emerges between understanding the theoretical value of
doing something and what it means to practically perform that task. For more than 60 years,
medical nursing programs formally incorporated reflective practices to accelerate learning in the
classroom (Caldwell & Grobbel, 2013). While teaching faculty in nursing programs expect their
students to reflect, not all experienced faculty members model a reflective practice for their
students. In a study of 121 nurse educators, Naicker and Van Rensberg (2018) found that the
nursing faculty themselves did not always exemplify a reflective practice. As such, studies
continue to call for formalized training in reflective practice in nursing programs (Heath, 1998;
Naicker & Van Rensburg, 2018). Nursing programs that encourage peer competition obstruct
students from incorporating a reflective practice into their studies (Wang et al., 2019). Research
by Edmondson (2004) showed that if a culture lacks psychological safety, people in the
organization may hesitate to talk through their learning process or even reflect on their
weaknesses for fear of the negative consequences of falling behind their peers or not performing
at higher levels of excellence. A culture where it is unsafe to reflect publicly or talk about a past
event to learn from it can negatively impact learning and compromise a culture of growth
mindset throughout the organization (Dweck, 2008). As reflection helped students in the
practical field of nursing, professionals in other fields can also benefit from reflective practice.
21

Leader Development and Reflective Practice
Leaders who incorporate reflection can augment the development of their leadership
skills by self-assessing their abilities and uncovering areas for growth. Northouse (2019) defines
leadership as the influence an individual has on the skills, motivation, and actions of a group of
people as they work to achieve the goals of the organization. Researchers Bradberry and Greaves
(2009) established the importance and impact of gaining insightful self-awareness as one builds
their leadership skills and philosophy of leading. Hesselbein (2011) wrote extensively about
looking back on the past to identify moments that define one’s leadership approach and
philosophy, specifically calling on reflective practice as a way to identify, and identify with,
one’s purpose. Leadership experts Badaracco (2020) and Kouzes and Posner (2017) pointed out
that emerging leaders who reflect on their past experiences can clarify the life lessons they have
learned and possibly gain a deeper understanding of how they will lead others in the future.
Through applied reflective practice, professionals can identify and build upon their
expectations and beliefs about leadership (Branson, 2007; Densten & Gray, 2001). Concluding a
management leader development program, Petriglieri et al. (2011) studied 90 students who
explored their learning experience through reflective practice and found that many students
claimed reflective practice helped them clarify both their leadership values as well as their
management philosophy. Both Petriglieri et al. (2011) and Branson (2007) identified benefits of
structuring reflective practice such as thinking about a past even from multiple lenses, which
helps one identify assumptions that may influence future action taken or not taken (Kahneman,
2011). Awareness of biases and a willingness to look at a situation from diverse viewpoints is a
necessary skill for transformational and influential leaders (Aas, 2017; Densten & Gray, 2001;
22

Northouse, 2019). Students of leadership can benefit from practicing reflection as they learn
about themselves, their assumptions, and their tendencies.
Research on reflection and leader development has identified the positive impact of
looking back on past experiences to prepare for future leadership responsibilities. Outcomes of
studies by Aas (2017) and Sucher et al. (2013) maintain that reflective practice guides students to
personalized insights they can apply to future endeavors. A constructivist (Creswell & Creswell,
2018) approach combines past experience with present reflective practice, which can lead to the
creation of a plan for future engagement (Densten & Gray, 2001). Kouzes and Posner (2017) and
Hesselbein (2011) concurred that people limit themselves by their own perspectives, and that
exploring past experiences helps people understand events from a different angle, allowing them
to gain a wider understanding of cultural and organizational realities. For emerging leaders,
reflection should be a part of their professional self-development process (Bradberry & Greaves,
2009; Hesselbein, 2011). Educators who focus on teaching leadership and leadership skills have
the explicit responsibility to teach students how to influence others effectively and meaningfully.
Primary and Secondary Teachers’ Use of Reflective Practice
Teacher education programs often incorporate reflective practice training into their
curriculum to help teachers learn about and build their classroom teaching and management
skills. Scholars have identified reflective practice as important to teachers’—professional
development and self-efficacy (Brandenburg, 2021; Hatton & Smith, 1995; Kayapinar, 2016). In
some undergraduate teacher training programs, beginning teachers are encouraged to reflect on
their reactions to—as well as learnings from—their experience in the classroom (Juklová, 2015).
Brandbenburg (2021) proposed that student-teachers move from passive recipients of theories,
models, and best practices to active co-creators of their own experiential and empirical
23

knowledge of classroom teaching and management. Likely, reflective practice is context-based,
and the degree to which one reflects may depend upon the expectation and support one receives
from their institution. Hatton and Smith (1995) identified the importance of separating reflective
thinking from reflective action. Kaynpinar’s 2016 study of 45 teachers that incorporated
reflective practice revealed that they fostered a culture of self-initiated personal and professional
development. Teachers who reflect on their experiences may position themselves to continually
develop their teaching skills.
Role of Reflective Practice in Higher Education
Many studies and research papers point to the benefits of educators practicing reflection
on their teaching. Clegg et al. (2010) highlighted the importance of clearly defining not just what
reflective practice is and can look like but also what a practitioner might expect from reflecting
on their teaching. As previously stated, the role of self-reflection has been recognized and
appreciated across numerous industries (Heinrich et al., 2021; Schön, 1987). As cultural, social,
and political changes impact public and private education, faculty members at all levels of
education need to reflect on their teaching methodologies as well as on the impact they have on
the students in their classroom (Cummings et al., 2016; Graetz & Smith, 2010; Reissner, 2010).
In a multi-year study of university professors, Pedrosa-de-Jesus (2016) identified the positive
influence that reflection had on teachers, bringing more innovative teaching methods into their
lessons. Simultaneously, the need for self-reflection has become important for faculty in higher
education (Chan & Lee, 2021; Dewey, 1933).
Seminal theories and models provide faculty with the knowledge and tools needed to
practice reflection on their teaching (Brookfield, 2017; Dewey, 1933; Gibbs, 1988; Kolb, 1984;
Schön, 1983). Building on Dewey’s (1933) and Schön’s (1983) theoretical advice, scholars
24

created models to incorporate reflection. Faculty in higher education can use these models to
practice reflection on their teaching, thereby gaining a better perspective on their teaching
practice. While Gibbs (1988) and Kolb (1984) outlined a multi-stage, cyclical model of
reflection, other frameworks are more conceptual in nature. Schön’s (1983, 1987) theory of
reflection-on-action and reflection-in-action has been used by faculty development programs as a
form of personalized professional development (Dimitrov & Haque, 2016). Building upon the
research of previous scholars, Schön (1983) defined reflecting-on-action as the process of
thinking about an action or event that has happened and reflection-in-action as focusing on what
is happening in the present. In a semester-long study, Riley-Doucet and Wilson (1997) found that
reflecting-on-action provided students the opportunity to efficiently identify their strengths and
to define further areas for growth and development.
Faculty development programs can incorporate formal reflection practice as a way for
educators to process their experiences (Aas, 2017). The purpose of reflection-in-action is to
focus on what has happened, building heightened awareness of one’s thoughts and actions as an
experience occurs with the intent to adjust actions as or when necessary (Schön, 1983).
Reflecting on past actions and results can provide educators an opportunity to study the
perceived impact of their efforts, looking for understanding and insight, and increasing their own
self-awareness (Beauchamp, 2015; Nicol & Macfarlane‐Dick, 2006; Nicol & Dosser, 2016).
Critical Reflection in Education
To reflect deliberately, one must consider not just what happened during an experience,
but also how an event or situation could be interpreted differently according to multiple
perspectives. Brookfield (2017) identified four lenses for practicing critical reflection: (a) the
self-reflective, autobiographical lens, (b) the peer-observed collegial lens, (c) the students’ lens,
25

and (d) the lens of academic and theoretical literature. Teachers who incorporate reflective
practice on their teaching experience potentially gain a deeper understanding of their own
working style, the context within which they work, and the influence they can have on their
students (Brookfield, 2009; Schedlitzki, 2019). The four-lens model provides the practitioner
with a framework that is at once expansive and inclusive, addressing a constructivist view of
building a personalized theoretical approach to constant, iterative improvement (Masui & Corte,
2005; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Brookfield (2017) acknowledged that teachers who practiced
reflection gained insight not only relating to their own teaching strategies but also into how they
made choices related to classroom management and lesson planning strategies to serve students’
needs. As faculty at TLC continue to teach in dynamic and diverse environments, deliberate
reflection can help educators gain a fuller, richer, and more personalized understanding of the
experiences, actions, and results achieved in their classroom.
It takes time and dedicated focus to reflect on teaching. Time management is of critical
importance for faculty in higher education. Hiver (2021) claimed that great teachers are aware of
what they do—their approach, planning, and influence on their students. To maximize their
learning through reflective practice, faculty members must connect theoretical frameworks of
reflection to models they can use to reflect on their teaching.
Models of Reflective Practice
Following the steps of a theoretical model of reflection provides practitioners with a
framework to support learning from an experience. Gibbs’s (1988) reflective model offers a
multi-stage framework using a series of questions to facilitate a structured reflection process.
Wain (2017) explained that each stage of Gibbs’s (1988) model informs the next. Reflection on
past action is both personal and contextual, as one views one’s experience through their own
26

assumptions and biases. As with Dewey’s (1933) theoretical approach, the starting point of
Gibbs’s (1988) model is the acknowledgment of a concrete experience. By formulating, asking,
and answering a series of self-directed and reflective questions, one can learn more from an
experience. Gibbs (1998) posed the following six questions:
1. What happened?
2. How did you react and how do you feel about what happened?
3. What was good and bad about what happened?
4. How do you make sense of or understand what happened?
5. What did you learn from what happened?
6. What might you do differently as a result of what happened?
While Gibbs’s (1988) model of reflection is prescriptive and time-intensive, studies have
shown that educators who incorporate a deliberate reflective practice can benefit by learning
from classroom experience and plan for what they might do differently in the future (Husebø et
al., 2015; Paterson & Chapman, 2013; Potter, 2015).
Many models of reflective practice utilize a series of unique and deliberate steps to codify
a process of reviewing a past occurrence to learn from the experience. Kolb (1984) outlined a
reflective practice in four steps, reinforcing the iterative nature of reflection as a continual,
ongoing process. Similar to Gibbs’s (1988) model of reflection, Kolb’s (1988) model advises
practitioners to identify a unique experience as the starting point of reflection (Fewster-Thuente
& Batteson, 2018; Healey & Jenkins, 2000; Kolb, 1984). In the first stage, one identifies a future
task with the intention of learning from the experience (Wain, 2017). After taking action—such
as teaching a lesson—the reflective practitioner deliberately reflects on the work they have
performed (Healey & Jenkins, 2000; Wain, 2017) Through that reflective process, one interprets
27

the event with the intent to identify a lesson they learned or to see what happened through
another perspective (Fewster-Thuente & Batteson, 2018). Finally, the last stage of Kolb’s (1988)
model calls for the practitioner to devise an experiment to implement based on the outcome of
the experiment and any insight they may have gained. As a cyclical process, this approach can
serve a faculty member in higher education as a repeatable model of self-directed learning
(Fewster-Thuente & Batteson, 2018; Healey & Jenkins, 2000). Faculty in higher education who
apply such a cyclical reflection pattern can engage in personal introspection, considering
potential areas for further professional skills development.
Literature over the past century has identified reflective practice as an important
professional skill. As noted earlier, in the nearly 100 years between research by Dewey (1933)
and Brookfield (2017), reflective practice gained acceptance as a component of continual faculty
development in higher education. While scholars have established the theoretical value of
reflecting on past actions, some higher education faculty members may not be familiar with the
formal models of reflection presented in this review of the literature. The aforementioned models
may aid TLC faculty reflect on their teaching.
Expected Outcomes of Faculty Practicing Reflection on Their Teaching
Teachers may incorporate a reflective practice to engage in their continual learning and
development process. Reflective practice is a way a faculty member can develop agency and
build their teaching style (Scanlan, 2021). Deliberately using one’s experience to self-develop
has been shown to increase faculty members’ self-efficacy (Noormohammadi, 2014; Runhaar et
al., 2010). In a study of 15 students in an undergraduate teacher education program, Brandenburg
(2021) echoed Brookfield’s (2017) research on teachers using reflective practice to take a more
28

proactive role in personalizing their teaching pedagogy. Educators at every level can reflect on
their teaching and continue to improve their style of teaching and classroom management.
Education can be a highly collaborative field in which faculty members can work
independently and then reflect together. Research corroborates the need for educators to not just
reflect on their experience in isolation but also to collaborate with others to gain increased value
and insight from such reflection (Campbell et al., 2019; Esterhazy et al., 2021; Phuong et al.,
2018). Esterhazy et al. (2021) identified 48 studies calling for the increased use of reflective
practice and peer collaboration by educators, supporting the claim by Campbell (2019) that
educators who focus on a collaborative model of reflection build stronger support networks.
Through in-depth synthesis studies, researchers Esterhazy et al. (2021) and Campbell (2019)
focused on the implications of peers reflecting together. Reflection with peer discussion and
collaboration supports proactive engagement among professionals moving toward common
workplace performance goals (Knapp et al., 2017).
Peer reflection among educators can occur informally during conversations or during
formal faculty professional development programs. On the subject of faculty reflecting on their
teaching and engaging in collaborative conversations to share insights and lessons learned,
Esterhazy et al. (2021) found that highlighting the process of reflection as an impetus for
discussion among colleagues led to deeper levels of trust and collaboration among faculty; such
collaborative conversations can build relationships and create a more efficacious workplace
environment by creating networked links of connection in a professional, academic environment
(Calkins & Harris, 2017; Campbell et al., 2019; Esterhazy et al., 2021; Knapp et al., 2017).
Whether identified as study groups (Knapp et al., 2017) or formal professional faculty
29

development activities, facilitated peer-reflection activities have been proven to maximize the
impact of reflective practice (Calkins & Harris, 2017).
Faculty members can use recommended processes to think about, discuss, and learn from
their experiences. Calkins and Harris (2017) provided a detailed procedural framework for peer-
collaborative reflection, putting the individual teacher at the center of the practice. In a staged
approach to openly discussing a past event, educators can reflect on the many influences on their
teaching methods, and explore the impact of their teaching on students in the classroom (Calkins
& Harris, 2017). According to Calkins and Harris (2017) the stages of reflection educators can
use are: soliciting student feedback, practicing personal reflection, reviewing the scholarly
literature, observing peers in the classroom, and attending ongoing professional development
programs.
As demographic and cultural changes continue, college professors will encounter more
diversity in their classrooms. Brookfield (2017) claimed that critically reflective teachers
position themselves to feel connected to the students and to student experience; they also
position themselves to identify biases, assumptions, and beliefs. In the coming years, researchers
anticipate continual growth of student diversity (Boelens et al., 2018). Faculty who are provided
time and space and a model for practicing peer-collaborative reflection can experience deeper
connections with their peers and build trust that can positively impact goal orientation and
student achievement (Campbell et al., 2019). While research has identified the benefits to
practicing reflection, educators still face barriers to reflecting on their teaching.
Clark and Estes (2008) Gap Analysis Theoretical Framework
The study utilizes a gap analysis theoretical framework (Clark & Estes, 2008) to study
faculty members’ use of reflective practice on their teaching. Clark and Estes (2008) posited that
30

performance gaps could attribute to knowledge (K), motivation (M), and organizational (O)
influences. A gap analysis clarifies how certain KMO influences support or impede the
achievement of organizational performance goals.
Stakeholder Knowledge, Motivation, and Organizational Influences
This study examines KMO influences on higher education faculty members’ use of
reflective practice on their teaching. Clark and Estes (2008) claimed that understanding
stakeholders’ knowledge of task performance is one of three factors influencing goal
achievement. This study uses four different types of knowledge as defined by Krathwohl (2002):
factual, conceptual, procedural, and metacognitive. Motivation is the second influence
considered in this gap analysis study. Pintrich (2003) wrote that motivation influences one’s
decision to start, continue working toward, and achieve a stated and agreed-upon goal. Clark and
Estes (2008) identified motivation as a factor in achieving both personal and organizational
change. This study explores two theories of motivation that influence educators’ use of
reflection: self-efficacy (Bandura, 1977) and expectancy value (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000).
Finally, the analysis provides an overview of the organizational influences on goal
achievement—namely, the cultural model and cultural settings (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001).
Knowledge and Skill Influences
The next section of the literature review will explore types of knowledge that influence
faculty reflecting on their teaching methods. According to Clark and Estes (2008), knowledge is
one’s stored experiences stemming from past success or failure that helps one achieve results and
is at the center of learning (Mayer, 2011). Rueda (2011) described knowledge as the information
a person needs to know how to achieve a goal, and Krathwohl (2002) provided a structured view
of four different types of knowledge one might need to succeed. First, factual knowledge
31

incorporates the fundamental elements one must know, such as the basic facts, information and
terminology to accomplish a task (Arneson & Offerdahl, 2018; Krathwohl, 2002). Next,
conceptual knowledge is the knowledge needed to connect theory to practice, aligning with
models of knowing as well as grasping relationships between the concepts and how they connect
and function together (Krathwohl, 2002). Third, procedural knowledge describes the techniques,
methods, and unique steps one would take to demonstrate understanding of what they have
learned in service of achieving a goal (Anderson & Krathwohl, 2001). Finally, metacognitive
knowledge influences faculty members’ use of reflection. Rueda (2011) described metacognitive
knowledge as a deeper understanding of how and when to use the knowledge gained. The
assumed knowledge influences are identified as necessary achieving the stakeholder goal of
faculty practicing reflection. Incorporating research-based models can aid a faculty member at
TLC in applying reflective practice to their routine. For faculty at TLC, a step-by-step
methodology may help instill a reflective practice into their routine as military members expect
and are willing to use checklist-based approaches to managing workflow.
Faculty Need to Know What Reflective Practice Is
Faculty need factual knowledge of what reflective practice is to achieve the stakeholder
goal. Reflecting on the craft of teaching is more just than thinking about a lesson one has taught.
Faculty need a shared definition of reflective practice such as the incorporation of a holistic
approach to learning from a past experience (Dewey, 1933; Rodgers, 2002). Faculty members in
higher education are poised to practice reflection on their pedagogical methods after any lesson
they teach (Boelens et al., 2018; Clegg, 2000; Germain, 2017). Reflective practice is deliberate
and concentrated thought about a past action focused on gaining knowledge or insight from the
32

event (Brookfield, 2017; Schön, 1983). Faculty at TLC need to know the practical definitions of
reflection to realize benefits of reflective practice.
The use of reflective practice begins by knowing what it is and how to do it. Clark and
Estes (2008) wrote that one needs to receive feedback to effectively implement a learned task,
which can be a form of reflection. Reviewing the literature on reflective practice and studying
existing models can start to implement or improve a reflective practice (Dewey, 1933; Kirpalani,
2017). Stephens and Santangelo (2021) researched college faculty members’ reflective practices
and found that more than 80% of the 100 faculty members agreed that reflection is important,
although there was a range of understanding and personal beliefs about how to define reflection.
As such, while some faculty at TLC may be familiar with the idea of reflection, they themselves
need factual knowledge and understanding of why they would want to reflect on their teaching.
Faculty Need Conceptual Knowledge of Reflective Practice
Faculty need to conceptualize reflective practice as it relates to their teaching
methodologies. Krathwohl (2002) defines conceptual knowledge as the underlying categories,
structure, and theory of a particular topic. Scholars Dewey (1933), Gibbs (1988), and Schön
(1983) provided models for how to practice reflection that incorporate distinct stages of thought.
If faculty at TLC have conceptual knowledge of reflective practice, they would know not only
what reflection is, but also be able to conceptually apply reflective models to their teaching
experience. Expanding on Dewey’s (1933) work defining reflection, Rodgers (2002)
extrapolated a four-stage process of deliberate reflection: (a) Initiating a meaning-making
process, (b) wherein one takes unique steps to process an experience, (c) which occurs first
privately and then in interaction with peers, (d) in an exercise conducive to a growth mindset
33

