RP or ‘RIP’: A critical perspective on reflective practice
Open accessAbstract
Abstract This paper provides a critical review of reflective practice (RP), drawing attention to particular problems with its representation, as well as proposing a more evidence-based and data-led approach to RP. Our central argument is that RP in the fields of applied linguistics, TESOL and education has achieved a status of orthodoxy without a corresponding data-led description of its value, processes and outcomes. Our concern is that RP is described in ways that are elusive, general, and vague and which may not be particularly helpful for practitioners. This is largely due to the lack of concrete, data-led and linguistic detail of RP in practice and to its institutional nature, lack of specificity, and reliance on written forms. It is also the case that, despite a small number of exceptions (e.g. Korthagen and Wubbels 1995; Walsh 2011), reflective practice is not operationalized in systematic ways. This paper argues that applied linguistics needs to champion a description of RP's processes and impact by drawing on data-led accounts of reflective practice across a range of contexts. Too many RP accounts rely on general summaries and so are neither critical, transparent, nor usable by other practitioners. A key aspect of developing a more critical approach is the need to move beyond rosy summaries of the outcomes of RP towards accounts of how RP gets done. Where possible we need to share examples of ‘reflection in action’ so that its nature and value can be better understood. We propose here that RP needs to be rebalanced, away from a reliance on written forms and taking more account of spoken, collaborative forms of reflection; in sum, we argue for a more dialogic, data-led and collaborative approach to reflective practice.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The presence of the novice instructor opened the space of reflexivity to be collaborative and dialogical, not only the enterprise of the veteran instructor.
“In the context of this research, the presence of the novice instructor opened the space of reflexivity to be not only the enterprise of the veteran instructor, but rather a collaborative and dialogical space to exchange perspectives, examine data together, and collaboratively build shared visions and planning next steps (Mann & Walsh, 2013).”
From Teaching cross-cultural and comparative perspectives of teacher development online: A reflective practitioner inquiry. (2023) · cites this paper as Mann & Walsh, 2013
Cites
Effective Reflective Practice: In Search of Meaning in Learning about Teaching
Loughran, J. J. (2002) · Journal of Teacher Education · doi:10.1177/0022487102053001004 · Cited by 1,231 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Toukan, E., & Niyozov, S. (2023) · Comparative and International Education · doi:10.5206/cie-eci.v52i1.11111
- Authors
- Mann, S., & Walsh, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Warwick (GB)
- Newcastle University (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Mann, Steve
- Venue
- Applied Linguistics Review
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2013-10-25
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 291-315
- ISSN
- 1868-6303 (ISSN-L)
- 1868-6311
- OpenAlex
- W2086534172
- Cited by
- 160
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 8 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 32.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- doi.org
- Locations
- Applied Linguistics Review (publishedVersion)
- Newcastle University ePrints (Newcastle Univesity)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Education › Reflective Practices in Education
- Social Sciences › Education › Teacher Education and Leadership Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Keywords
- reflective practice, reflection-in-action, collaborative reflection, dialogic reflection, reflective writing, applied linguistics, TESOL, teacher professional development
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review