(Dweck, 2008). As such, faculty at TLC must integrate their understanding of reflective practice
by learning how conceptual models of reflection relate to their teaching experience.
Faculty Need to Know How to Practice Reflection
Faculty need to know processes and procedures of reflective practice to put those
thinking skills into use (McCabe et al., 2009). The models provided by Brookfield (2017),
Dewey (1933), Gibbs (1988), Kolb (1984), and Schön (1983, 1987) provide frameworks
educators can use to apply reflection to their practice. In a study of 15 faculty members and 19
students in a university pre-service education program, McCabe et al. (2009) found a consensus
on the order and kinds of questions to ask oneself to practice reflection. Theoretical research on
reflective practice provides documented questions that critically explore the connection between
what happened in the classroom and one’s perception of teaching, including what they might
change as a result of that reflection (Brookfield, 2017; Kolb, 1984; McCabe et al., 2009). For
faculty members at TLC, having a structured approach to reflection may support the
incorporation of regular reflective practice into the teaching experience.
Schön (1983), and later Killion and Todnem (1991), categorized types of reflection based
on timing: reflecting-on-action, reflection-in-action, and reflecting-for-action. Each of those
stages offers an educator the chance to reflect after, during, and before an experience. Gun
(2011) further explored the practice of reflection with a group of four educators over a period of
2 months. During the intensive course, the educators focused on specific teaching practices and
applied a deliberate, scheduled review of their experience in order to gain insight (Gun, 2011).
Through both personal reflection and peer collaboration, the results of this study provided
relevant results. Overall, the faculty benefited in two specific ways: (a) they were able to identify
their own teaching methods that could be improved, such as direction-giving to students, and (b)
34

they identified problems and developed solutions by discussing their experiences with colleagues
(Gun, 2011). Faculty at TLC need to know how to put reflective practice into use as they think
about their teaching practice.
Faculty Need to Be Self-Aware of Their Own Reflective Practice
Faculty members at TLC must be aware of how their assumptions and actions impact the
culture of their classroom. Metacognitive knowledge links one’s personal and professional
experiences to their understanding of causes and effects. Krathwohl (2002) identified the ability
to think about thinking as metacognition. Teachers set the tone for what is accepted and expected
in a learning environment. Like any organizational structure in which leaders influence
followers, faculty at TLC must be aware that their own mindset (Dweck, 2008) and values
(Schein, 2010) in relation to reflective practice may also influence the student experience. In her
research on learning and development, Dweck (2008) found that the metacognitive approach of
addressing a situation with a growth mindset can be a way for leaders to model what it is they
expect their followers to do. If faculty members deliberately practice and openly discuss their
own reflective practices, they may positively influence the culture of their classroom, promoting
the incorporation of reflection into the learning experience for students and faculty alike.
Metacognitive ability indicates one’s capacity to reflect on and use a learned skill. After
gaining factual and procedural knowledge of reflective practice, a teacher can develop the
metacognitive capacity to, as Krathwohl (2002) has explained, consider the impact of reflection
itself. Faculty members at TLC must understand how to practice reflection as well as to plan for
and implement a personalized reflective practice. The reflective models mentioned in this
review— for example, the six questions in Gibbs’s (1988) reflective process—provide a guided
approach to practicing reflection, thereby supporting metacognitive knowledge development.
35

Krathwohl (2002) further established the positive impact of metacognitive reflection as a way to
codify and personalize a learned skill. Metacognitive knowledge refers to the kinds of knowledge
and understanding one needs in order to act on factual and procedural learning (Rueda, 2011).
According to Titus and Gremler (2010), while most faculty members understand the importance
and place of reflection in their teaching pedagogy, not all educators practice reflection on their
teaching style. Metacognitive knowledge and the use of metacognitive reflection are directly
related to the stakeholder goal of 100% of faculty members reflecting on their teaching daily.
Table 2 outlines four assumed knowledge influences and knowledge types.

Table 2
Knowledge Influences
Assumed knowledge influence Knowledge type
Faculty need factual knowledge of reflective
practice.
Factual
Faculty need conceptual knowledge of how to
practice reflection.
Conceptual
Faculty need procedural knowledge of how to
practice reflection.
Procedural
Faculty need to be self-aware of their reflective
practice.
Metacognitive

36

Motivational Influences
This section of the dissertation will provide a review of two motivational influences on
how faculty perform reflective practice at TLC. Clark and Estes (2008) and Rueda (2011)
pointed to the significance of motivation in analyzing the performance gaps of stakeholders
achieving a goal. Scholars have written that motivational factors may impact the level, type, and
consistency of the reflection one practices (Thompson, 2010). When there is a gap between a
goal and organizational performance, applying motivational theory is a way to engage a
population to act. This section will review the literature regarding two motivational theories:
self-efficacy theory and expectancy value theory.
Self-Efficacy Theory
Faculty members need to believe they can perform reflective practice. Self-efficacy
theory describes a person’s self-concept relating to the perception of their ability to do
something. A person’s belief and self-judgment regarding their capability to achieve a goal can
positively or negatively influence their performance (Bandura, 1977). Past experience is a
building block of one’s mental picture of what one can do (Bandura, 1993), indicating that
reflection is indeed a natural part of one’s learning process. Social cognitive theory posits that
people can learn how to do something by observing others practicing that skill (Bandura, 1993).
Through observation, reflection, and practice, it is possible to build an efficacious mindset,
potentially increasing the likelihood that one will continue practicing the skill they have learned
(Vygotsky, 1978).
Research suggests that one’s self-efficacy increases if they look back on a past event or
situation and reflect on insight gained that might help achieve a future goal (Bandura, 1993). As
a motivational tool, individual self-efficacy could aid faculty members at TLC achieve the
37

stakeholder goal identified in this study, that 100% of faculty members reflect on their teaching
daily. Alternatively, self-efficacy can diminish as one considers the level of difficulty of a future
action thereby lowering ones’ motivation for taking future action (Bandura, 2012). In a study of
529 students, Pajares (2001) found that those who lacked self-efficacy expressed doubt relating
to their abilities to perform in an academic setting, and students with low self-efficacy tended to
avoid tasks even designed to help them learn because they did not feel comfortable attempting.
Subsequent research indicated that the peer-collaborative influence of processing past success or
failure can impact their feeling of motivation and level of self-efficacy of individuals and groups
working toward goals (Pajares, 2003).
Faculty in higher education need to feel motivated to reflect on their teaching. Attending
training and education experiences, practicing reflection, and discussing their experience with
peers may produce higher self-efficacy (Ashley & Reiter-Palmon, 2012; Kirpalani, 2017; Park &
Millora, 2012). Outside of a formal early-education teaching program, which may have included
lessons on reflective practice (Collin et al., 2013; Juklová, 2015), faculty members may lack
continued training and support to develop and customize their reflective practices (Collin et al.,
2013). Scholars have indicated that reflective practice is a proactive way for faculty to develop
their pedagogical skills (Kirpalani, 2017; Runhaar et al., 2010).
The impact of building efficacy toward practicing reflection is not only beneficial to
faculty members. Ashley and Reiter-Palmon (2012) observed that faculty who modeled
reflection could positively impact their students. For example, after a study of 419 students
explored the impact of self-awareness, Ashley and Reiter-Palmon (2012) determined that
collectively sharing in a reflective practice positively correlated to people’s ability to openly
38

discuss challenges and work together to seek solutions openly. Understanding faculty members’
self-efficacy may help identify a motivational influence on reflective practice.
Expectancy Value Theory
A second motivational influence related to the incorporation of reflective practice by
faculty at TLC is expectancy value. Pintrich (2002) and Rueda (2011) define expectancy value as
the expectation of usefulness that one applies to the mental effort and active choice of
performing tasks. Wigfield and Eccles (2000) explained that expectancy value involves
identifying an expectation of a positive, successful outcome of performing a task. Wang and
Eccles’ (2013) additional research identified a link between the culture of a learning environment
and the level of student and teacher engagement. Clark and Estes (2008) recognized that people
value actions and expectations that can benefit them, while they reject what they think or feel is
not of value.
The value one places on taking an action toward a performance goal directly impacts
their level of motivation. Wigfield and Eccles (2002) described expectancy value theory to
understand how one makes choices vis-a-vis the goals they have set. The theory posits that the
amount of effort one puts toward achieving a goal will depend on the belief that one can
accomplish the task and the relative value one will experience. Wigfield and Eccles (2000)
established that expectations impact motivation toward task achievement. In contrast, self-
efficacy is a way to gauge one’s belief regarding their ability to do a task, expectancy value
measures the value given to such effort (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). A faculty member might
avoid or minimize reflection if the experience they are thinking about is a negative one (Jones et
al., 2013; Trapnell & Campbell, 1999).
39

Three significant constructs impact expectancy value: (a) one’s belief they can do the
task, (b) the expectation of a positive result, and (c) the subjective value one applies to such
achievement (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). If faculty members at TLC believe there is value to
practicing reflection on teaching, they may be more willing to make it part of their professional
practice. As such, it is important to understand how motivational theories may influence the
stakeholder goal of 100% of faculty undertaking reflective practice. Table 3 presents two
assumed motivation influences and motivation types.

Table 3
Motivational Influences
Assumed motivation influence Motivation type
Faculty need to believe they can perform
reflective practice.
Self-efficacy
Faculty need to see value in reflecting on their
teaching.
Expectancy value

40

Organizational Influences
It takes deliberate effort to incorporate reflective practice into the teaching, research, and
service responsibilities of a PME educator. Like professors at public and private institutions,
faculty at TLC are responsible to teach, conduct research, and perform service-related activities
for the college. In addition to influences of knowledge and motivation, the organizational culture
itself can have an impact on the level of performance success stakeholders achieve. According to
According to Clark and Estes (2008), the workplace environment resources and expected
processes are factors that influence the achievement of performance goals. Cultural models and
cultural settings are categories of organizational factors (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001), which
are explored in this study as influences on the performance goal of the stakeholder goal that by
June 2023, 100% of TLC faculty will reflect on their teaching daily.
Cultural Setting
According to Rueda (2011) the cultural setting incorporates the “who, what, where,
when, why, and how” questions about people working and interacting in an organization.
Cultural settings exist as the result of people working together within the confines and
expectations of cultural models (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001; Schein, 2010), including factors
such as written policies, existing training programs, and evaluative procedures (Schein, 2010).
TLC must provide resources enabling faculty members to practice reflection on their pedagogy if
the organization wants to support reflective practice as a culture of teaching. Gallimore and
Goldenberg (2001) established that an organization’s setting embodies observable behaviors and
accepted norms among a group of people working together. In a study applying reflection to
programs in post-graduate higher education programs, Wain (2017) described reflection as
defining past achievements and focusing on the lesson learned for future guidance and a sense of
41

heightened self-efficacy. Faculty in higher education face a diverse population and complex
environment in the classroom (Boelens et al., 2018; Dedman, 2019; Grapin & Pereiras, 2019).
Incorporating reflective practice into the curriculum has been shown to facilitate collaboration,
accelerate learning, and improve organizational performance (Curtis et al., 2019). Castelli (2016)
studied the impact of practicing reflection as a pathway for individuals to articulate the
relationship between their effort and the organizational performance goal as well as how taking
time to reflect aided one’s ability to understand how their insights may lead to taking a different
action.
While research points to the positive impacts of reflection and collaboration for faculty,
stakeholders need access to resources to engage in reflective practice. The organization must
support faculty in pursuing professional development. As one example, the organization could
provide faculty members at TLC the resources necessary to engage in reflective practice (Curtis
et al., 2019). While professionals beginning their career are sometimes provided with training in
reflective practice—including examples of reflection and time built into their learning program
(Le Cornu & Ewing, 2008; Liu, 2015)—only some leader and professional development
programs for faculty in higher education provide these same resources and expectations to
experienced faculty (Castelli, 2016; Korthagen, 2016). By clarifying norms and behaviors, a
newcomer to the organization will be able to learn about culture through models. By defining
and committing to a strategy of continual faculty development that incorporates reflection, the
organization can create a model that encourages and supports a culture of reflective practice. To
facilitate change, TLC leaders must actively support and develop a culture of reflection.
Evaluation of faculty performance TLC are on three work-related factors: research, teaching, and
service. While educational theory can outline the importance and impact of reflection on
42

teaching practice (Chan & Lee, 2021), too often educators have many other obligations and may
not themselves prioritize practicing reflection (Brownell & Tanner, 2012).
Research shows that faculty who reflect on their experience can develop from their
experience and build upon their teaching skills and style. Educators who continue improving
teaching skills generally incorporate some type of reflection into their development (Korthagen,
2016). For reflective practice to become a part of faculty members’ routines, the culture of the
organization must provide them with the necessary resources for reflection to occur. To support a
reflective culture, TLC faculty need to know what is expected through rules and policies and that
others are practicing and being rewarded for engaging in expected and accepted behaviors.
Cultural Model
The cultural model of an organization has been described as a shared understanding of
how people think about working within the organization, a mental heuristic of how things are
and ideally would be (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). TLC needs a cultural model that values
reflection within the organization. Schneider et al. (1996) established that organizational culture
could be understood and explained by reflecting on the assumptions—even hidden ones—of
people who work in an organization. Cultural models are dynamic and, according to Schein
(2010), can include implicit and explicit understanding of what types of behavior are accepted,
and the shared meanings of operational habits throughout the organization. To effectively impact
organizational change, employees need to provide models, equipping them to take action toward
changing the culture and sustaining those changes over time (Schein, 2010; Schneider et al.,
1996). Cultural models overtly and covertly define expectations of an organization (Rueda,
2011). For reflection to become a common practice at TLC, the culture of the organization needs
43

to encourage and provide resources to faculty members. Table 4 provides an overview of the
organizational influences on practicing reflection at TLC.

Table 4
Organizational Influences
Assumed motivation influence Organizational category
The organization needs to provide faculty
with resources to practice reflection.
Cultural setting
The organization needs to value reflective
practice.
Cultural model

44

Conceptual Framework
This study uses a conceptual framework to explain the intersection of the knowledge,
motivation, and organization (KMO) influences in evaluating faculty members’ use of reflective
practice at TLC. This study is founded on the theoretical framework of a gap analysis (Clark &
Estes, 2008) and focused on the KMO influences that may impact stakeholders’ ability to
achieve a performance goal. To explore higher education faculty members’ use of reflective
practice, Figure 1 shows the KMO influences as they intersect and individually contribute to
achieving the performance goal of stakeholders practicing reflection on their teaching. The
conceptual framework depicted in Figure 1 illustrates relationships among the factors influencing
faculty members’ KMO aspects of using reflective practice in their teaching. The box on the
right side of the illustration states the stakeholder goal of faculty members reflecting on their
teaching methods daily. A key component of goal achievement (Harackiewicz et al., 2008) is a
clear, objective, and measurable goal (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011). The performance goal
identified is a perspective through which the application of a gap analysis can address the factors
that improve or impede goal achievement.
The large circle of organizational influences surrounds two smaller, intersecting circles of
knowledge and motivation influences. From an organizational level, the cultural model and
setting of TLC contributes to an understanding of assumptions that could impact faculty
members’ use of reflective practice. From a cultural model perspective, this study explores the
perceived presence of organizational support of reflective practice as evidenced by existing
behaviors and values espoused by faculty at TLC. Regarding the cultural setting, this study
focuses on the perceived time that faculty must implement reflective practice on their teaching.
45

Next, the study looks at specific knowledge and motivation influences on how faculty
practice reflection. From a knowledge perspective, the study looks at four areas: (a) factual, (b)
conceptual, (c) procedural, and (d) metacognitive factors influencing reflection. Next, through
the lens of motivational theory, self-efficacy and expectancy value are factors that may influence
the reflective practice of faculty in higher education. Faculty at TLC need to believe they can
reflect on their teaching practice and that such reflection has personal and professional value.

46

Organizational Influences
Cultural Setting: The organization needs to provide faculty
with resources to practice reflection.

Cultural Model: The organization needs to value reflective
practice.

Figure 1
Conceptual Framework

Knowledge Influences

Factual: Faculty need factual
knowledge of reflective practice.

Conceptual: Faculty need
conceptual knowledge of how to
practice reflection.

Factual: Faculty need procedural
knowledge of how to practice
reflection.

Conceptual: Faculty need to be
self-aware of their reflective
practice.

Motivation Influences

Self-Efficacy: Faculty need to
believe they can perform
reflective practice.

Expectancy Value: Faculty need
to see value in reflecting on
their teaching.

Organizational Goal:
By June 2024, 100% of the
graduates of TLC will
integrate reflective practice
into their command.
Stakeholder Goal:
By June 2023, 100% of faculty
will reflect on their teaching
daily.
47

Conclusion
A general review of the literature suggests that incorporating reflection is important to
educators. The first section of this review focused on the definitions and models of reflection
presented in the literature. The second section reviewed the influences and barriers to educators
practicing reflection. The chapter ended with an explanation of a conceptual framework,
outlining the critical knowledge, motivation, and organizational elements that may impact the
performance goal of stakeholders using reflection daily. The next chapter will lay out this study’s
methodological approach.

48

Chapter Three: Methodology
The problem of practice for this study was to understand the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences on faculty members at The Leadership College (TLC) practicing
reflection on their teaching. Chapter Three presents the research design and methodology for
data collection and analysis for the study. The purpose of this project was to evaluate the
knowledge, motivation, and organization influences that impact faculty members at TLC in
accomplishing the stakeholder goal of 100% of faculty employing a reflective practice for their
teaching by June 2023. While a complete analysis would focus on all stakeholders, for purposes
of this qualitative study, the stakeholders of focus were military and civilian faculty members at
TLC. This chapter describes the methodology of the study, data collection through interviews,
and how the data were analyzed and presented. The chapter will conclude by outlining and
addressing the ethics and limitations of the study.
Research Questions
The study was guided by the following research questions:
1. What are faculty members’ knowledge and motivation influences related to reflective
practice?
2. How does the culture of the organization influence faculty members’ reflective
practice?
Overview of Design
To understand the perspectives of higher education faculty teaching at a DoD PME
institution, qualitative research was used to gain first-hand knowledge of the experience faculty
members had using reflective practice in their teaching. One-on-one interviews were scheduled
with a nonrandom group of faculty to focus on their experience, understanding, and use of
49

reflective practice (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study used semi-structured
interviews (see Appendix B) as the method of data collection. Interviews were appropriate to
address the theme of this study, as conversations allowed TLC faculty members to share their
opinions, experiences, and perspectives of reflective practice. The interview process provided
participants the opportunity to confidentially discuss the topic of this study in their words and
from their lived experience (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016).
Research Setting
TLC is a leadership development center of excellence educating leaders from various
organizations within the DoD. Serving more than 15,000 students a year, approximately 500 full-
time faculty teach at TLC. More than 60% of the teaching faculty is male, and more than 60% of
the faculty is White. Both active duty military members and civilians teach at TLC, the
difference being that military members teach for 1 or 2 years and then relocate to a new duty
station, while the civilian faculty members often stay for longer periods of time. Most civilians
sign a 3-year or 5-year contract to teach; few professors have tenure. For the research questions
in this study, I interviewed both military and civilian faculty members. This approach was
appropriate because both military and civilian faculty members teach in programs throughout
TLC.
The Researcher
I am interested in understanding how higher education faculty members reflect on their
teaching. In January of 2019, I arrived at TLC having experience teaching primary and
secondary levels but no understanding of teaching at the college level. My career working in
education ended after teaching high school in California between 1996 and 2000. I then worked
in private industry as a consultant, leadership coach, and author, from 2000–2018. In 2019, I
50

closed my coaching company and moved from Southern California to the Deep South of the
United States. I do not yet have a terminal degree and have not served as an active duty military
member. Never serving in uniform or teaching at the college or university level, I am different
from many people I teach with at TLC. While I have lived in Central and South America and
speak Spanish fluently, I do represent most of the faculty as a White male. Having worked in
private industry and coaching leaders worldwide for nearly 20 years, I assume people I work
with are as motivated as I am to work hard and always strive for more. Sometimes this
assumption is wrong. Additionally, I have worked as a leadership coach with clients around the
world for more than 20 years, and I am biased toward what I experience as the positive results of
reflective practice. This bias could have influenced my study through the questions I asked
during the open-ended portions of the interviews. During interviews, I had to remain mindful of
my mannerisms as I am an animated person and had to minimize any unconscious influence I
had during the interview conversations.
As an instructor at TLC, I had no senior or supervisory responsibility over any other
faculty members and no hierarchical relationships with potential interviewees. I employed
strategies to mitigate assumptions and biases. In some cases, I had pre-existing professional
relationships with some of the interviewees. This situation may have served this research study
as an advantage as participants might have provided deeper insights, offering rich, detailed, and
candid responses to interview prompts and follow-up queries.
Participants
The problem of practice for this study was to explore how higher education faculty use
reflective practice on their teaching. I began by identifying faculty members to interview through
single stage sampling (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) by inviting faculty who teach at TLC to talk
51

with me about reflective practice. I emailed seven faculty members whom I had met since
starting to work at TLC in 2019. In the email, I explained the purpose of the study, invited them
to an interview, and advised them that I would follow the email with a personal phone call (see
Appendix A). The sampling strategy for locating interview subjects was both purposeful
sampling and general recruitment (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I also asked faculty members if
they would introduce me to someone I could interview for the study, a selection type called
snowball sampling (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Because this qualitative study centered on the
reflection practice of faculty members, it was important to interview faculty who are currently
teaching in the classroom, whether in a virtual or in-person environment. The original goal was
to identify a minimum of 12 faculty members to invite to interview for this study.
Interviewee Sampling Criteria and Rationale
Criterion 1
Participants were full-time faculty members at TLC. The lived experience of full-time
employees added to the depth of discussion relative to the knowledge, motivation, and
organizational influences regarding reflective practice at TLC.
Criterion 2
Participants were a mixture of civilian and military faculty. My intention at the start of
the study was to schedule four to six interviews with active duty faculty and four to six
interviews with civilian faculty. This plan gave me a range of experience as we discussed
participant awareness and use of reflective practice on their teaching pedagogy.
Criterion 3
I recruited a representative population of interviewees in terms of gender and ethnic and
racial background as well as a representative population more widely. As 60% of TLC faculty
52

are male, my initial goal was to recruit a minimum of four women representing both military and
civilian faculty members to explore the differences and similarities between males and females
related to reflective practice.
The sampling approach for this qualitative study was purposeful sampling. To recruit
participants, I emailed TLC faculty whom I had met over the previous 2 years and 8 months who
were currently teaching in-person or virtual courses. After contacting each person, I invited them
to an interview and asked them to consider sharing the name of another colleague I did not yet
know who would participate in this study. Interested faculty members emailed me directly,
providing their contact information with their response to these questions:
1. What is your current academic rank?
2. How long have you been teaching at TLC?
3. Would you be available to talk with me about reflective practice and your teaching?
4. When would be some good times in the next week or two for us to talk over Zoom?
Semi-structured interview questions were used to inquire into TLC faculty members’ lived
experience and their KMO influences related to a reflective practice on teaching.
Instrumentation
Interviews were the method of data collection for this qualitative study. According to
Merriam and Tisdell (2016), a qualitative study aims to understand how participants of a study
interpret and explain their experiences. Interviews provided rich qualitative data to assess the
knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on the stakeholder goal in relation to the
research questions for this study. Appendix A shows the invitation sent via email to faculty
members to participate in the interview; Appendix C provides the informal, semi-structured
53

interview protocol used for this research. The following sections specify the methods used to
collect data for this study.
Data Collection Procedures
Data were collected through interviews using a set of predetermined questions to explore
the lived experience (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) of faculty members at TLC regarding their
experience and use of reflective practice on teaching. I used a semi-structured (Merriam &
Tisdell, 2016) and open-ended interview methodology (Patton, 2002) to gain an organizational
culture-based understanding of TLC faculty members’ experience with reflective practice. The
questions followed a predefined interview protocol as shown in Appendix C. Semi-structured
interviews provide an opportunity for interviewees to expand beyond a list of questions
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This type of conversation offered the participants the freedom to
share their experience and allowed me to ask probing and expanding questions throughout the
interview (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). However, as Creswell and Creswell (2018) have noted, a
limitation of using interviews for data collection is the implicit dependence on the interviewees’
experience but also on their willingness to share candidly about that experience. The questions
and prompts listed in Appendix C were designed to ask the interviewee to share their
experiences, knowledge, and opinions and were based upon the theoretical framework of the
Clark and Estes (2008) gap aalysis theoretical framework. The purpose of pre-defining questions
was to structure the approach to the conversation. As anticipated, this model proved to be
effective for faculty members to share their experiences.
The interviews were conducted over the period of one month, using the Zoom video
meeting platform so I could see the participant while we talked. Each interview lasted
approximately 40 minutes. I used a green screen with a lightly colored background as to reduce
54

the amount of visual noise the interviewee saw. The interview was transcribed using the add-on
application Otter.ai to the Zoom application. As per the interview protocol, hand-written notes
were also taken during the conversation. Afterward, I sent the transcription of the interview to
the participant.
Data Analysis
Data analysis is the process of using collected information to make meaning of a study
(Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This study utilized transcribed and coded interviews, which were
then analyzed in relationship to the two research questions for this study. The video recording of
the interview as well as the audio and text-transcription files were uploaded to a cloud-based
storage system, stored in a password-protected folder. Upon reviewing the transcription, I
removed any identifying information regarding the participant I interviewed or the location
where they worked.
After reviewing each transcription, I used a multi-phased approach to code the qualitative
data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). First, I used a priori codes, and then I used a printed version
of the transcripts to identify and highlight any generalizable or individual themes. I then applied
both a priori and emergent codes to align with the conceptual framework described in Figure 1.
Next, those codes were aggregated and organized into analytic codes. The final phase of analysis
focused on patterns and themes emergent from the interviews and organized into findings.
Credibility and Trustworthiness
Conducting and analyzing an interview requires that one understands they can influence
what participants share, how and what data are used for study analysis, and how that analysis
influences the study itself (Maxwell, 2013). To maintain credibility and trustworthiness in a
study, researchers must be vigilant in their role as the researcher and mitigate potential bias. This
55

section discusses credibility and trustworthiness, and how the study addressed the qualitative
approach of semi-structured interviews to gather and analyze the data from faculty at TLC.
Because I am an instructor at TLC, I had to understand my own reflexivity to understand
and disclose how I might influence—and be influenced by—the study’s research process. While
there are three levels of academic titles above me and I do not have tenure at TLC, I was
considered a junior colleague by the faculty members I interviewed. My role, gender, ethnicity,
and race may have influenced the depth and even quality of conversation in the interviews. Due
to this positionality, I intended to use the interview protocol to transparently and explicitly define
my intent with the study (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I used the interview
protocol as a guide to focus on gathering inputs and experiences from participants who taught at
TLC. My own biases were checked through best-practice implementation of maintaining
credibility and reliability.
A wide representation of TLC faculty was invited to participate in the study. Invitations
were sent via email, and continued with snowball sampling (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) to
expand the reach of invitation. My position at the college served as an advantage in gaining a
purposeful and selective sampling for obtaining participants. While research shows that selective
sampling is an inherently biased process (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), through the use of multiple
points of view and obtaining data saturation (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), I asked
people I interviewed to recommend someone that I do not yet know. This line of query led to
interviewing several people with whom I had not met previously.
Patton (2002) proposed that the value of an interview is conditional, based on the skill
level of the interviewer. The interview protocol, the types of questions and probes, and the
recording and note-taking systems and tools contribute to quality of the study (Merriam &
56

Tisdell, 2016). I intended to reach saturation through semi-structured interviews, including the
option to ask follow-up questions during the interview. Qualitative strategies enhanced
credibility and trustworthiness of this study, including self-reflective bias clarification (Creswell
& Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Through an in-depth review of the literature and
identifying as diverse a group of interviewees as possible, the study examined a variety of
experiences from faculty members’ perspectives. Inviting participants to share their experiences
was one way to investigate and understand their lived experience and collect data regarding
faculty members’ perception of and experience with reflective practice (Miles et al., 2020). Next,
I paused often during the interview to clarify for understanding. Finally, I explored my own
biases through a clear description of how background, positionality, and experience shaped the
research findings.
Ethics
I currently serve as an instructor at the college I studied for this research. As I
interviewed faculty members and analyzed information from human subjects, I was bound to
prioritize the anonymity and confidentiality of the participants (Glesne, 2011; Maxwell, 2013).
Of note is that faculty at TLC are expected to create classroom environments in which students
and faculty can exercise both non-attribution and academic freedom as they learn. The
organization supports a culture of open dialogue as it relates to faculty and students discussing,
researching, and submitting their research projects and papers on complex and controversial
topics including national and international security issues. I provided participants with an
invitation that described my commitment to anonymity and confidentiality, and during the
interview I reminded them that at any time they could change, amend, or withdraw any
information they shared.
57

According to Merriam and Tisdell (2016), it is incumbent upon researchers to clearly
articulate biases, dispositions, and assumptions that potentially influence research methodology
and results. Additionally, I am a civilian and, having joined the college less than three years ago,
do not have a supervisory role or advanced academic rank. Not having a terminal degree means
that I have the duty title of instructor, the lowest of all academic ranks at TLC. Maxwell (2013)
cautioned researchers to be aware of their positionality related to the research and to identify any
differential in power between the study and the researcher. As the researcher, I shared my
position and positionality with my interviewees as well as with the readers of this work early and
throughout the study. I aimed to make it very clear to the reader how the data reported in this
study were collected and may be interpreted through my own assumptions, biases, and
positionality.

58

Chapter Four: Findings
The purpose of this study was to conduct a needs analysis of the knowledge, motivation,
and organizational (KMO) influences necessary for TLC faculty members to employ daily
reflective practice from their teaching. The conceptual framework that guided this study was the
Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis model, used to identify and evaluate any gaps between the
stated performance goal and desired outcome. Semi-structured interviews with TLC faculty
made up the qualitative data for the study. This section identifies the needs and assets of KMO
influences that TLC could consider to increase the number of faculty members practicing daily
reflection on their teaching methods. Assumed needs were identified as continuing needs when a
majority (six or more) of faculty identified a lack of KMO support to regularly reflect on their
teaching. Alternatively, assumed needs were corroborated as assets when a majority (6 or more)
of faculty members indicated KMO support to practice reflection on their teaching daily. There
were two research questions that guided this study:
1. What are faculty members’ knowledge and motivation influences related to reflective
practice?
2. How does the culture of the organization influence faculty members’ reflective
practice on their teaching methods?
The methodology for this study was a qualitative design. Interviews used an informal,
semi-structured interview protocol designed to understand faculty members’ experience of
reflective practice essential to identifying the needs for incorporating regular reflective practice
on their teaching methods.
59

This chapter begins with a description of the 11 faculty members who participated in this
study. Next, findings present an analysis of the interview data into KMO needs and assets. The
chapter concludes with a synthesis of validated and emergent themes.
Participants
Faculty from two different colleges at TLC participated in this research study including
one department chair, one full professor, three associate professors, and six instructors. While
TLC has more male faculty members than female faculty members overall, I interviewed seven
men and four women. TLC offers courses in professional military education (PME) and more
advanced joint professional military education (JPME) taught by military and civilian faculty, so
this study provides a diverse range of backgrounds with perspectives from six active duty
military faculty members and five civilian faculty members. All interviews were conducted,
recorded, and transcribed using the Zoom platform software. During the interviews, participants
responded to questions designed to gain insight regarding their understanding and use of
reflective practice on their teaching. Faculty members had between 2.5 and 22.4 years of
teaching experience and ranged in full-time employee (FTE) title from instructor to department
chair. Table 5 shows an overview of the interviewees.

60

Table 5
Interviewee: Time Teaching and Gender
Interviewees Time teaching (in years) Gender
Finch 22.4 M
Cardinal 5 F
Hawk 6 M
Owl 3 M
Sparrow 1 M
Condor 2.2 F
Towhee 1.5 M
Falcon 2 M
Kestrel 5 F
Eagle 5.5 F
Jay 2.5 M

Note. The findings described herein account for interviews with 11 faculty members.

Findings Research Question 1
This section will address the two influences identified in Research Question 1 (RQ1):
“What are faculty members’ knowledge and motivation influences related to reflective practice?”
This section will first analyze faculty members’ knowledge of reflective practice. Krathwohl and
Anderson (2001) identified four types of knowledge that affect a stakeholder’s ability to attain
their performance goal: (a) factual, (b) conceptual, (c) procedural, and (d) metacognitive. Next,
this section presents findings regarding motivational influences of self-efficacy and expectancy
value using stakeholders’ comments providing an overview of the needs and assets of
motivation.

61

Findings of Assumed Knowledge Influences
The assumed knowledge influences and needs for faculty members at TLC to reflect on
their teaching daily are: (a) factual, (b) conceptual, (c) procedural, and (d) metacognitive. All 11
interviewees generalized reflective practice as thinking about the past. Findings indicate that
faculty members understand reflective practice applies to teaching, though most discussed
reflecting on the student experience or the materials and lesson plans they used to teach and not
their own teaching methods, per se. Table 6 summarizes the findings of knowledge influences
showing one need and three assets that may influence achieving the stakeholder goal of 100% of
faculty reflecting on their teaching daily by June 2023. The following section presents findings
that highlight faculty members’ knowledge of reflective practice.

Table 6
Identifying Knowledge Influences
Assumed knowledge influence Need Asset
Faculty have factual knowledge of reflective practice.

X
Faculty need conceptual knowledge of how to practice
reflection.
X
Faculty have procedural knowledge of how to practice
reflection
X
Faculty are self-aware of their reflective practice.
X

62

Factual Knowledge
Factual knowledge includes the basic elements a person needs to know about a subject
(Krathwohl, 2002). The assumed influence was that faculty at TLC need factual knowledge of
reflective practice to employ reflective practice on their teaching daily. Findings validated this
influence as an asset, nine of the 11 interviewees provided definitions of reflection and reflective
practice that align with the definitions such as those identified in the literature review of this
study. Interview data show that faculty generalize reflective practice as thinking about the day at
the end of a day. Falcon explained, “I think there's probably a lot of different ways to do that
[reflection] but taking time to really think about what's been happening and take a step back.”
Kestrel put it more simply, “I would define reflective practice as looking backwards.” Five
interviewees discussed the action of reflecting as to think, or the act of thinking. During the
interviews, Falcon, Eagle, Sparrow, and Towhee each used the words “think” and “thinking”
several times during their discussions. Jay said, “A reflective practice is thinking about your
thinking.” Jay used the words “think,” “thinking,” and “thinks” 58 times during the interview.
Participants shared their understanding of reflective practice, often in sweeping terms as
when Finch defined reflection as “basically [doing] something, then having time to think about
it,” or when Hawk said, “I would define that as … something you do regularly in a way to
review events that have occurred.” While all participants indicated reflective practice concerned
the past, some interviewees indicated that their reflective process went beyond merely thinking
about the past. Towhee said: “You have to have reflective practice and seek that feedback and
talk to people about these things and read about these things and actually think about an open
mind, otherwise, it will affect you big time.” He added:
63

I would say, you experience something and then you think about how you could’ve done
it better, or if there’s anything you need to change, if anything at all, after experiencing
something. Basically mindfulness, I think is what it was. I know there’s a little bit
nuance. There’s a little difference there, but in my mind it’s pretty close.
Faculty members each shared their own interpretations of reflective practice. Table 7 identifies
commonly used terms by the participants to describe their factual knowledge of reflection.

Table 7
Commonly Used Terms During Interviews to Define Reflective Practice
Term Faculty member(s) Cumulative times
used
Reflect or
reflection(s)
Sparrow, Falcon, Condor, Jay, Cardinal 155
Practice or
practicing
Condor, Towhee, Kestrel, Owl, Finch 106
Experience or
experiences
Towhee, Hawk, Cardinal, Falcon, Condor 58
Feedback
Towhee, Sparrow, Kestrel, Cardinal,
Hawk
53

Note. The table shows the frequency of terms used by interviewees to define reflective practice.

64

Conceptual Knowledge
Interviewees revealed that to achieve the stakeholder goal they needed conceptual
knowledge of reflective practice. Anderson and Krathwohl (2001) identified conceptual
knowledge as knowledge of underlying categories of an area or field. All interviewees responded
to the prompt: “Would you talk about the concept of reflective practice in your own teaching
experience?” Eight participants said they conceptualized reflection as a subjective, informal
process, and they did not acknowledge using any structure to reflect on their teaching. Some
faculty members repeated or reworded what they had said earlier; however, none of the faculty
addressed research-based reflective models such as those discussed in the literature review. A
specific theme emerged from the data: faculty members are not familiar with models of
reflection such as those developed by Brookfield (2017), Kolb (1984), or Gibbs (1988). Cardinal
stated:
The informal process is kind of like, “Oh, remember the student that said that? That was
interesting. I should write that down.” Or like, “Oh, I forgot to say this. I really wanted to
make sure I made that point.”
Findings suggest that faculty at TLC conceptualize reflective practice differently from one
another and lack a structured approach to reflecting or an understanding of the models available
to practice reflection on their teaching.
As established in the literature review, practicing reflection on teaching methods allows
educators to connect what they teach to how they teach. An emergent theme across the interviews
was that many faculty members reflected less on their teaching methods than on the content,
material, and lessons they teach. Jay’s monologue, describing how he connected reflection to
lesson planning, included a series of questions he asked:
65

I won’t necessarily pull out a notepad and pen and start drafting things down. What I do,
however, is I'm always thinking as I'm developing the next lesson plan. What did I take
away from the last one? Where is my flight [group of 10–15 students]? What do they
need from me right now? How can I deliver this next lesson in a manner that is going to
be, or give them the best opportunity to receive it? What did I screw up on the last time
that I taught this lesson? That's essentially the questions that I'm asking myself as I go
about prepping for the next class.
Falcon put it clearly, “Part of reflecting is being able to really understand what the lesson
means”; and to reflect, Hawk reported, “I try to use every time that I do that [reflect on the
lesson] as an opportunity to at least have another idea about how I can do things in the future.”
To achieve the goal of incorporating daily reflective practice on their teaching, faculty need to
augment their conceptual knowledge of what reflection is and how to do it.
Procedural Knowledge
Procedural knowledge builds upon factual and conceptual knowledge and is the
understanding of the steps or method for completing a task (Krathwohl, 2002). Analysis of the
interview data showed that the influence of procedural knowledge by faculty at TLC is an asset.
Interviewees were asked, “What is the process you use to reflect?” Nine of the 11 faculty
members indicated that they had a routine to practice reflection. Jay even used the word
“discipline,” explaining, “So, unless somebody has the discipline, the knowledge, the discipline
to do it, the knowledge of how to do it, or is even prompted to do it, they're just kind of left to
their own devices.” Five faculty members shared personalized methods of practicing reflection.
Two interviewees, Cardinal and Owl, talked about reflecting on their drive to and from work, and
three talked about journaling (Jay, Kestrel, and Towhee) to purposefully reflect on the day. Six
66

faculty members mentioned note-making and writing as their process of reflection. Cardinal said,
“I’m making notes during the practice [facilitating student discussions]” and both Kestrel and
Towhee described writing notes after teaching. Kestrel detailed her process in the following way:
And so, I will take a few minutes after every class and sometimes it sinks in more later in
the day and then I will jot down notes on all of my lesson plans so that the next time I
teach a course, I can have easy access to, “Hey. What did I do last time? What went
really well?”
Towhee also described a personalized process of writing notes “right after the fact,” as soon after
teaching a lesson as possible. Owl shared a long-standing routine of reflection, saying, “I have a
reminder that pops up in [Microsoft] Outlook that asks me to record things from the day.”
Faculty members who use writing to reflect discussed their processes of thinking about
something that happened that day. To exemplify this process, Condor shared that his reflective
practice fit into the day in the following way: “I will stop periodically for a period of time.” The
pause that faculty talked about was found to be their procedure to practice reflection by thinking
about their teaching experience earlier in the day.
Seven faculty members shared that they used questions at the end of the teaching day to
reflect. Jay discussed reflection as a questioning process, again saying that he regularly asked
himself, “What can I do better tomorrow?” Condor described how she looked back on an
“awesome” lesson and asked, “Why was it awesome?” Within this theme of asking questions to
reflect, some faculty admitted that they often reflected with colleagues, many times informally
between classes. Six interviewees described instances of seeing a colleague in the hallway at the
end of a class and, as Kestrel explained:
67

So, there is an informal mechanism of, "Hey, how did it go today?" And then people do
their own, "Oh, well it went well, but I would do this differently or I would do that
differently," and so there is a little bit of a peer opportunity to do it immediately
following any given lesson.
The processes of practicing reflection described by faculty at TLC indicate that procedural
knowledge is an asset to achieving the stakeholder goal of reflecting on teaching daily.
Metacognitive Knowledge
Krathwohl and Anderson (2001) explained metacognitive knowledge as the ability to
reflect on knowledge and skills and to adjust as required based on planning and monitoring one’s
progress toward a goal. The assumed influence for metacognitive knowledge stated that faculty
members at TLC need to understand how to plan for and implement a personalized reflective
practice. Eight of the 11 faculty members validated that reflective practice was an asset,
confirming their metacognitive knowledge of reflection. “I don’t think it’s just like you just walk
into the class and start talking and then you’re good,” Eagle stated. At the end of the
conversation, Eagle shared a concern while discussing the kind of support TLC could offer,
asking aloud how the organization could “encourage reflective practice without institutionalizing
it and making it devoid of all real meaning and just becoming something that you have to go
through the hurdles,” alluding to the relevancy of setting the organizational culture to incorporate
reflective practice.
Seven participants demonstrated metacognitive knowledge by describing reasons for
practicing reflection such as: thinking deeply about the questions they asked during class (Jay,
Falcon, and Kestrel); choosing materials used to teach certain lessons (Condor, Falcon, Kestrel,
and Owl); and how to include students more in classroom discussions (Cardinal, Kestrel, and
68

Hawk). Through analysis of the data, three themes emerged in relation to the asset of
metacognitive knowledge that faculty have about reflective practice: (a) connections to students,
(b) connections to teaching, and (c) a growth mindset.
Connections to Students
The intersection of reflection and student experience was magnified by both Falcon and
Condor. According to Falcon, “I think about the relationship that I have with them [the students]
and the relationship that we have to the material, together.” To further this discussion, Condor
exclaimed, “It’s about understanding the business of educating others, and then that supports
whatever content we might be teaching.”
Throughout the interviews, the words “student” and “classroom” appeared often. Hawk
specifically called out the positive impact of metacognitive knowledge of reflection, saying, “I
learn every time I go in the classroom, I think the students at our institution are skilled and
practiced professionals.” Through a word-search across the interviews, seven participants used
the terms “think about thinking” or “thinking about thinking” while describing their reflective
practice. Jay reported, “And I think the only way I would be even able to do this, is because I
started thinking about my thinking and thinking more deeply about what it is that I do and why I
do it.” Later in the interview, Hawk described his metacognitive process of practicing reflection,
saying:
But the understanding that people with different backgrounds bring different
perspectives, I think to me, helps me to look at, when I sit down after class and I
reevaluate what the students have said and talked about. And I try to figure out how I can
do better next time.
69

Cardinal echoed the connection between reflecting on their teaching and the perceived student
experience, “I think it’s just natural human nature to kind of think back on, ‘Okay. How did that
go? What went well? What didn’t go well? Gosh, what do I wish I would’ve said differently?’”
This response demonstrates metacognitive knowledge as Cardinal views applying reflection to
teaching methodologies, linking their experience to an understanding of cause and effect
(Krathwohl & Anderson, 2010).
Connections to Teaching
Through analysis, nine of the 11 participants indicated that when they reflected about
teaching, they did so in metacognitive fashion. One example of this process is when Towhee
explained reflecting on teaching a lesson by saying, “But if you don’t do anything with it, then
you’re not reflecting.” Like Towhee, Kestrel considered reflection as a way “to get better and
identify why things were the way that they were or where they went one way or another and why
that happened.” Condor magnified the importance of connecting a reflective practice to content
and the student experience saying:
What could I do better to prepare students for what’s coming? How do I give people
material or ideas for proceeding who might be uncomfortable learning? What things do
we do for preparation?
Reflective Practice and Growth Mindset
Analysis of interview responses revealed that at least six of the 11 faculty members
connected reflective practice to a growth mindset. Research by Dweck (2008) indicated that if a
leader approaches a situation looking for the potential for growth or opportunity, followers might
see that as a model of what is expected of them as well. By reflecting on their teaching, faculty
members can demonstrate the continual development they practice; if those same faculty share
70

their metacognitive reflective practice with their students, students might build their own
reflective practice skills. Falcon reported that he wondered “How students are doing, what
they’re liking, what they’re not liking, and adjustments” he could make. Some participants used
the words “improve,” “better,” and “differently” when describing the concept of reflection.
During the interview, Jay observed:
As I’m thinking through how can I deliver the next lesson to the class, how can I deliver
it in a way that, if I have a lot of diversity in class, how can I deliver it in a way where
most of the students will be able to receive it?
Table 8 provides examples of how five interviewees described reflective practice as a growth
mindset.

71

Table 8
Comments Connecting Reflective Practice to Growth Mindset
Faculty member Commentary
Kestrel I would define reflective practice as looking backwards in a growth
mindset.
Hawk I try to use every time that I do that as an opportunity to at least have
another idea about how I can do things in the future.
Sparrow I think part of reflection is we're recognizing you constantly have to
learn and grow.
Finch [Reflection is] your own sense of what needs to be taught and then how
you improve when you come around the next time.
Condor I define this term as connected to metacognition. Partly formative,
partly summative, always metacognition.
Falcon It’s a chance to evaluate what happened and then use that information to
help you learn or be more prepared for future events.

Note. These comments were found through a review of the interviewee transcripts to identify
ways in which faculty connected reflection to professional or personal growth.

Jay described a metacognitive reflection process in the following way: “I think the only
way I would be even able to do this, is because I started thinking about my thinking and thinking
more deeply about what it is I do and why I do it.” Like Jay, Kestrel defined “reflective practice
as looking backwards in a growth mindset way to get better and identify why things were the
way that they were or where they went one way or another and why that happened.” Condor
magnified the importance of connecting a reflective practice to content and the student
experience:
72

Then all of that thinking leads me to, “what could I do better to prepare students for
what's coming? How do I give people material or ideas for proceeding who might be
uncomfortable learning? What things do we do for preparation?”
Several participants offered examples of how reflecting on the relationship between teaching
content and materials and their own pedagogy was an individual practice. For example, Falcon
shared, “I think reflection is a highly personal thing; the way that I reflect might not be the way
that you reflect, might not be the way someone else reflects.” These examples indicate that
faculty at TLC regard the positive effect of practicing reflection as a way to engage in deeper
consideration of their teaching methods.
Summary of Findings for Knowledge Needs
Regarding the influence of the four types of knowledge influencing the stakeholder goal,
the findings resulted in three current assets and one current need if all TLC faculty were to
reflect on their teaching methods daily. All participants understood the factual definition of
reflective practice as thinking about the past and acknowledged that influence is an asset.
Alternatively, findings indicate a need for TLC faculty to be introduced to and utilize reflective
practical models and research-based frameworks to build conceptual knowledge of reflective
practices. Throughout the interviews, it became apparent that participants conceptualized
reflective practice differently. Finally, data indicate that procedural and metacognitive
knowledge of reflective practice are assets to achieving the stakeholder goal defined in this
study.
Findings of Assumed Motivation Influences
The conceptual framework of this study assumes a relationship among motivational
influences for faculty to achieve the stakeholder goal of practicing reflection on their teaching
73

daily. Clark and Estes (2008) recognized motivation as an influence in achieving a stated goal.
Faculty need to believe they are capable of practicing reflection on their teaching, and to expect
value from engaging in a task—that doing so will make it easier to achieve a stated goal. An
additional motivation need identified through data analysis: faculty members need to consider
matters of diversity and multiculturalism that arise during their reflection on their teaching
methods and the teaching materials they use. Two interviewees shared examples of how the
diverse makeup of students their classes cause them to reflect on not only the teaching materials
they incorporate, but also the methods used to teach. For example, Hawk said that sitting down
after class to evaluate the conversations he facilitated and what students talked about “influences
what I’m thinking about” as he plans upcoming lessons.
Self-Efficacy
According to Bandura (1977), individuals’ performance is enhanced when they feel they
have the knowledge and skills to perform a given task. Seven of the 11 interviewees indicated a
feeling of efficaciousness about employing reflective practice, indicating that self-efficacy is an
asset to achieving the stakeholder goal of 100% of TLC faculty reflecting on their teaching daily.
An example of high efficacy came during the interview with Towhee, “I mean, I don't want to
sound egotistical. I guess I feel like, some people are just; they do this naturally. My whole life
I’ve done this.” In fact, seven of the 11 interviewees indicated feeling that they had a high ability
to reflect on what they teach and the materials they use to instruct their classes (Falcon and
Hawk), their lesson plans (Condor, Eagle, Jay, and Kestrel), and the student experience (Condor,
Finch, and Cardinal). Regarding reflecting on their teaching, faculty expressed a high level of
efficacy, which according to Rueda (2011) motivates individuals to work toward achieving a
goal.
74

Findings suggest that faculty believed in their ability to reflect on their experience
teaching at TLC. Falcon acknowledged, “I have to say … my ability to reflect in general
influences my ability to reflect in other areas like teaching.” Nine of the participants specifically
stated that they believed they had the skills and knowledge necessary to perform reflective
practice on their teaching though, as mentioned previously, faculty need conceptual knowledge
of reflective practice. Three participants admitted they felt they had a strong ability to reflect, as
when Jay said, “I would say I’m probably more aware than the average bear.” Sparrow
exemplified the asset of self-efficacy by stating confidently, “So, I think part of reflection is
recognizing you constantly have to learn and grow.” Later in the interview, Jay said, “I guess the
only thing I would add to that is that I have found it to be a discipline.”
Both Cardinal and Towhee alluded to a natural tendency to practice reflecting, which
included focusing on their own actions in the classroom as well as on the impact of their teaching
on their students’ experience. Cardinal stated quite emphatically that “I think I reflect
thoroughly, and that might just be part of my personality”; Towhee expressed a similar
sentiment: “When I started to learn more about this [reflection], I notice that I did this kind of
naturally, and I assumed that everybody did that. And they don’t.” He added, “Nothing trumps
experience in my mind, and the better your reflective practice, the better your experience is
going to be.” Sparrow suggested that individual reflection is not enough, that faculty members
need to collaborate on the content they teach and on teaching methods as well, adding, “It’s hard
to hear, ‘Hey, you got that wrong,’ or ‘Hey, maybe you could do better.’”
Eight of the participants addressed efficaciousness in reflective practice as an asset to
their teaching experience at TLC. Falcon demonstrated strong self-efficacy regarding reflection,
stating that “reflective practice is something that you either do or don’t do throughout your life.”
75

He disclosed that he is someone who does attend to reflective practice. Participants shared that
the organization does not provide faculty development or ongoing training in reflective practice;
this may be a reason that many faculty members talked about reflecting as a “personal thing” and
for those who do practice it, reflection is “a discipline,” but, as previously explained, lacks a
conceptual model that guides all faculty. Reflective practice was described by some as an event
that sometimes occurs as a collaborative effort, as when Condor added:
I think part of my reflective practice is also having ongoing conversations with
colleagues who are teachers. I never stop talking about “What did you do? What are you
going to do? How are going you going to do it? Why are you doing it that way? How
about this?”
The questions that Condor and Jay asked as well as the collaborative approach to reflective
practice shared by five other interview participants indicate that faculty members had self-
efficacy when it came to practicing reflection.
Expectancy Value
The influence related to expectancy value was that faculty members need to believe there
is value in reflecting on their teaching. Analysis of the data revealed a gap in perceptions of
value that could be gained by employing daily reflective practice. Eccles (2006) described the
motivational influence of expectancy value as one’s belief that achieving a goal or completing a
defined task will enhance their personal and/or professional life. Eccles (2006) and Pintrich
(2003) further explained utility value as the perceived usefulness of a task, and how well
engaging in or accomplishing that task fits into long-term goal achievement. Developing a
positive utility value of reflection will motivate faculty at TLC to reflect, further supporting
76

achievement of the stakeholder goal of 100% of faculty members reflecting on their teaching
daily.
Only four faculty members identified value in reflecting on their teaching. Sparrow used
the words “learn and grow” to describe the value of reflection. Kestrel discussed the value of
reflection by emphasizing the importance of reflecting on materials and content, saying, “What
questions could I have asked better or do I really like the activities in class or the videos
[students watched]?” Further, Kestrel described reflecting on lesson plans by asking, “How well
did I connect the video or the activity to the main lesson objectives?” Throughout the interviews,
the value most faculty placed on reflection concerned thinking about the lesson plans and
content, not the teaching methods employed. Cardinal exemplified this perception by saying:
At the end of every course [I look back and think]: “Okay, the next time I teach this
course, I’m going to do this differently. I’m going to add this reading. I’m going to
rearrange these two IPs [Instructional Periods] to make … class three would have made
sense before class two” or something.
Three interviewees said they felt motivated to reflect on the content and materials used during
the lessons. Condor shared: “In terms of content, I think reflection is very important to gauge
what’s happening.” Further, Falcon mentioned that “part of reflecting is being able to really
understand what the lesson means.” Towhee cited the importance of reflecting on content,
“There’s a lot of opportunities that I miss to link certain concepts together.” Overall, there was a
sense of agreement among the faculty that reflecting on teaching content could make the material
and lessons more relevant for the student experience. Or, as Condor put it:
It’s about understanding the business of educating others, and then that supports whatever
content we might be teaching. We have a hot wash [department meeting] after every
77

course. But the hot wash doesn’t necessarily reflect on teaching. It reflects on the content.
“Where are the readings effective? Were the guest speakers we brought in effective?
Would you recommend using those things again?”
To exemplify this remark, Falcon mentioned that “part of reflecting is being able to really
understand what the lesson means.” There was a sense of agreement among the faculty that they
expect value from reflecting on teaching content, such as making the lessons more relevant for
the students they teach.
Diversity at TLC and Reflective Practice
While expectancy value can materialize as either intrinsic or extrinsic motivation, seven
participants stressed the importance of reflecting on the issues of diversity in the classroom at
TLC. When asked about diversity at TLC, faculty members shared that their classes lack
diversity; Eagle said, “It's not diverse at all.” As noted earlier in this study, the majority of
students attending TLC are White males. Diversity of students attending TLC is increasing
incrementally, though perhaps not in parity with public education. Due to the culture and climate
of the armed services, the organization faces a challenge in enrolling people of color (POC) and
women at TLC. For example, Hawk said “the first African American student to graduate here
was in 1950. … The first female to graduate was 1972.” While POC, women, and international
students attend TLC, most of the students are not racially, ethically, or gender diverse; however,
there is other diversity in the classroom. Condor put it bluntly, “Well, we are not gender or
racially diverse, but we have a lot of diversity of military experience, age, and academic
capabilities.” To explore the use of reflective practice by faculty members at TLC, questions
about diversity and inclusion led to an emergent theme.
78

An emergent asset influencing faculty motivation to reflect on teaching was apparent, as
seven of the 11 faculty addressed the importance of reflecting on the diversity of students they
teach. Jay admitted, “The initial thought that comes to mind is, well, if you have diversity in the
classroom, you're going to get different voices, different opinions, different ideas, different ways
of thinking.” Kestrel commented, “So, lots of different backgrounds, experience, and ideas and
approaches and personalities, oh the personality differences.” Nine faculty members expressed
the interconnection between their teaching methods and the kinds of diversity represented by
students in their classes. When asked “How might the diversity of students influence your
reflective practice?”, Condor replied:
Where are the women speakers? Where are the Black speakers? Where are the Hispanic
speakers? Where are the Asian speakers, the Muslims? Who is not being represented and
how can we broaden what we include, so that the diversity of students influences what we
do?
Her focus on bringing diverse materials into her lessons came during the conversation about the
diversity in her classes as well as the organization at large.
Six participants shared a connection between their own reflective thinking and the lack of
diversity at TLC. In Falcon’s words, “Well, ultimately I think it's because the feedback that I get
that assists me with reflection is coming from a place that has limited diversity.” To expand on
this sentiment, Hawk shared:
But the understanding that people with different backgrounds bring different
perspectives, I think to me, helps me to look at, when I sit down after class, and I
reevaluate what the students have said and talked about. And I try to figure out how I can
do better next time.
79

Three participants remarked on thinking about their classes and working to be equitable and
inclusive, though, as in Cardinal’s case, such themes usually focused on the content and teaching
materials, “How do I give people material or ideas … also about who are we reading? Are we
reading women authors? Are we reading authors from a variety of racial and ethnic
backgrounds?” Findings indicated that faculty members are considering diversity while building
their lesson plans. Table 9 summarizes the findings of the needs and assets of motivation needs.

Table 9
Summary of Assessed Motivation Influences
Assumed motivation influence Need Emergent asset Asset
Faculty need to believe they can employ
a reflective practice to their teaching
(self-efficacy)
X
Faculty need to expect value from
reflecting on their teaching daily
(expectancy value)
X
Faculty need to expect value from
reflecting on concepts of the diversity
of students in their classes on their
teaching methods (expectancy value)
X

80

Summary of Findings for Motivation Needs
Regarding assumed motivation needs for faculty at TLC to practice daily reflection on
their teaching, the interview data resulted in a current need, a current asset, and an emergent
motivation asset. Nine of the 11 interviewees openly shared feeling efficacious in their ability to
engage in the task of reflective practice; however, only four specifically identified an expected
value to be derived from reflecting on their teaching. When asked to describe the anticipated
value of a reflective practice for their teaching, several interviewees talked about reflecting on
the content they taught or activities they facilitated in the classroom, not on their teaching
methods. More than half of the participants shared a lower level of expectancy value regarding
reflecting on their teaching methods. Faculty members uncovered an important emergent theme
while discussing the potential value of reflecting on their teaching methods in relation to
diversity of students attending TLC. Preliminarily findings indicate that because there are
students with different cultural and experiential backgrounds, some faculty members think about
the materials they use to teach their students, as well as the way they facilitate discussions in the
classroom. Without being asked specifically, participants indicated that having recommended
models, training, or frameworks to reflect on their teaching methods might motivate them to
practice reflection more regularly.
Findings of Assumed Organization Influences
This section will address the influence identified in Research Question 2 (RQ2): “How
does the culture of the organization influence faculty members’ reflective practice on their
teaching methods?” There were both similarities and differences shared as interviewees offered
unique perspectives regarding the organizational influences on reflective practice at TLC. The
findings are organized by two types of organizational influences: cultural models and cultural
81

settings. While all participants agreed that reflective practice on teaching is important, opinions
were varied as were expectations of what reflective practice is, organizational support of
reflecting on teaching, and why to reflect. Table 10 provides sample participant responses to two
of the interview questions related to cultural models and cultural settings: (a) Can you describe if
you feel the organization values reflective practice? Why or why not? And (b) What expectation
is there for faculty members to reflect on their teaching?

82

Table 10
Sample Quotes by Interviewees Related to Organizational Influences
Organizational
influence
Finch Cardinal Eagle Jay
Cultural model

When you start
off, we come
in with
academic
instructor
school, which
is a bit of a
joke.
I do think that
reflective
practice is
naturally
baked in …
but I have not
seen a lot of
patience for
holistic or
process
change.
People in
leadership
aren’t really
intellectuals
and so that
tends to
decrease
enabling
reflective
practice.
I think they
expect that
from you [to
reflect], but
there’s no …
encouragemen
t to do so. It’s
one of those
unwritten
rules, I guess I
would say.
Cultural setting

Faculty
members tell
you what they
did right,
what they
thought could
be improved
and so it’s
kind of a
discussion.
I know they
[colleagues]
do a formal
hot wash, or
what’s the
thing that’s
super trendy
right now? A
Kanban board
for next steps.
I would say that
they don’t
[value
reflective
practice]
because
[performance
evaluations]
don’t ask.
Nobody taught
me how to do
reflection …
training
started when I
read this book
[Insight, by
Tasha Eurich]
several years
ago.

Note. The direct quotes above contribute to the findings aligned to cultural models and settings.

To describe organizational influences on reflective practice, I identified two emerging
themes. First, the cultural model of TLC as described by interviewees lacks an expectation that
faculty reflect on their teaching methodology. Second, faculty identified a lack of necessary
resources to reflect on their teaching such as theoretical and practical models of reflective
practice.
83

Cultural Setting
Cultural setting consists of the concrete and visible manifestations of an organization’s
culture, observable as artifacts including furnishings, decoration, or other physical
representations (Hall, 2016; Schein, 2010) as well as resources to include time to practice and
training to improve the skills necessary to achieve organizational, stakeholder group, and
individual goals. This influence was identified as a need by nine of the 11 participants, who said
that the organization did not provide any formal training in applying reflective practice to
teaching experiences. The cultural setting influence was that to achieve the stakeholder goal of
100% of faculty practicing reflection on their teaching, TLC must provide faculty with resources.
Cardinal put it bluntly, “I can’t remember ever having any training or even discussion about the
fact that it would be valuable or how to do it.” Condor expanded further, “The word reflect and
reflective practice is not explicitly part of what we do.” All 11 interviewees mentioned talking
informally with colleagues after or before teaching to share ideas on teaching activities,
materials, and sometimes methods. To provide an example, Falcon shared:
The thing that I see the most is right after class, people bump into each other in the
hallways and then they go sidebar in somebody’s office and talk about what went well,
what didn’t go well, what the students liked and didn’t like and how they’ve just felt
overall about the material and whatnot.
Research in applying reflection to faculty members’ teaching methods has shown that
professionals need more than peer observation and feedback to gain from such reflection-on-
action (Badaracco, 2020; Comer, 2016; Kayapinar, 2016; Schön, 1987). With more than 22 years
of teaching experience, Finch summed up the lack of organizational support of reflective practice
by saying, “It’s your own sense of what needs to be taught and then how you improve on that
84

then when you come around the next time.” While Cardinal and Eagle mentioned the faculty
development that was provided during the summer months, neither could provide examples of
learning how to reflect on their teaching methods. The training they received was dedicated to
learning classroom management techniques and writing complete lesson plans and lacked any
training or examples of reflecting on their teaching methods.
Findings indicate that while faculty review or debrief lessons in groups, little
organizational support is offered and there is no organizational expectation for practicing
individual reflection on teaching methods. When asked if the organization provided resources to
practice personal reflection on their teaching, participants responded in the negative. While
faculty acknowledged “thinking about” what they taught and what materials they used, eight
participants stated that they lacked both the time and formal guidance in methods of reflecting on
their teaching methods. In Jay’s words, “The institution, the school, or the program itself does
not allow for reflective thinking … there’s no time.” For faculty to practice reflection and go
beyond thinking about content, lesson plans, and teaching materials so that they practice
reflecting on teaching methodologies, the organization needs to support the cultural setting. Table
11 provides several examples of faculty comments regarding the influence of cultural setting on
their use of reflective practice.

85

Table 11
Interviewees’ Comments Regarding the Cultural Setting of TLC
Faculty member Examples of cultural setting on faculty member’s use of reflective practice
Finch And then you have the course hotwash again, where’s a matter then of
again maybe picking up new techniques from colleagues.
Cardinal I can’t remember ever having a training or even conversation about the fact
that it would be valuable or how to do it.
Hawk We have a hot wash after every one of our lessons.
Owl Either way, we could have reflective practice included in our faculty
development.
Sparrow The only time they really get feedback is they watch you twice.
Condor I use students’ feedback during the class, after the class.
Towhee Definitely on Fridays, we’ll go and have a beer in our lounge.
Falcon What have they done to specifically develop that capability [to reflect]?
Nothing.
Kestrel There’s not spot checks to keep people accountable for doing things to
continuously improve.
Eagle It’s really [two weeks of training] just internal development within our
department that we do for our courses.
Jay The institution, the school, or the program itself does not allow for
reflective thinking.

Cultural Model
Invisible values, shared beliefs and assumed ways of being expressed by individuals
within a group or an organization create the cultural model of an organization (Gallimore &
Goldenberg, 2001; Schein, 2010). The qualitative evidence from the interviewees suggests that
while the organization values constant improvement of its faculty, the cultural model influence
does not support faculty in practicing reflection. Six of the interviewees mentioned a lack of
organizational support to implement regular reflective practice of their teaching methods. The
86

lack of a cultural model supporting reflective practice was described clearly by Condor, who
said, “reflective practice is not explicitly part of what we do” at TLC. Similarly, Falcon said, “I
do some reflecting on my own, but that’s not necessarily related to teaching.” A lack of
organizational support or expectation compromises the likelihood that stakeholders will achieve
the goal of reflecting on their teaching daily in relation to changing or improving their teaching
methods.
Interviewees described what they thought of regarding the assumed and unspoken
expectations of the organization for faculty to reflect on their teaching. Condor admitted, “I feel
that TLC deeply values reflective practice,” but then continued, “There's not baked into our
[organization’s] casserole all of the really umami parts of reflective practice that I would wish,
because it's hurry up, get done with it.” Kestrel commented, “I think that the organization values
reflective practice because they constantly support people improving themselves, but it is
incredibly informal.” Relating his interpretation of organizational expectation regarding feedback
from students, Finch explained, “The department and the school expect you to take into serious
consideration the evaluations.” Additionally, some participants described their experiences
regarding sharing teaching materials or classroom experiences. Four faculty members provided
examples of informally talking with peers in hallways after teaching. Describing his assumptions
of reflecting in the organization, Finch continued, “It’s up to you, interacting with your
colleagues and learning from them, and not so much from [attending] any [faculty development]
workshops.” Cardinal and Jay echoed the sentiment that it is up to the individual faculty member
to define and practice reflection on their own. As Jay explained:
My experience with reflection is a conversation between two instructors where somebody
asks, "How did class go?" The other person answers. And the question is generally
87

reciprocated. And whether somebody goes beyond that, I don't have knowledge of. I have
not ever asked an instructor that question.
While the organization’s cultural model may expect faculty to reflect, nine of the 11
participants reported that there was no formal expectation or faculty development or training to
do so. While faculty members mentioned reflecting during hallway conversations or department
meetings with peers, a few interviewees described negative experiences practicing reflection
with their colleagues. Regarding peer-level discussions, Finch said “It wasn’t really a productive
reflection because I was like, ‘I already know this. I don’t need to be told it in front of others’
[faculty members].” In another interview, Towhee stated, “And then it's on you to go chat with
your peers, your fellow faculty members. That's the training you get it's really, it's on your own.”
Faculty expressed feeling that the organization wanted them to collaborate on teaching materials
and content, but it was not apparent that reflective practice was required or expected. During the
interview, Jay shared, “If there’s an expectation for it, I don’t know what that expectation is.
Maybe there’s an unwritten expectation, that you should do better next time.” At the
organizational cultural model level, it is not clear that the organization values or promotes
reflective practice on teaching methods.
Summary of Findings for Organizational Influences
Regarding the assumed influences of cultural model and cultural setting influencing
faculty members’ practice of reflection on their teaching, the interview data resulted in two
ongoing needs. TLC seems to value reflection on teaching materials and lesson content;
however, faculty members are neither expected nor formally required to reflect on their teaching
methods. Additionally, there does not appear to be shared understanding of the value of
88

intrapersonal reflective practice or shared agreement on the practice of reflection across faculty
members.
Summary
The study set out to define and understand how eight assumed KMO influences might
impact the stakeholder goal of higher education faculty members employing daily reflective
practice. The advantage of practicing reflection on teaching methods extends beyond just
thinking about the materials faculty members use or the content they teach. Although the
participants in this study generalized reflective practice to apply to lesson plans and materials,
there are potential benefits for educators who also reflect on their teaching methods. The findings
of this study validated four needs. First, the need for improvement regarding TLC faculty
members’ conceptual knowledge of reflective practice. Second, his study validated a motivation
influence: expectancy value. The last two influences that needed to be validated by this study
were that the cultural model and cultural settings need to support a change to incorporating
reflective practice if faculty at TLC are to achieve the stakeholder goal of employing reflective
practice on their teaching methods daily. Chapter Five addresses potential recommendations to
support the number of higher education faculty members reflecting on their teaching practice and
methods.

89

Chapter Five: Recommendations and Discussion
The previous chapter provided an analysis of 11 interviews of faculty members in higher
education to address the research questions exploring KMO influences that would support (or
hinder) 100% of TLC’s faculty members in achieving the goal of employing reflective practice
on their teaching daily. Interviewees shared their own experiences and in some cases what they
had heard from other faculty at TLC. In several instances, participants said that responding to the
interview questions themselves was a form of reflective practice, saying there was value to just
having the conversation itself. In essence, talking about how they reflect made them reflect on
and about their teaching methods. This study explored eight influences and each influence was
identified as a need or an asset if six or more faculty validated or invalidated an assumed
influence gap. This study found four influences identified in the literature review to have gaps
that contribute to the attenuated use of a reflective practice by TLC faculty. The
recommendations that follow are organized and presented by KMO influences designed to
reduce or eliminate gaps in performance toward this study’s proposed stakeholder goal. This
chapter proposes an implementation and integration plan of three recommendations using Kurt
Lewin’s three steps of change: unfreeze, change, and refreeze to engage and equip faculty
members with the tools and support needed to practice reflection. This chapter concludes with a
reflection on the study’s limitations and recommendations for future research.
Discussion of Findings
Data analysis of all 11 interviewee transcripts indicated that the faculty at TLC do not
have a common understanding of the fundamental theories of reflection or of models they can
use to reflect on their teaching. Eight of the 11 participants shared their understandings of the
concept of reflective practice, ranging from thinking about a material they used to teach a lesson
90

to meeting in the hallway at the end of the teaching day to discuss a class with a colleague. For
their part, researchers Dewey (1933), Gibbs (1988), Kolb (1984), and Schön (1987) identified
reflective practice as a tool that professionals use to improve their teaching and facilitation. Even
more recently, Brookfield (2017) wrote that through critical reflection, educators could identify
effective and non-effective teaching methodologies. There was no agreed-upon definition of the
term reflective practice; in fact, ten participants shared they did not get models or frameworks
reflective practice during training, faculty development, or staff meetings. True, one participant
claimed he thought he remembered a reflection discussion in the initial faculty development he
attended two decades earlier; he did not say it was a memorable or valuable topic if indeed it was
included in that onboarding program.
As Clark and Estes (2008) acknowledged, knowledge and skill are necessary to achieve a
performance goal. Regarding the types of conceptual knowledge one needs, Rueda (2011)
identified: principles, theories, or structures relevant to a particular area. All 11 faculty members
shared their knowledge of the term “reflective practice,” but the conceptual understanding of
what reflective practice was described somewhat differently by each person. To engage in
reflective practice, one needs to know more than just the definition of the term. While the faculty
at TLC defined a factual meaning of reflective practice, the participants of this study lacked a
conceptual understanding of the models or structures from literature they could use to reflect on
their teaching.
Finding 1: There Is No Shared Understanding of the Value of Reflecting on Teaching
Methods
All 11 participants demonstrated a positive mindset regarding their ability to think about
their teaching, thus reflecting a primary attribute of the self-efficacy theory of motivation.
91

Research by Bandura (1977) suggested that when one believes they have the knowledge and skill
to do a task, there is a stronger likelihood they will complete actions in alignment with a stated
performance goal. Findings from this study indicate that while TLC faculty believe they can
reflect, it appeared that many did not have a clear understanding of why they would spend time
doing so. When asked what value they gain by reflecting on their teaching, there was no
consensus about the value of reflecting specifically on teaching methods. Eccles (2006) stated
that as a motivational tool, a positive expectancy value of completing a task in relation to a stated
goal increases the activity one takes toward achieving that goal.
This important finding indicates a potential blind spot for faculty in higher education. In
many respects, teaching at a college or university is an individual activity, and with time and
experience faculty might fall into routine pedagogy. As the student body and student
expectations continue to change, faculty need to critically wonder about how the methods they
use in the classroom influence and impact their students’ learning experience. Clark and Estes
(2008) identified motivation as the active choice one makes toward persisting in action to
achieve an outcome. Rueda’s research (2011) suggested that a basic understanding of
motivational theory could serve one in attaining a predetermined goal. Chunoo and Osteen
(2016) found that organizations empower people to work toward a goal by operationalizing a
plan and providing structured approaches toward goal achievement. Given these insights from
the literature and this study’s findings, faculty at TLC need to fill the gap between the concept of
reflective practice on their teaching and the potential, expected value of reflecting on their
teaching. By reflecting on the value of reflective practice, faculty may identify teaching methods,
as well as teaching materials and lesson plans, that can improve or change their teaching
methods.
92

Finding 2: Faculty Reflect on Diversity of Students and Teaching
Participants of this study are aware of the lack of diversity of the students and fellow
faculty members at TLC. Super et al. (2021) identified the positionality that instructors have
allowing them to deliberately design lessons and courses for diversity, equity, inclusion, and
belonging (DEIB) for the students they teach. One surprising feature discussed by seven of the
11 participants was that international military services send their country’s military leaders to
attend PME at TLC and classes (of 12–15 students) enroll one or two international students per
class section. As some faculty members discussed the lack of student diversity in their classes,
they shared that they sometimes think of changing their teaching methods. Additionally, three of
the 11 interviewees talked about attempting to diversify the materials they used in the classroom.
One example is not relying on old lecture notes and traditional readings but looking to
incorporate updated lectures and learning materials. By reflecting on both the diversity of
students at TLC as well as the materials they assign to students, faculty may identify teaching
strategies that will allow them to connect with more students.
TLC is a federally funded PME learning organization, and because the demographics of
the U.S. officer corps (across all services) in the military is homogenous, it was important to
inquire into the impact that the diversity of students’ backgrounds, experiences, and expectations
has on faculty members’ teaching methods. As stated earlier, more than 80% of TLC students are
White males. Of significant note regarding this study, 100% of the interview participants for this
study were White. One of this study’s emergent findings was that several faculty members at
TLC indicated that recently they have been reflecting more on the topic of diversity when
thinking about their students, teaching methods, and teaching materials. Specifically, this is
considering recent events such as the murders of George Floyd and Ahmaud Arbury, as well as
93

institutional DEIB efforts underway throughout the military services. When asked how the
makeup of their students impacts their teaching methods, several participants shared stories
indicating their interest in addressing the lack of diversity in their classes as well as the
importance of considering how factors such as DEIB impacts their future teaching.
Finding 3: TLC Can Support Faculty by Creating a Culture of Reflective Practice
As stated earlier, teaching is just one duty of the faculty at TLC. While they are expected
to continue researching and publishing in their field of expertise and perform other duty service
projects, several participants discussed the limitations of the cultural setting to incorporate
reflective practice on their teaching methods. Six of the participants described that the lack of
time available to reflect is an inhibitor, therefore impeding achieving the performance goal of
this study. Clark and Estes (2008) addressed the inefficiencies of organizations whose employees
lacked the resources necessary to achieve goals. The final dimension of assumed influence
analyzed for this study was the cultural setting of the organization. Teaching, lesson planning,
attending meetings, and other requirements mean there is little to no time in the day for
participants to reflect. Gallimore and Goldenberg (2001) wrote extensively about how the
cultural setting of an organization can facilitate stakeholder success in achieving predetermined
goals. By providing both models of reflective practice (providing conceptual models and
frameworks to the faculty) as well as time to reflect at the start of meetings and during one-on-
one meetings, TLC could support faculty members in achieving the stakeholder goal of
practicing reflection. Providing resources can lead to a sense of valuing the importance of
practicing reflection, supporting the cultural model of reflective practice by all faculty members.
94

Recommendations for Practice to Address KMO Influences
Three recommendations derive from key findings that emerged from this study’s data,
and two suggestions present avenues for further research. The stakeholder goal of the study is
that, by June 2023, 100% of faculty at TLC will reflect on their teaching daily. The assumed
influences of the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis framework identified were used to identify
and validate the KMO influence gaps in performance between the stakeholder goal and daily
activities.
Recommendation 1: Provide Models of Reflective Practice During Faculty Development
Found to support educators building pedagogic skills (Dewey, 2011; Kirpalani, 2017;
Schön, 1987), reflective practice is important for TLC faculty to have access to examples and
frameworks to guide and direct their reflective practice on teaching methods. Eight participants
of this study indicated a lack of knowledge about conceptual models and frameworks useful to
reflecting on teaching methods. A recommendation to redress this gap is to offer models of
reflective practice to be used during discussions at end-of-course meetings attended by all faculty
members. By providing conceptual models and practical guides, faculty at TLC will be able to
implement effective, daily reflective practice. Models and checklists from scholars in reflection
and reflective practice (Brookfield, 2017; Gibbs, 1988; Kolb, 1984) could be provided to all
faculty during summer faculty development for use during the end-of-course meetings. Faculty
at TLC need conceptual knowledge to practice reflection as well as models and job aids during
their regular hot wash (end-of-course) faculty meetings. As the majority of faculty know what
reflective practice is, already have some processes in place to practice reflection, and have the
self-efficacy to reflect on their teaching, providing conceptual models and frameworks will
facilitate faculty members in achieving the goal of practicing reflection on their teaching daily.
95

Recommendation 2: Faculty Share Experiences of Reflecting on Teaching Methods
Seven participants in this study indicated a lack of expected value of reflecting on
teaching methods. Eccles (2009) found that stakeholders who attach value to a stated goal were
more likely to engage in task-oriented activities toward achieving the predetermined outcome.
While most participants shared stories of informal and individual reflection at the end of a
teaching day, most of that reflection was haphazard and multi-dimensional. Some faculty
reflected on the materials they used in class, others reflected on the assignments they presented,
and some reflected on the dynamic of intro-student experiences in their classrooms. Clark and
Estes (2008) wrote that when people focus on the specific personal benefits of accomplishing a
task, the perception of value increases. As such, this study recommends that course directors and
department deans openly discuss specific pedagogical goals with their faculty, identifying
improvements to teaching methods fellow faculty members can make throughout the year and
incorporate discussions of reflective practice. One way to do this is for those more experienced
faculty to use the reflective models indicated in recommendation one of this study to reflect on
their own teaching methods and then share their insights and any changes or updates they made
to their pedagogy and andragogy.
Faculty collaboration through reflective practice may also build a higher level of
efficaciousness felt among the staff as Bandura (1977) found that one can build self-efficacy by
hearing stories that align with a predetermined goal. To progress toward the goal of 100% of
TLC faculty reflecting on their teaching daily, deans and directors can share their own stories of
value derived from practicing reflection. If faculty members hear experienced faculty celebrate
the value of reflecting on teaching methods, they might make the mental effort and active choice
necessary to reflect. Additionally, directors and deans might also derive value from engaging in
96

regular discussions with faculty about more than the readings, videos, or lecture notes and lesson
plans they use to teach. To increase the perceived expectancy value of reflecting on teaching
methods, this study recommends that leaders at TLC model and facilitate discussions of
reflective practice during formal and informal meetings and discussions.
Recommendation 3: Provide Faculty With Time to Reflect
One hundred percent of this study’s participants shared that they are busy, and often do
not have time to reflect in any organized or systemic fashion. In fact, seven participants
described their practice of reflection as simply seeing someone in the hallway and asking, “How
was your day?” TLC can maximize the above recommendations by organizing the cultural
setting of the college with the time and resources necessary to reflect on their teaching. Building
from the first two recommendations, another recommendation is that all faculty schedule a 15-
minute block each school day to reflect on their teaching methods using either the models
provided by Gibbs (1988) or Kolb (1984), or other models that individual faculty members
choose. Scheduling time into the teaching day could aid faculty in reflecting on their teaching
methods. For example, if a faculty member teaches three classes a week, then the cultural setting
needs to be organized so that the faculty member can reflect three times for at least 15 minutes
each. It is incumbent upon deans and directors to openly discuss and clearly expect all faculty to
reflect on their teaching using theoretical models and conceptual frameworks. Course directors
and department deans can model this practice by deliberately scheduling time to appreciate these
acts of reflection on teaching during end-of-course faculty meetings. Research shows that when
educators purposefully reflect together, they can increase social connectedness (Brookfield,
2017; Kirpalani, 2017). Building and strengthening the organization’s cultural setting will not
only support but may even motivate faculty members to work together toward achieving the
performance goal of this study (Clark & Estes, 2008; Rueda, 2011).
97

Integrated Recommendations
Combining knowledge, motivation, and organizational recommendations to positively
influence stakeholders’ performance will ensure that faculty at TLC will achieve the goal of
100% of faculty reflecting on their teaching daily. Rueda (2011) concluded that organizations
need deliberate and clear expectations to achieve stated goals. Likewise, Clark and Estes (2008)
claimed that a clear and compelling vision of the future supports the adoption and
implementation of emerging skills and behaviors. Designing and implementing a comprehensive
plan for an organization to change will provide stakeholders with a systemic model for
incorporating new skills and behaviors. To integrate the three recommendations above, Lewin’s
change model as a framework will support faculty at TLC incorporating reflective practice on
their teaching methods. The three steps of change—unfreeze, change, freeze—can increase
faculty members’ use of reflective practice. The following integration and implementation plan
suggests a multi-month, iterative process to close the gaps identified in this study.
Step 1: Unfreeze
The first stage of Lewin’s change model is to unfreeze current processes that are in place
in an organization by communicating what the change is, and why it is important. TLC faculty
need to know what reflective practice faculty is conceptually, and how to benefit from reflecting
on teaching. In addition, faculty need to feel assured that TLC leadership will support them in
practicing reflection. According to Lewin’s model of change in three steps (Cummings et al.,
2016), at this stage, any doubts that arise from stakeholders should be openly discussed and
addressed. At this point in the change model, it is vital to clearly reiterate the stakeholder goal. In
the case of this project the goal is that 100% of TLC faculty will reflect on their teaching
methods at the end of each teaching day.
98

Using Lewin’s model, the first step of this organizational change begins by
acknowledging both the current way that faculty reflect, as well as providing the reasons for
changing. Faculty at TLC could unfreeze during summertime faculty development by learning
about two models of reflection: Gibbs’s (1988) reflective model (described in Chapter Two), and
Driscoll’s (1994) framework of reflection. Both frameworks would provide faculty with
sequential processes for reflecting on their teaching methods. For example, practitioners have
found that answering questions such as what, so what, and now what regularly can generate
insights (Driscoll & Teh, 2001). Research on reflective practice has shown that when people
engage in self-directed inquiry, their understanding and use of reflection may increase
(Badaracco, 2020; Kirpalani, 2017; Loo, 2002; Schön, 1987). Sharing models of reflective
practice, leaders at TLC would increase the level of conceptual knowledge of reflection that
faculty could apply to their teaching methods.
To unfreeze the current practices of reflection that participants of this study shared, TLC
leadership will provide models of reflection and organize small group discussions on the
concepts of reflective practice during summer faculty development. Additionally, course
directors and academic deans should regularly communicate the stakeholder performance goal.
During these development meetings, faculty will review lesson plans, teaching materials, and
methods of andragogy and pedagogy. To unfreeze the current ways that faculty reflect, the
agenda for meetings could include one or more models of reflection identified in the literature
review of this study. By sharing evidence-based frameworks of reflective practice, faculty at
TLC could close the gap of conceptual knowledge to progress toward the stakeholder goal,
which would be an important first step in integrating change.
99

Step 2: Change
According to Wigfield and Eccles (2000), one is more likely to work toward a goal if
they perceive value in the effort extended. Rueda (2011) identified the importance of supporting
stakeholders in identifying the value of acting toward a specific goal. Creating the setting for
experienced faculty to share their experiences of practicing reflection on their teaching methods
can highlight the importance and value of this practice. Faculty at TLC need the time and support
of the organization if they are going to reflect (Gallimore & Goldenberg, 2001). Incorporating
scheduled time to share teaching methods and reflection into regular staff meetings, end-of-
course hot wash (debrief) meetings, and informal hallway conversations during the teaching day
can help TLC go beyond merely assuming all faculty reflect on their teaching.
The second stage of Lewin’s model is to incorporate change that aligns with the stated
performance goal. The recommended change should support faculty talking about the materials
used to teach lessons and reflecting on their teaching methods. To integrate Lewin’s model into
the findings from this study, experienced faculty members could openly share their teaching
methodologies, how they became more reflective teachers, and how reflection has supported and
enhanced their teaching methods. Additionally, peers could use Gibbs’s (1988) and Kolb’s
(1984) reflective models as conversation starters during informal after-class hallway
conversations to conceptualize and develop their own reflective practice. If faculty would take
this stage one step further and use the reflection models during their supervisor-level
conversations, they might gain greater value from reflecting such as creating innovative ideas to
apply to teaching future lessons or considering DEIB factors relevant to the materials (videos,
readings, case studies, etc.) used for their classes.
100

Step 3: Refreeze
Lewin’s third stage of change is to refreeze the changes made until the next proposed
change initiative. Faculty members at TLC would change their routines of reflection by sharing
their use of reflective practice job aids on their own and with others. Using models to guide their
reflective practice, faculty members could move toward the third stage of change in Lewin’s
model and progress toward implementing previously mentioned recommendations based on the
findings of this study. To maximize the refreeze stage, a personal behavior by each stakeholder
needs to be acknowledged, understood, and practiced. At TLC, this means faculty members need
to practice deliberately reflecting on their teaching methods to freeze the behavior and achieve
the performance goal of this study: 100% of faculty reflecting on their teaching daily. While the
term refreeze may be interpreted as some as the end of the line, the idea that no further change
will be necessary, Lewin’s model of change acknowledges that once organizational change is
achieved, there is the possibility that subsequent changes will need to be made.
Faculty at TLC need to be prepared to mitigate a vortex of feelings as they adopt change.
One way to refreeze the change at TLC is for faculty to organize a reflection showcase at the
beginning of the second term each year, during the month of January, before students return to
class. To integrate the recommendations of this study, all faculty will be invited to share their
implementation strategies as well as any benefits of practicing reflection. The format of this
showcase should be coordinated by each of the departments at TLC, coordinated by either the
department dean or CD, and supported by the highest levels of the organization. A gathering
such as this would allow faculty to convene and celebrate what they have learned by reflecting
on their teaching. Table 12 shows a recommended timeline of five months to implement the
suggested integration plan.
101

Table 12
Timeline to Address Knowledge, Motivation, and Organization Influences
Month Activity Aspect of Lewin’s change model
addressed
September Introduce models and frameworks of
reflective practice during faculty
development.
Unfreeze
October Experienced faculty share their personal
stories of reflective practice and learning
teaching methods.
Unfreeze/change
November Institute (and practice) a 15-minute
“Reflecting on teaching methods” at the
start of each formal department meeting
using models of reflection.
Change
December Include a dedicated conversation about
reflective practice during supervisor end-
of-year meetings.
Change/refreeze
January All faculty are invited to showcase what they
have learned because of teaching and
reflecting on their teaching.
Refreeze

Limitations and Delimitations
Creswell (2014) advised that researchers take necessary measures leading up to and
during a qualitative study to manage limitations and delimitations that are beyond a researcher’s
control. Given the technical challenges of recording an interview using Zoom technology and
then transcribing the conversation accurately, COVID-19’s impact on my ability to conduct in-
person interviews, or the unconscious biases or assumptions I have on the topic of reflective
practice going into the study, there was potential for human error. In addition to my own
limitations, I recognize that I was limited by the pool of interview subjects I was able to meet, as
well as facing the limitations of their experience with the topic of this study. Furthermore, this
102

study was limited in the scope of time available for interviewing candidates and analyzing the
data.
I made every effort to protect participants’ personal information as well as to realistically
convey their experience in relation to the research questions and the topic of this study. This
study only represents the experience of a few faculty members, the interview subjects being
selected based on convenience, access, and willingness to talk about reflective practice. The data
collected and analyzed may or may not be applicable or generalizable to all higher education
faculty, though the findings of this study may point toward further research regarding reflective
practice and higher education faculty reflecting on their teaching.
Recommendations for Future Research
Research shows that reflection-on-action (Schön, 1983) and reflecting on teaching
(Brookfield, 2017; Dewey, 1933; Kirpalani, 2017; Rodgers, 2002) have aided educators in
building their facilitation and leadership skills. While reflective practice is often included in
teacher training programs at primary, elementary, and even secondary levels of education,
further research could explore the problem of practice among higher education faculty reflecting
on their teaching methods. Two areas of future research emerged from this study.
The qualitative data collected from this study focused on the KMO influences that
supported or limited faculty at TLC reflecting on their teaching. As stated in Chapter One, more
than 800,000 faculty members influence millions of students in the classroom every day. Mixed-
methods research could consider whether there is a correlation between faculty reflecting on
their teaching methods and student performance.
The COVID-19 pandemic that began in the winter of 2019-2020 disrupted education
around the world. Depending on the response by administrators, some faculty were required to
103

teach remotely, not only distancing themselves from students, but their colleagues as well.
Another recommendation based on this study is to research the reflective practice of faculty
working in online, hybrid, or hyflex teaching environments. As faculty and students come out of
a pandemic and enter an endemic, there may be research that can highlight reflective practice and
teaching methods.
Additionally, the qualitative data used for this research study indicates that some faculty
members reflect on issues of diversity and multiculturalism in the classroom. While this study
showed that TLC is not as diverse as other public or private universities, faculty claimed that
when they took the time to reflect, they sometimes change their teaching plan, find new teaching
materials, and teach more inclusively. Future research could consider the implications of student
performance if more higher education faculty reflect on their teaching methods and the issues of
DEIB that universities throughout the country currently face.
One final recommendation is to research reflective practices of leaders in environments
and cultures outside of education. For example, leaders of a nonprofit organization could provide
their experience of reflecting on leading and managing either employees or volunteers of
organizations.
Connection to the Rossier Mission
Leaders who reflect on past events stand out in their ability to test assumptions
(Kahneman, 2011), identify patterns (Schön, 1983), and make connections (Loo, 2002).
Research on reflective practice indicates that leaders who incorporate reflection-on-action and
reflection-in-action (Schön, 1987) can develop a capacity to identify interpersonal opportunities
for a diverse group of people working—or, as in the case of this study, teaching—together
(Cropley et al., 2010; Super et al., 2021). The University of Southern California’s (USC) Rossier
104

School of Education aims to prepare leaders to achieve educational equity through practice,
research, and policy. This study connects to the first two prongs of USC’s triadic goal. By
providing future higher education faculty members with practical recommendations to remove or
reduce their barriers to employing reflective practice and offering a course of action for future
research, more faculty at TLC can reflect on their teaching methods and perhaps gain insights
into how they can impact the interpersonal relationships among students at the colleges.
Conclusion
The purpose of this study was to use the Clark and Estes (2008) gap analysis theoretical
framework to identify the knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that hinder or
support the employment of reflective practice on higher education faculty members’ teaching
methods. Eleven faculty members at TLC provided their experience and insight. Findings of this
study identified four gaps that could negatively influence the stakeholder goal of 100% of faculty
members reflecting on their teaching daily. While faculty members think about the past, most
often by thinking or talking about a lesson plan or teaching materials used that day, they can do
more to benefit from organized and regular reflective practice methods. Stopping at the end of
the day to ask reflection questions about pedagogy will benefit both the faculty members and the
students at TLC. Unfortunately, the faculty at TLC are not equipped with models of reflection
they can use to benefit from thinking about their teaching methods.
The purpose of higher education is to prepare adult learners for the future. Faculty at TLC
are preparing military officers for a world of continued vulnerability, uncertainty, complexity,
and ambiguity. Not only do we teach lessons developed in the past, but we are also preparing
leaders who will live into, make decisions, and co-create the future. The news is full of strife:
COVID 19, economic and social disparity within the borders of the United States, potential
105

military conflict between Russia and Ukraine or China and Taiwan, and political instability in
countries around the world. To prepare for the future, we need leaders who are willing to reflect.
Reflection on teaching methods can equip higher education faculty with insight that can be used
in subsequent classes. This reflection on teaching can culminate in critical thought on pedagogy,
consideration of what happened in the classroom, and exploration of one’s expectations,
assumptions, and biases.
It takes time, and faculty need models. By reflecting, and modeling reflection, on
pedagogy and andragogy, faculty could even inspire graduates of TLC to practice reflect
themselves. Encouraging students to reflect is important for at least two reasons. First, as
previously mentioned, the world of the future is going to look different than the past. Therefore,
it is more important than ever to wonder if how we used to do things should be the way we
continue doing them. If by reflecting on how a faculty member taught a lesson causes a change
to teaching technique, this can serve as a model for fellow stakeholders as well as the student
body. Second, the demographics of TLC and higher education are shifting. The classroom of the
future, again, looks different than it did in the past. Every year, classrooms at TLC will have
more women, more people of color, and more international officers attending TLC. Faculty need
to examine the KMO influences on whether and how they think about teaching to gain the
benefit of reflective practice. As presented in this study, faculty at TLC consider reflection as
looking back on past activities. However, to maximize this reflection process more is needed.
Beyond reflecting on teaching materials and lesson plans, faculty need to understand reflective
practice as a concept and believe there is value to the pause.

106

References
Aas, M. (2017). Leaders as learners: Developing new leadership practices. Professional
Development in Education, 43(3), 439–453.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2016.1194878
Anderson, J. (2019). In search of reflection-in-action: An exploratory study of the interactive
reflection of four experienced teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 86, 102879.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102879
Anderson, L. W., & Krathwohl, D. R. (Eds.). (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and
assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. (Complete ed.).
Longman.
Arneson, J. B., & Offerdahl, E. G. (2018). Visual literacy in Bloom: Using Bloom’s taxonomy to
support visual learning skills. CBE—Life Sciences Education, 17(1).
https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.17-08-0178
Ashby, C. (2006). Models for reflective practice. The Journal for Nurses in General Practice,
32(10), 28, 31–32.
Ashley, G. C., & Reiter-Palmon, R. (2012). Self-awareness and the evolution of leaders: The
need for a better measure of self-awareness. Journal of Behavioral and Applied
Management. https://doi.org/10.21818/001c.17902
Badaracco, J. (2020). Step back: How to bring the art of reflection into your busy life. Harvard
Business Review Press.
Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice Hall.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning.
Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117–148. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2802_3
107

Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of
Management, 38(1), 9–44. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206311410606
Beauchamp, C. (2015). Reflection in teacher education: Issues emerging from a review of
current literature. Reflective Practice, 16(1), 123–141.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2014.982525
Benade, L. (2015). Teachers’ critical peflective practice in the context of twenty-first century
learning. Open Review of Educational Research, 2(1), 42–54.
https://doi.org/10.1080/23265507.2014.998159
Boelens, R., Voet, M., & De Wever, B. (2018). The design of blended learning in response to
student diversity in higher education: Instructors’ views and use of differentiated
instruction in blended learning. Computers & Education, 120, 197–212.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2018.02.009
Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection, turning experience into learning. Kogan
Page.
Boyer, E. L. (1997). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Carnegie
Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.
Bradberry, T., & Greaves, J. (2009). Emotional intelligence 2.0: The world’s most popular
emotional intelligence test. TalentSmart.
Brandenburg, R. (2021). Enacting a pedagogy of reflection in initial teacher education using
critical incident identification and examination: A self-study of practice. Reflective
Practice, 22(1), 16–31. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2020.1821626
Branson, C. (2007). Effects of structured self-reflection on the development of authentic
leadership practices among Queensland primary school principals. Educational
108

Management Administration. Leadership, 35(2), 225–246.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143207075390
Brookfield, S. (2009). The concept of critical reflection: Promises and contradictions. European
Journal of Social Work, 12(3), 293–304. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691450902945215
Brookfield, S. (2017). Becoming a critically reflective teacher (2nd ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Brownell, S. E., & Tanner, K. D. (2012). Barriers to faculty pedagogical change: Lack of
training, time, incentives, and…tensions with professional identity? CBE—Life Sciences
Education, 11(4), 339–346. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.12-09-0163
Bruno, A., & Dell’Aversana, G. (2018). Reflective practicum in higher education: The influence
of the learning environment on the quality of learning. Assessment & Evaluation in
Higher Education, 43(3), 345–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1344823
Bussard, M. E. (2017). Postdebriefing activities following simulation. Teaching and Learning in
Nursing, 12(3), 220–222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2017.03.010
Calderhead, J. (1989). Reflective teaching and teacher education. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 5(1), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(89)90018-8
Caldwell, L., & Grobbel, C. C. (2013). The importance of reflective practice in
nursing. International Journal of Caring Sciences, 6(3), 319–326.
Calkins, S., & Harris, M. (2017). Promoting critical reflection: An evaluation of the longer-term
impact of a substantial faculty development program. The Journal of Faculty
Development, 31(2), 29–36.
Campbell, N., Wozniak, H., Philip, R. L., & Damarell, R. A. (2019). Peer‐supported faculty
development and workplace teaching: An integrative review. Medical Education, 53(10),
978–988. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13896
109

Cane, J. E., Ferguson, H. J., & Apperly, I. A. (2017). Using perspective to resolve reference: The
impact of cognitive load and motivation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning,
Memory, and Cognition, 43(4), 591–610. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000345
Canning, N. (2010). Playing with heutagogy: Exploring strategies to empower mature learners in
higher education. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 34(1), 59–71.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03098770903477102
Carleton, E. L., Barling, J., & Trivisonno, M. (2018). Leaders’ trait mindfulness and
transformational leadership: The mediating roles of leaders’ positive affect and leadership
self-efficacy. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science / Revue Canadienne Des
Sciences Du Comportement, 50(3), 185–194. https://doi.org/10.1037/cbs0000103
Castelli, P. A. (2016). Reflective leadership review: A framework for improving organisational
performance. Journal of Management Development, 35(2), 217–236.
https://doi.org/10.1108/JMD-08-2015-0112
Chan, Cecilia. K. Y., & Lee, Katherine. K. W. (2021). Reflection literacy: A multilevel
perspective on the challenges of using reflections in higher education through a
comprehensive literature review. Educational Research Review, 32, 100376.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2020.100376
Chunoo, V., & Osteen, L. (2016). Purpose, mission, and context: The call for educating future
leaders. New Directions for Higher Education, 2016(174), 9–20.
https://doi.org/10.1002/he.20185
Clark, R. E., & Estes, F. (2008). Turning research into results: A guide to selecting the right
performance solutions. Information Age Publishing, Inc.
110

Clegg, S. (2000). Knowing through reflective practice in higher education. Educational Action
Research, 8(3), 451–469. https://doi.org/10.1080/09650790000200128
Collin, S., Karsenti, T., & Komis, V. (2013). Reflective practice in initial teacher training:
Critiques and perspectives. Reflective Practice, 14(1), 104–117.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2012.732935
Collins, J. C., & Porras, J. I. (2004). Built to last: Successful habits of visionary companies.
Harper Business.
Comer, M. (2016). Rethinking reflection-in-action: What did Schön really mean? Nurse
Education Today, 36, 4–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2015.08.021
Cornish, L., & Jenkins, K. A. (2012). Encouraging teacher development through embedding
reflective practice in assessment. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 40(2), 159–
170. https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866X.2012.669825
Cote, R. (2017). A comparison of leadership theories in an organizational environment.
International Journal of Business Administration, 8(5), 28.
https://doi.org/10.5430/ijba.v8n5p28
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design. (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Cropley, B., Hanton, S., Miles, A., & Niven, A. (2010). The value of reflective practice in
professional development: An applied sport psychology review. Sport Science Review,
19(3–4), 179–208. https://doi.org/10.2478/v10237-011-0025-8
Cummings, S., Bridgman, T., & Brown, K. G. (2016). Unfreezing change as three steps:
Rethinking Kurt Lewin’s legacy for change management. Human Relations, 69(1), 33–
60. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726715577707
111

Curtis, E., Martin, R., & Broadley, T. (2019). Reviewing the purpose of professional experience:
A case study in initial teacher education reform. Teaching and Teacher Education, 83,
77–86. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.03.017
Day, C. (1993). Reflection: A necessary but not sufficient condition for professional
development. British Educational Research Journal, 19(1), 83–93.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1500513.
de Jong, N. A., Boon, M., van Gorp, B., Büttner, S. A., Kamans, E., & Wolfensberger, M. V. C.
(2021). Framework for analyzing conceptions of excellence in higher education: A
reflective tool. Higher Education Research & Development, 1–15.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2021.1915964
Dedman, B. (2019). College students are more diverse than ever. Faculty and administrators are
not. AAC&U News.
Demirkol, I. C., & Nalla, M. K. (2018). Predicting job satisfaction and motivation of aviation
security personnel: A test of job characteristics theory. Security Journal; London, 31(4),
901–923. http://dx.doi.org.libproxy2.usc.edu/10.1057/s41284-018-0137-2
Densten, I. L., & Gray, J. H. (2001). Leadership development and reflection: What is the
connection? International Journal of Educational Management, 15(3), 119–124.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09513540110384466
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the
educative process. D.C. Heath and Company Publishers.
Dewey, J. (2011). Democracy and education. Simon & Brown.
Diego-Medrano, E., & Salazar, L. R. (2021). Examining the work-life balance of faculty in
higher education. International Journal of Social Policy and Education, 3(3), 27–36.
112

Dimitrov, N., & Haque, A. (2016). Intercultural teaching competence: A multi-disciplinary
model for instructor reflection. Intercultural Education, 27(5), 437–456.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14675986.2016.1240502
Driscoll, J. (1994). Reflective practice for practise. Senior Nurse, 14(1), 47–50.
Driscoll, J., & Teh, B. (2001). The potential of reflective practice to develop individual
orthopaedic nurse practitioners and their practice. Journal of Orthopaedic Nursing, 5(2),
95–103. https://doi.org/10.1054/joon.2001.0150
Dweck, C. S. (2008). Mindset: The new psychology of success. Ballantine Books.
Edmondson, A. C. (2004). Learning from mistakes is easier said than done: Group and
organizational influences on the detection and correction of human error. The Journal of
Applied Behavioral Science, 40(1), 66–90. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021886304263849
Esterhazy, R., de Lange, T., Bastiansen, S., & Wittek, A. L. (2021). Moving beyond peer review
of teaching: A conceptual framework for collegial faculty development. Review of
Educational Research, 91(2), 237–271. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654321990721
Feigl, H. (1945). Operationism and scientific method. Psychological Review, 52(5), 250–259.
https://doi.org/10.1037/h0056755
Fewster-Thuente, L., & Batteson, T. J. (2018). Kolb’s experiential learning theory as a
theoretical underpinning for interprofessional education. Journal of Allied Health, 47(1).
Fox, R. K., Dodman, S., & Holincheck, N. (2019). Moving beyond reflection in a hall of mirrors:
Developing critical reflective capacity in teachers and teacher educators. Reflective
Practice, 20(3), 367–382. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2019.1617124
113

Gallimore, R., & Goldenberg, C. (2001). Analyzing cultural models and settings to connect
minority achievement and school improvement research. Educational Psychologist,
36(1), 45–56. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15326985EP3601_5
George, B. (2015). Discover your true north. Jossey-Bass.
Germain, J. (2017). Reflections on leadership: Theory, experience, and practice. Quest, 69(2),
169–176. https://doi.org/10.1080/00336297.2017.1302347
Gershenson, S., Holt, S. B., & Papageorge, N. W. (2016). Who believes in me? The effect of
student–teacher demographic match on teacher expectations. Economics of Education
Review, 52, 209–224. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econedurev.2016.03.002
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Further
Education Unit.
Giguere, M. (2012). Self-reflective journaling: A tool for assessment. Journal of Dance
Education, 12(3), 99–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/15290824.2012.701168
Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed). Pearson.
Graetz, F., & Smith, A. C. T. (2010). Managing organizational change: A philosophies of change
approach. Journal of Change Management, 10(2), 135–154.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14697011003795602
Grapin, S. L., & Pereiras, M. I. (2019). Supporting diverse students and faculty in higher
education through multicultural organizational development. Training and Education in
Professional Psychology, 13(4), 307–315. https://doi.org/10.1037/tep0000226
Grech, J. (2021). Critical self-reflection for nurse educators: Now more than ever! Teaching and
Learning in Nursing, 16(1), 89–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2020.09.001
114

Greenberger, S. W. (2020). Creating a guide for reflective practice: Applying Dewey’s reflective
thinking to document faculty scholarly engagement. Reflective Practice, 21(4), 458–472.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2020.1773422
Griffin, M. L. (2003). Using critical incidents to promote and assess reflective thinking in
Preservice Teachers. Reflective Practice, 4(2), 207–220.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940308274
Gun, B. (2011). Quality self-reflection through reflection training. ELT Journal, 65(2), 126–135.
https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccq040
Hall, M. (2016). Leading your culture: Four key areas leaders should folks on. Leader to Leader,
2016(79), 12–17. https://doi.org/10.1002/ltl.20212
Hannah, S. D., & Carpenter-Song, E. (2013). Patrolling your blind spots: Introspection and
public catharsis in a medical school faculty development course to reduce unconscious
bias in medicine. Culture, Medicine, and Psychiatry, 37(2), 314–339.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11013-013-9320-4
Harackiewicz, J. M., Durik, A. M., Barron, K. E., Linnenbrink-Garcia, L., & Tauer, J. M. (2008).
The role of achievement goals in the development of interest: Reciprocal relations
between achievement goals, interest, and performance. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 100(1), 105–122. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.100.1.105
Hatton, N., & Smith, D. (1995). Reflection in teacher education: Towards definition and
implementation. Teaching and Teacher Education, 11(1), 33–49.
https://doi.org/10.1016/0742-051X(94)00012-U
115

Healey, M., & Jenkins, A. (2000). Kolb’s experiential learning theory and its application in
geography in higher education. Journal of Geography, 99(5), 185–195.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00221340008978967
Heath, H. (1998). Reflection and patterns of knowing in nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing,
27(5), 1054–1059. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1998.00593.x
Hébert, C. (2015). Knowing and/or experiencing: A critical examination of the reflective models
of John Dewey and Donald Schön. Reflective Practice, 16(3), 361–371.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2015.1023281
Heinrich, W. F., Louson, E., Blommel, C., & Green, A. R. (2021). Who coaches the coaches?
The development of a coaching model for experiential learning. Innovative Higher
Education, 46(3), 357–375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-020-09537-3
Hesselbein, F. (2011). My life in leadership: The journey and lessons learned along the way.
Jossey-Bass.
Hickson, H. (2011). Critical reflection: Reflecting on learning to be reflective. Reflective
Practice, 12(6), 829–839. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2011.616687
Higgins, D. (2011). Why reflect? Recognising the link between learning and reflection.
Reflective Practice, 12(5), 583–584. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2011.606693
Hiver, P., Whiteside, Z., Sánchez Solarte, A. C., & Kim, C. J. (2021). Language teacher
metacognition: Beyond the mirror. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching,
15(1), 52–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2019.1675666
Holmes, K. (2017). Mindfulness as a practice of professional life. The Journal of Educational
Thought (JET) / Revue de La Pensée Éducative, 50(1), 21–42. JSTOR.
https://doi.org/10.2307/26372388
116

Hordvik, M., MacPhail, A., & Ronglan, L. T. (2020). Developing a pedagogy of teacher
education using self-study: A rhizomatic examination of negotiating learning and
practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 88, 102969.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2019.102969
Husebø, S. E., O’Regan, S., & Nestel, D. (2015). Reflective practice and its role in simulation.
Clinical Simulation in Nursing, 11(8), 368–375.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecns.2015.04.005
Hussar, B., Zhang, J., Hein, S., Wang, K., Roberts, A., Cui, J., Smith, M., Bullock Mann, F.,
Barmer, A., and Dilig, R. (2020). The condition of education 2020 (NCES 2020-144).
U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics. https://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo. asp?pubid=2020144
Jeppesen, A., & Joyce, B. (2018). Challenges and successes: Faculty reflections on a college
teaching development program. Collected Essays on Learning and Teaching, 11.
https://doi.org/10.22329/celt.v11i0.4972
Jewett, P., & MacPhee, D. (2012). Adding collaborative peer coaching to our teaching identities.
The Reading Teacher, 66(2), 105–110. https://doi.org/10.1002/TRTR.01089
Jones, N. P., Papadakis, A. A., Orr, C. A., & Strauman, T. J. (2013). Cognitive processes in
response to goal failure: A study of ruminative thought and its affective consequences.
Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 32(5), 482–503.
https://doi.org/10.1521/jscp.2013.32.5.482
Juklová, K. (2015). Reflection in prospective teacher training. Procedia - Social and Behavioral
Sciences, 171, 891–896. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.01.206
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
117

Kaplan, L. S., & Owings, W. A. (2013). The unaddressed costs of changing student
demographics. Journal of Education Finance, 39(1), 15–46.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/23597602
Kayapinar, U. (2016). A study on reflection in in-service teacher development: Introducing
reflective practitioner development model. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice,
16(5), 1671–1691. https://doi.org/10.12738/estp.2016.5.0077
Keevers, L., & Treleaven, L. (2011). Organizing practices of reflection: A practice-based study.
Management Learning, 42(5), 505–520. https://doi.org/10.1177/1350507610391592
Kennelly, R., & McCormack, C. (2015). Creating more ‘elbow room’ for collaborative reflective
practice in the competitive, performative culture of today’s university. Higher Education
Research & Development, 34(5), 942–956.
https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2014.911259
Khan, N. (2017). Adaptive or transactional leadership in current higher education: A brief
comparison. The International Review of Research in Open and Distributed Learning,
18(3). https://doi.org/10.19173/irrodl.v18i3.3294
Kirpalani, N. (2017). Developing self-reflective practices to improve teaching effectiveness.
Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 17(8), 73–80.
Klar, H. W., Huggins, K. S., & Andreoli, P. M. (2021). Coaching, professional community, and
continuous improvement: Rural school leader and coach development in a research-
practice partnership. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1–28.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2020.1869311
118

Knapp, S., Gottlieb, M. C., & Handelsman, M. M. (2017). Enhancing professionalism through
self-reflection. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 48(3), 167–174.
https://doi.org/10.1037/pro0000135
Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and
development. Prentice-Hall.
Korthagen, F. (2016). Inconvenient truths about teacher learning: Towards professional
development 3.0. Teachers and Teaching, 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1211523
Kouzes, J. M., & Posner, B. Z. (2017). The leadership challenge: How to make extraordinary
things happen in organizations (6th ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Krathwohl, D. R. (2002). A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy: An overview. Theory Into Practice,
41(4), 212–218. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4104_2
Krathwohl, D. R., & Anderson, L. W. (2010). Merlin C. Wittrock and the revision of Bloom’s
taxonomy. Educational Psychologist, 45(1), 64–65.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520903433562
Kreibich, A., Hennecke, M., & Brandstätter, V. (2020). The effect of self–awareness on the
identification of goal–related obstacles. European Journal of Personality, 34(2), 215–
233. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2234
Krutka, D. G., Bergman, D. J., Flores, R., Mason, K., & Jack, A. R. (2014). Microblogging about
teaching: Nurturing participatory cultures through collaborative online reflection with
pre-service teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 40, 83–93.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.02.002
119

Le Cornu, R., & Ewing, R. (2008). Reconceptualising professional experiences in pre-service
teacher education…reconstructing the past to embrace the future. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 24(7), 1799–1812. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2008.02.008
Legare, T. L., & Armstrong, D. K. (2017). Critical reflective teaching practice for novice nurse
educators. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 12(4), 312–315.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.teln.2017.05.004
Lencioni, P. (2002). The five dysfunctions of a team: A leadership fable. Jossey-Bass.
Liu, K. (2015). Critical reflection as a framework for transformative learning in teacher
education. Educational Review, 67(2), 135–157.
https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2013.839546
Loo, R. (2002). Journaling: A learning tool for project management training and team-building.
Project Management Journal, 33(4), 61–66.
https://doi.org/10.1177/875697280203300407
Lubbe, W., & Botha, C. S. (2020). The dimensions of reflective practice: A teacher educator’s
and nurse educator’s perspective. Reflective Practice, 21(3), 287–300.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2020.1738369
Machida, M., & Schaubroeck, J. (2011). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in leader development.
Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 18(4), 459–468.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1548051811404419
Maksimovic, J., & Osmanovic, J. (2018). Reflective practice as a changing factor of teaching
quality. Research in Pedagogy, 8(2), 172–189. https://doi.org/10.17810/2015.82
120

Martin, H. J. (2010). Workplace climate and peer support as determinants of training transfer.
Human Resource Development Quarterly, 21(1), 87–104.
https://doi.org/10.1002/hrdq.20038
Masui, C., & Corte, E. (2005). Learning to reflect and to attribute constructively as basic
components of self-regulated learning. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(3),
351–372. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709905X25030
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3rd ed.). SAGE
Publications.
Mayer, R. E. (2011). Applying the science of learning. Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
McCabe, M., Walsh, S., Wideman, R., & Winter, E. (2009). The ‘R’ word in teacher education:
Understanding the teaching and learning of critical reflective practice under construction.
IEJLL: International Electronic Journal for Leadership in Learning 13(7).
McCarthy, J. (2011). Reflective writing, higher education and professional practice. Journal for
Education in the Built Environment, 6(1), 29–43.
https://doi.org/10.11120/jebe.2011.06010029
McGarr, O., & Emstad, A. B. (2020). Comparing discourses on reflective practice in teacher
education policy in Ireland and Norway: Critical reflection or performance management?
European Journal of Teacher Education, 1–19.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1832984
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and
implementation (4th ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Retrieved May 29, 2021, from https://www.merriam-
webster.com/dictionary/reflect
121

Mezirow, J. (1998). On critical reflection. Adult Education Quarterly, 48(3), 185–198.
https://doi.org/10.1177/074171369804800305
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2020). Qualitative data analysis: A methods
sourcebook. (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.
Monarrez, T., & Washington, K. (2020). Racial and ethnic representation in postsecondary
education. Urban Institute. https://files-eric-ed-
gov.libproxy1.usc.edu/fulltext/ED606027.pdf
Naicker, K., & Van Rensburg, G. H. (2018). Facilitation of reflective learning in nursing:
Reflective teaching practices of educators. Africa Journal of Nursing and Midwifery,
20(2). https://doi.org/10.25159/2520-5293/3386
Nicol, D. J., & Macfarlane‐Dick, D. (2006). Formative assessment and self‐regulated learning: A
model and seven principles of good feedback practice. Studies in Higher Education,
31(2), 199–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070600572090
Noormohammadi, S. (2014). Teacher reflection and its relation to teacher efficacy and
autonomy. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1380–1389.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.556
Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Noteborn, G., Bohle Carbonell, K., Dailey-Hebert, A., & Gijselaers, W. (2012). The role of
emotions and task significance in virtual education. The Internet and Higher Education,
15(3), 176–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.03.002
Olteanu, C. (2017). Reflection-for-action and the choice or design of examples in the teaching of
mathematics. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 29(3), 349–367.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0211-9
122

Pajares, F. (2001). Toward a positive psychology of academic motivation. The Journal of
Educational Research, 95(1), 27–35. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220670109598780
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A review of the
literature. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 19(2), 139–158.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10573560308222
Park, J. J., & Millora, M. L. (2012). The relevance of reflection: An empirical examination of the
role of reflection in ethic of caring, leadership, and psychological well-being. Journal of
College Student Development, 53(2), 221–242. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2012.0029
Parsons, M., & Stephenson, M. (2005). Developing reflective practice in student teachers:
Collaboration and critical partnerships. Teachers and Teaching, 11(1), 95–116.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1354060042000337110
Paterson, C., & Chapman, J. (2013). Enhancing skills of critical reflection to evidence learning in
professional practice. Physical Therapy in Sport, 14(3), 133–138.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ptsp.2013.03.004
Patton, K., & Parker, M. (2017). Teacher education communities of practice: More than a culture
of collaboration. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 351–360.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2017.06.013
Pedrosa-de-Jesus, H., Guerra, C., & Watts, M. (2017). University teachers’ self-reflection on
their academic growth. Professional Development in Education, 43(3), 454–473.
https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2016.1194877
Peercy, M. M., & Troyan, F. J. (2017). Making transparent the challenges of developing a
practice-based pedagogy of teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 61, 26–
36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2016.10.005
123

Petriglieri, G., Wood, J. D., & Petriglieri, J. L. (2011). Up close and personal: Building
foundations for leaders’ development through the personalization of management
learning. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 10(3), 430–450.
https://doi.org/10.5465/amle.2010.0032
Phuong, T. T., Cole, S. C., & Zarestky, J. (2018). A systematic literature review of faculty
development for teacher educators. Higher Education Research & Development, 37(2),
373–389. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1351423
Potter, C. (2015). Leadership development: An applied comparison of Gibbs’ Reflective Cycle
and Scharmer’s Theory U. Industrial and Commercial Training, 47(6), 336–342.
https://doi.org/10.1108/ICT-03-2015-0024
Reissner, S. C. (2010). Change, meaning and identity at the workplace. Journal of
Organizational Change Management, 23(3), 287–299.
https://doi.org/10.1108/09534811011049617
Riley‐Douchet, C., & Wilson, S. (1997). A three‐step method of self‐reflection using reflective
journal writing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 25(5), 964–968.
https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.1997025964.x
Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking.
Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842–866. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9620.00181
Rueda, R. (2011). The 3 dimensions of improving student performance: Finding the right
solutions to the right problems. Teachers College Press.
Runhaar, P., Sanders, K., & Yang, H. (2010). Stimulating teachers’ reflection and feedback
asking: An interplay of self-efficacy, learning goal orientation, and transformational
124

leadership. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26(5), 1154–1161.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2010.02.011
Sablan, J. R. (2014). The challenge of summer bridge programs. American Behavioral Scientist,
58(8), 1035–1050. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764213515234
Scanlan, M. (2021). Does engaging in action research support trainee teachers in forming and
reflecting on values? Education 3-13, 49(2), 241–254.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2020.1722198
Schedlitzki, D. (2019). Developing apprentice leaders through critical reflection. Higher
Education, Skills and Work-Based Learning, 9(2), 237–247.
https://doi.org/10.1108/HESWBL-09-2018-0095
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass.
Schneider, B., Brief, A. P., & Guzzo, R. A. (1996). Creating a climate and culture for sustainable
organizational change. Organizational Dynamics, 24(4), 7–19.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0090-2616(96)90010-8
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Schön, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching
and learning in the professions. Jossey-Bass.
Slade, M. L., Burnham, T., Catalana, S. M., & Waters, T. (2019). The impact of reflective
practice on teacher candidates’ learning. International Journal for the Scholarship of
Teaching and Learning, 13(2). https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2019.130215
Steinert, Y., O’Sullivan, P. S., & Irby, D. M. (2019). Strengthening teachers’ professional
identities through faculty development. Academic Medicine, 94(7), 963–968.
https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002695
125

Stephens, M., & Santangelo, J. (2021). A continuum to promote college instructor metacognition
about teaching. College Teaching, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567555.2021.1879723
Sucher, B., Nelson, M., & Brown, D. (2013). An elective course in leader development.
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(10), 224.
https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe7710224
Super, L., Hofmann, A., Leung, C., Ho, M., Harrower, E., Adreak, N., & Rezaie Manesh, Z.
(2021). Fostering equity, diversity, and inclusion in large, first‐year classes: Using
reflective practice questions to promote universal design for learning in ecology and
evolution lessons. Ecology and Evolution, 11(8), 3464–3472.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.6960
Sutton, A., Williams, H. M., & Allinson, C. W. (2015). A longitudinal, mixed method evaluation
of self-awareness training in the workplace. European Journal of Training and
Development, 39(7), 610–627. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJTD-04-2015-0031
Tan, S. Y. (2021). Reflective learning? Understanding the student perspective in higher
education. Educational Research, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131881.2021.1917303
Thompson, M. (2010). Where reflection and motivation meet. Professional Development in
Education, 36(3), 393–397. https://doi.org/10.1080/19415257.2010.487323
Titus, P. A., & Gremler, D. D. (2010). Guiding reflective practice: An auditing framework to
assess teaching philosophy and style. Journal of Marketing Education, 32(2), 182–196.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0273475309360161
Tomlinson, S. (1997). Edward Lee Thorndike and John Dewey on the science of education.
Oxford Review of Education, 23(3), 365–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305498970230307
126

Trapnell, P. D., & Campbell, J. D. (1999). Private self-consciousness and the five-factor model
of personality: Distinguishing rumination from reflection. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 76(2), 284–384. https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.76.2.284
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard University Press.
Wain, A. (2017). Learning through reflection. British Journal of Midwifery, 25(10), 662–666.
https://doi.org/10.12968/bjom.2017.25.10.662
Walkington, J. (2005). Becoming a teacher: Encouraging development of teacher identity
through reflective practice. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 33(1), 53–64.
https://doi.org/10.1080/1359866052000341124
Wang, M.-T. (2013). School context, achievement motivation, and academic engagement: A
longitudinal study of school engagement using a multidimensional perspective. Learning
and Instruction, 28, 12-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2013.04.002
Wang, Y., Yang, Y., Wang, Y., Su, D., Li, S., Zhang, T., & Li, H. (2019). The mediating role of
inclusive leadership: Work engagement and innovative behaviour among Chinese head
nurses. Journal of Nursing Management, 27(4), 688–696.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jonm.12754
Watts, L. (2019). Reflective practice, reflexivity, and critical reflection in social work education
in Australia. Australian Social Work, 72(1), 8–20.
https://doi.org/10.1080/0312407X.2018.1521856
Weikel, A. (2019). Structured reflective practice and teacher inquiry. Journal of Jewish
Education, 85(2), 116–135. https://doi.org/10.1080/15244113.2019.1598224
127

Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy–value theory of achievement motivation.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 68–81.
https://doi.org/10.1006/ceps.1999.1015
Wlodarsky, R. L., & Walters, H. D. (2006). The reflective practitioner in higher education: The
nature and characteristics of reflective practice among teacher education faculty. National
Forum of Teacher Education Journal, 16(3), 1–16.
Wu, B., Hu, Y., & Wang, M. (2019). Scaffolding design thinking in online STEM preservice
teacher training. British Journal of Educational Technology, 50(5), 2271–2287.
https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12873
Wurdinger, S., & Allison, P. (2017). Faculty perceptions and use of experiential learning in
higher education. Journal of E-Learning and Knowledge Society, Vol 13 No 1, Research.
https://doi.org/10.20368/1971-8829/1309
Ziker, J. P., Wintermote, A., Nolin, D., Demps, K., Genuchi, M., & Meinhardt, K. (2014). Time
distribution of faculty workload at Boise State University. College of Social Sciences and
Public Affairs Presentations, 22, 3.

128

Appendix A: Invite for Interview Participation (Emailed Directly to Faculty at TLC)
Dear (name),
As I pursue my doctoral degree through the University of Southern California, Rossier
School of Education, I am studying the use of reflective practice by faculty in higher education. I
am currently looking for faculty members here at TLC (a pseudonym) to partake in my study.
Your participation is 100% voluntary, your identity will remain completely anonymous, and the
interview (which can take place via Zoom or telephone) would last no more than one hour.
I am writing to ask if (1) you would be willing to talk with me during an interview, and
(2) if you’d recommend one person here at TLC I could ask to interview. My email address is
JWomack@usc.edu and my mobile number is 805-798-1362. I will follow this email with a
phone call to personally ask you for an interview. If you know someone who might be interested
in talking about reflective practice, please also let me know then. I would be grateful beyond
words for the opportunity to hear you share your experience of teaching here and how you see
reflection used by yourself and your peers. I intend to use this study to help future faculty at TLC
achieve the stakeholder goal of faculty members reflecting on their teaching daily.

Thank you,
V/r,
Jason ‘JW’ Womack
Instructor, Leadership Studies, TLC
129

Appendix B: Interview Protocol
Prior to the scheduled interview, the interviewee will be asked for permission to audio
and video record the conversation. Each volunteer will receive a transcription of the interview as
soon as that transcription is written and checked for accuracy between the written word and the
recorded conversation. If the participant declines being recorded, they will be invited to not
participate in the study.

Thank you for your willingness to talk with me about this topic of reflection and reflective
practice.
Your insights are a crucial aspect to this qualitative study.
As a reminder, please know you do not have to participate in the interview, you do not have to
answer every question I ask, and we can end the interview the moment you are uncomfortable
talking with me.
Additionally, I will record our conversation as well as take notes here in my journal. Your name
and position, as well as the name of this institution, will remain completely anonymous.
However, as I will take demographics of those I interview for this study, please answer the
following questions:
What is your position and title?
How long have you been a faculty member in higher education?
Thank you, now we will move on to the interview questions. This conversation will be recorded
and will take approximately 60 minutes. Is it ok with you if I also write notes down while you’re
talking?
This interview is about reflective practice and teaching in higher education.
130

The first question is…

1. How would you define the term reflective practice?
2. As a faculty member, if you have applied reflective practice to your teaching would
you tell me about that?
3. Would you talk about the concept of reflective practice and your own teaching
experience?
4. If you reflect on teaching, what is the process you use to reflect?
5. After teaching a lesson, what do you reflect on as it relates to your teaching
experience?
6. How do you feel about your awareness of your own abilities to reflect on your
teaching?
7. Do you think you have the skills needed to reflect on your experience teaching?
(PROBING QUESTION) If yes: How do you do that? If no: Why not?
8. What influences your belief in your ability to reflect on your teaching?
9. Do you see value in reflective practice? (PROBING QUESTION) If yes: Will you tell
me about a time you saw value from reflective practice on your teaching? If no: Why
do you not see value in reflective practice?
10. Can you describe if you feel the organization values reflective practice? (PROBING
QUESTION) If yes: Why? If no: Why not?
11. What have you heard other faculty members at TLC do to reflect on their teaching?
12. How would you describe the diversity of students you have in your classes?
13. How might the diversity of students in your classes influence your reflective practice?
131

14. What training or development have you received at TLC in the use of reflective
practice on your teaching?
15. What expectation is there for faculty members to reflect on their teaching?
(PROBING QUESTION) Do you feel this expectation from your peers or your
supervisors?
16. Is there a question about reflective practice that I could have asked? (PROBING
QUESTION) If yes, would you talk about that with me?

132

Conclusion to the Interview:

Post Interview Comments and/or Observations:

______, thank you for taking the time to meet with me today to discuss my strong interest in the
practice of reflection by faculty here at the college. As a faculty member here for just two and a
half years, I remain fascinated by this topic of reflective practice and teaching experience. Our
conversation today further strengthened my interest in finding out how higher education faculty
members reflect on their teaching.

Thank you again for our conversation and I look forward to sharing the culminating results with
you from this study when completed.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract While reflective practice is a tool used by teachers in K–12 education, nursing education, and corporate training, faculty in higher education lack consistency of incorporating reflective practice on their pedagogy and andragogy. The purpose of this study was to use a gap analysis to evaluate knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences that negatively impact or positively support faculty members’ use of reflective practice on their teaching. Semi-structured, qualitative interviews were conducted with 11 full-time faculty members of a university in the Southeast United States. Two research questions guided the conceptual framework of this study: (a) What are faculty members’ knowledge and motivation influences related to reflective practice? and (b) How does the culture of the organization influence faculty members’ reflective practice? Generalizable themes were identified through analysis of the interviews. The results indicate gaps in knowledge, motivation, and organization influences that impede faculty members’ use of reflective practice on their teaching methods. Recommendations offered in Chapter Five are intended to influence stakeholders incorporating reflective practice. Findings suggest the need to incorporate training and job aids as well as encourage a culture of reflection to ensure that all faculty reflect on their teaching.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Gender beyond the binary: transgender student success and the role of faculty

PDF

Cultivating culturally competent educators

PDF

Preparing university faculty for distance education: an evaluation study

PDF

Social work faculty practices in writing instruction: an exploratory study

PDF

The knowledge, motivation, and organization influences affecting the frequency of empathetic teaching practice used in the classroom: an evaluation study

PDF

Factors influencing the success of Black male faculty at a Predominantly White Institution

PDF

Development of employee well-being initiatives to improve engagement and performance: an innovative study

PDF

Sustaining faith-based organizations through leadership pipelines and programs: an evaluation study

PDF

Inclusion of adjunct faculty in the community college culture

PDF

Cultural diversity of dance in higher education: the hip hop remix

PDF

An analysis of influences to faculty retention at a Philippine college

PDF

The moderating role of knowledge, motivation, and organizational influences on employee turnover: A gap analysis

PDF

Underrepresentation of African American faculty in higher education: an improvement model dissertation

PDF

Underutilization of employer-funded higher education: a gap analysis

PDF

Managing successful organizational change for faculty in higher education: an innovation study

PDF

A methodology for transforming the student experience in higher education: a promising practice study

PDF

A study of manager reflective practice

PDF

Analyzing the implementation of a learning management system into a post-merger & acquisition organization and its effects on sales performance (improvement model)

PDF

Enhancing transfer of harassment prevention training into practice

PDF

European higher education fundraising: a Spanish field study

Asset Metadata

Creator Womack, Jason Wayne (author)

Core Title Higher education faculty and reflective practice

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Organizational Change and Leadership (On Line)

Publication Date 03/21/2022

Defense Date 02/25/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag andragogy,higher education faculty,OAI-PMH Harvest,pedagogy,reflection,reflective practice

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Datta, Monique (committee chair), Canny, Eric (committee member), Ott, Maria (committee member)

Creator Email jason.womack@usc.edu,jason@womackcompany.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC110816576

Unique identifier UC110816576

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Womack, Jason Wayne

Type texts

Source 20220323-usctheses-batch-917 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu