Content uploaded by Siru Myllykoski-Laine
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Siru Myllykoski-Laine on Oct 04, 2024
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=crep20
Reflective Practice
International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives
ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: www.tandfonline.com/journals/crep20
Using self-reflection to support higher education
teaching
Siru Myllykoski-Laine, Anna Parpala, Telle Hailikari & Liisa Postareff
To cite this article: Siru Myllykoski-Laine, Anna Parpala, Telle Hailikari & Liisa Postareff (2024)
Using self-reflection to support higher education teaching, Reflective Practice, 25:5, 589-604,
DOI: 10.1080/14623943.2024.2376784
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2024.2376784
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa
UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis
Group.
View supplementary material
Published online: 09 Jul 2024.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 723
View related articles
View Crossmark data
Using self-reection to support higher education teaching
Siru Myllykoski-Laine
a
, Anna Parpala
b
, Telle Hailikari
c
and Liisa Postare
c
a
Department of Teacher Education, University of Turku, Turku, Finland;
b
Department of Education, University
of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland;
c
HAMK Edu Research Unit, Häme University of Applied Sciences, Hämeenlinna,
Finland
ABSTRACT
Seeking ways to support the work of higher education teachers is
important. One of the tools that can be used to support teachers’
work is the promotion of reection. Thus, the current study aimed
to explore higher education teachers support opportunities pro-
vided by self-reection. In the study, Finnish higher education
teacher educators (N = 20) reected their teaching by using
a research-based self-reection tool HowUTeach, which consists of
items measuring teaching processes and well-being. The teachers
responded to the items and then received feedback based on their
responses. The teachers then participated in group interviews,
which form the data for the present study. Thematic analysis of
the interviews focused on teachers’ experiences of the self-
reection and aimed to identify support opportunities the self-
reection and feedback may oer for teachers. Based on the nd-
ings, the teachers (1) experienced an enhancement and enrichment
of self-reection, (2) were expecting a more situation-specic
approach to self-reection, and (3) noted support opportunities
through the deepening of reection during collegial interaction.
The study highlights that in order to support higher education
teachers by promoting self-reection, it is also crucial to provide
teachers with opportunities for dialogical reection.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 8 December 2023
Accepted 2 July 2024
KEYWORDS
Self-reflection; reflective
practice; higher education;
approaches to teaching;
well-being
Introduction
It has long been known that reective thinking is important for teachers’ learning (e.g.
Rodgers, 2002). Reection refers to an inspection of one’s thoughts, ideas, and beliefs,
through which something can be revealed about them (Swain, 1998). For professional
development to occur, it is important to promote systematic reection and understand
what it consists of (Nel, 2021; Rodgers, 2002; Ulusoy, 2016). Husu et al. (2008) argue that
concrete methods are needed for reection to promote teacher development and tea-
chers’ awareness of important aspects inuencing their work. It has been suggested that
self-evaluation tools can be utilised to support teachers’ reection on teaching, especially
if teachers receive constructive and useful feedback through the self-evaluation
(Biencinto et al., 2021). Previous research in the higher education (HE) context has
CONTACT Siru Myllykoski-Laine sipamy@utu.fi
Supplemental data for this article can be accessed online at https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2024.2376784
REFLECTIVE PRACTICE
2024, VOL. 25, NO. 5, 589–604
https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2024.2376784
© 2024 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/
licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited. The terms on which this article has been published allow the posting of the Accepted Manuscript in a repository by the author(s) or
with their consent.
shown that teachers’ awareness of their teaching processes is important for their peda-
gogical development (Ilie et al., 2024; Postare & Lindblom-Ylänne, 2008).
The present study utilises a research-based self-reection tool HowUTeach, designed
for HE teachers (also referred to as lecturers in other contexts), to promote teaching-
related reection. Specically, the aim of the study is to examine teachers’ experiences of
the self-reection aiming to support their teaching processes and teaching-related well-
being, which have been shown to be positively related to each other (Postare et al.,
2023). The research question is as follows: How do the teachers experience the use of the
research-based self-reection tool as a support for their teaching and well-being?
Meaning of reection in teaching and pedagogical development
Previous research emphasises the role of reection in developing teachers’ knowledge
and practices. Reection is considered an important part of teacher development because
when thinking carefully about their teaching and experiences, teachers can identify
dierent aspects of the teaching situation and gain greater awareness of their choices
(Husu et al., 2008). Based on Dewey’s ideas, Rodgers (2002) suggests that reection is
a systematic process that provides a deeper understanding of dierent experiences and
their relationships. Schön (1987) also built on Dewey’s ideas and drew a distinction
between ‘reection-on-action’ and ‘reection-in-action’. According to Schön (1987),
reection-on-action refers to thinking about a problem or issue before and/or after
teaching, whereas reection-in-action refers to thinking that occurs during the teaching
process itself and is much more complicated. Previous research on primary and secondary
education teachers showed that the use of self-evaluation and feedback was useful, not
only for increasing teachers’ pedagogical knowledge but also promoting changes in their
teaching practices (Biencinto et al., 2021). Research on the pedagogical reection of
general education teachers showed that reection is seen as a moral and habitual activity
closely linked to practical situations, which should be promoted systematically
(Birmingham, 2023).
The denition by Rodgers (2002) highlights the role of interaction with others in
reection, preferably with more experienced facilitators in a safe environment (see
Kirkman & Brownhill, 2020). Similarly, Husu et al. (2008) suggest that in order for the
reection to be eective, external support and dialogue are needed. Social aspects of
reection, such as peer support and feedback, have been shown to be important for
university teachers’ learning and development (e.g. Pekkarinen & Hirsto, 2017), and it is
important that opportunities for collegial support are created in university communities
(Myllykoski-Laine et al., 2022). An atmosphere of support and collegiality has been found
to support the development of reective practice (Kelley et al., 2022; Kurtts & Levin, 2000).
Teaching processes and teaching-related well-being
In the HE context, research has focused on teachers’ approaches to teaching, which refer
to the types of teaching processes teachers adopt (Ilie et al., 2024; Mladenovici & Ilie, 2023;
Postare & Lindblom-Ylänne, 2008; Trigwell & Prosser, 2004) and thus mirror their peda-
gogical awareness. In a learning-focused approach to teaching, teachers invest in tea-
cher – student and student – student interactions to activate students’ own thinking,
590 S. MYLLYKOSKI-LAINE ET AL.
which is often associated with teachers’ reection on their own teaching (Postare &
Lindblom-Ylänne, 2008; Postare et al., 2023). In the content-focused teaching the tea-
chers may not be able to reect their teaching profoundly, and thus, lack pedagogical
awareness (Postare & Lindblom-Ylänne, 2008). Recent studies have shown that
approaches to teaching consist of dierent dimensions: level of interaction, information
transmission, reection, and organisation in teachers’ own teaching (Parpala & Postare,
2021; Postare & Lindblom-Ylänne, 2008; Postare et al., 2023). Especially an inability to
reect student learning and own teaching have shown to be related to teachers’ weaker
beliefs in their competence as teachers (Postare et al., 2023).
Research on HE teachers’ well-being have mainly focused on stress, burnout, and
emotions (e.g. Mula-Falcón et al., 2022; Salimzadeh et al., 2017) and also more positive
approaches would be benecial. In the present study, well-being is approached through
two positive dimensions, namely self-compassion and self-ecacy, and one negative
dimension, namely self-criticism. Although well-being is a multidimensional concept, in
the present study we refer to teacher well-being through these three dimensions. Self-
ecacy refers to an individual’s belief in their own competence to perform in a necessary
way to reach specic goals or complete tasks successfully (Bandura, 1997). When applied
to the teaching context, teachers’ self-ecacy refers to ‘an individual teacher’s beliefs in
their own ability to plan, organise, and carry out activities that are required to attain given
educational goals’ (Skaalvik & Skaalvik, 2010). Teacher self-ecacy has been shown to be
related to teachers’ well-being (Aloe et al., 2014). Furthermore, teachers with high self-
ecacy also apply more student-focused approaches to teaching (Zee & Koomen, 2016).
There is also some evidence indicating that self-reection predicts self-ecacy (Yin et al.,
2023).
Self-compassion refers to an orientation to care for oneself and being understanding
towards oneself instead of being overly self-critical (Ne, 2003), and it has been shown to
contribute positively to well-being (Bluth & Ne, 2018). Interestingly, self-reection has
been shown to predict self-compassion but through integrated self-knowledge, which
requires understanding of how to reach goals and consideration of past experiences
(Viskovich & De George-Walker, 2019). Self-criticism, on the other hand, can be dened as
a process of negative self-evaluation and harsh self-judgement (López et al., 2015; Ne,
2003), which have been identied to be connected to burn-out and depression (Ne &
Germer, 2017). Promoting teachers’ self-reection might also promote more compassio-
nate attitude towards oneself and raise awareness and diminish the harmful ways of
facing diculties.
Material and methods
Data and participants
The data consist of thematic focus group interviews (N = 7) of HE teacher educators (N =
20). The participants were contacted by utilising email lists of departments or units to
deliver an invitation to participate in the study. However, only a few teachers responded
to the invitation. Thus, most of the teachers were contacted directly through personal
contacts. For example, the heads of departments were contacted, who then asked
members of their own sta who would be interested in joining the interviews.
REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 591
Participants were informed about the study aims, voluntariness, utilisation of data and
data privacy issues. Research consent was obtained from all participants.
Before the focus group interviews, the participants answered the self-reection tool
HowUTeach (Parpala & Postare, 2021), which has been designed for teachers in HE. The
tool consists of Likert-scale items measuring teachers’ approaches to teaching and their
well-being and related feedback, which is provided after answering the items to promote
self-reection. In its present state the tool serves more reection-on-action than reec-
tion-in-action (Schön, 1987) as teachers are asked to reect the items in general. In the
present study, two parts from the HowUTeach were used: HE teachers’ approaches to
teaching (HEAT) and teaching-related self-ecacy-beliefs, both of which have been
validated among HE teachers (Postare et al., 2023). In addition, a shortened inventory
measuring self-compassion and self- criticism (López et al., 2015; Ne, 2003) were
included in the self-reection, as previous research has highlighted their importance to
teachers’ well-being (Postare & Lindblom-Ylänne, 2008). The participants answered the
inventory from the perspective of increased distance teaching.
The feedback included descriptions of the dierent dimensions of the inventory and
their importance in teachers’ work (e.g. ‘Self-ecacy beliefs mean the belief about
whether the teacher is able to do their job well and inuence the students’ learning . . .
’). Moreover, the feedback provided suggestions about how these elements could be
further developed (e.g. ‘Remember that the belief in self-ecacy is not a permanent trait.
It is possible to inuence self-ecacy beliefs, for example through reection, discussion,
and learning. . .’). The feedback also included numerical scores to show how high the
teachers scored on each scale. Thus, the idea is to support the teacher’s awareness of the
types of dimensions that are prominent in their own teaching and how these dimensions
have been dened in previous research (Parpala & Postare, 2021). As the original version
of the HowUTeach did not include feedback concerning self-compassion and self-
criticism, this was created by a pedagogical expert for the purposes of the present study.
The teachers participated in focus group interviews after receiving the feedback. The
interviews focused on teachers’ experiences of the self-reection and feedback. The items
and scales (Appendix 1) utilised in the present study and the interview questions related
to the use of the self-reection (Appendix 2) can be found in the Appendices. Figure 1
Figure 1. Data gathering process.
592 S. MYLLYKOSKI-LAINE ET AL.
illustrates the data gathering process. The interviews lasted approximately 80 minutes on
average, and they were transcribed verbatim.
The teachers in the study worked as teacher educators in three universities (n = 14) and
one university of applied sciences (UAS; n = 6) in Finland. University teachers worked
mainly as educators for basic degree students studying to be primary school teachers.
UAS teachers worked as educators in adult education programmes for students acquiring
their qualication in vocational teacher education, special education, or student counsel-
ling. All participants had a formal teacher’s pedagogical qualication. The majority of the
participants had been working in the eld of HE for more than 15 years (ranging from 1 to
27 years; on average 11 years). Figure 2 includes information on the focus groups.
On average, the teachers reported high values related to interactive and organised
approaches to teaching and low values related to transmissive and unreective approaches
to teaching. In addition, they reported high values related to teaching-related self-ecacy
beliefs and self-compassion and low values in relation to self-criticism. The reported values
for self-criticism exhibited the most variation among the participants and also included
some high values. Table 1 presents the statistics of the sum variables based on the items in
the HowUTeach questionnaire. The statistics information is provided only to show how the
teachers responded on average to the dimensions of the HowUTeach tool, because this
information could be important to understand the results of the group interviews, where
the teachers discussed about their own results and the feedback they received.
Figure 2. Information on the focus groups.
Table 1. Statistics of the sum variables.
Mean SD Minimum Maximum
Approaches
to teaching
Interactive 4,35 0,54 3,00 5,00
Transmissive 2,12 0,67 1,00 3,33
Unreflective 1,77 0,53 1,00 2,67
Organised 4,12 0,40 3,00 5,00
Well-being Self-efficacy beliefs 4,53 0,44 3,75 5,00
Self-criticism 2,22 0,89 1,00 4,00
Self-compassion 4,22 0,42 3,67 5,00
N = 20. The participants answered the individual items on a scale: 1 = totally disagree, 3 = in between, 5 = totally agree.
REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 593
Analysis
Thematic analysis was utilised in the analysis of the teachers’ experiences focusing on
‘capturing something important about the data in relation to the research question’
(Braun & Clarke, 2006, p. 82). The focus was on identifying the teachers’ experiences of
the use of the self-reection related to their teaching processes and well-being. During
the analysis, experiences of the dierent dimensions of the self-reection were not
inspected separately. Rather, the aim was to identify meaningful experiences related to
the self-reection in general. The interview data were rst read several times for familiar-
isation. While reading through the data, data extracts related to the research question
(Braun & Clarke, 2006) were identied in the data set and coded under dierent themes.
Notes were written down during the analysis to aid in the identication of recurring
themes. In the rst phase of analysis there were many themes, including positive experi-
ences and critical experiences of the self-reection. Some of the identied themes were
combined, as it was noted that they represented similar experiences (e.g. enhanced
reection, diversication of reection, and reection promoting empowerment as posi-
tive experiences).
Findings
Through the group interviews, the study explored how the teachers experience the self-
reection related to their teaching processes and well-being. As the participants in the
study were teacher educators and most had many years of teaching experience, most of
them were very familiar with the themes of the self-reection and their relevance for
teaching.
Through the analysis of the interviews, three themes were identied, which were
related to the opportunities the self-reection may or may not oer in supporting HE
teachers’ teaching and well-being: (1) Realised support opportunities for teachers:
enhancement and enrichment of self-reection through the self-reection; (2) Limited
support opportunities for teachers: need for a more situation-specic approach for self-
reection; and (3) Expected support opportunities for the teachers: the deepening of
reection through collegial interaction based on the self-reection.
In general, many of the teachers experienced the use of the self-reection positively.
However, there was considerable variety in whether they found it to be useful for their
teaching or well-being. The themes are presented in the following sections along with
excerpts from the group interviews.
Realised support opportunities for teachers: enhancement and enrichment of
self-reection concerning teaching processes and well-being
The rst theme focuses on the teachers’ experiences that reect support opportunities
they had already identied while utilising the self-reection tool. Based on the teachers’
experiences, the self-reection had increased the teachers’ reection regarding both
teaching processes and well-being. In addition, the self-reection had diversied the
teachers’ reection by providing them with new insights. This was found to be useful
594 S. MYLLYKOSKI-LAINE ET AL.
for their pedagogical development but did not necessarily result in any changes in their
actual teaching practices.
I have similar positive [experiences], yes. My teaching will not probably change a lot after this,
but why I think this was useful is because as a teacher it is important sometimes to do these
things and think about [teaching] . . . it is good for your personal development. You would not
otherwise stop to think about these things. (Group 1)
I was reecting myself as a teacher in all of these. Like how I have done this or do I have this.
With some themes, I thought I could do something more. So, it woke me up to think about
these from a personal viewpoint. (Group 2)
As such, the self-reection acted as an initiator for reection, which might not other-
wise take place in everyday working practice. In addition, the participants saw that an
organised way to reect the teaching-related matters may increase the depth of
reection.
At least in general, it helps you to reect your teaching better or more specically and
consider dierent viewpoints based on the feedback . . . what kind of teacher you are and
in what matters it would be good to develop more. It does not solve concrete problems . . . it
gives you good tools for self-reection and through that for the development of your
teaching. (Group 2)
Thus, the teachers valued the systematic way the self-reection promoted teaching-
related reection but also expressed that the feedback lacked concreteness. According
to the ndings, if the feedback does not relate to relevant and concrete issues a teacher is
dealing with, it may not guide them forward.
This was useful in a way that it made me think about my own teaching and dierent
dimension related to it . . . but I did not gain anything concrete from it. (Group 2)
Although the enhancement of reection did not necessarily result in any changes in
teaching practices, the self-reection strengthened the perceptions the teachers already
had of themselves as teachers or of relevant pedagogical matters. Thus, it had
a reinforcing role for the teachers.
There were many statements and themes that I have been thinking and with what I also work
with, so maybe this made it visible to me, so it brought a good feeling. With some parts I felt
that hey, I have developed a lot. (Group 5)
In addition to the enhancement of reection, some of the participants experienced that
the self-reection had supported them in some way or even empowered them as
teachers.
It was a pretty good tool for reection, it was supportive, and even a little bit empowering.
You get to know what kind of things you can strengthen in the future. It wasn’t problem-
focused but solution-focused . . . It was interesting to answer the questionnaire and I think
that the feedback had good inuences, perhaps, related to [my] well-being. (Group 2)
Some of the participants felt that the self-reection oered them tools for pedagogical
development or even increased their well-being.
REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 595
Limited support opportunities for teachers: need for a more situation-specic
approach for self-reection
The second theme focuses on the teachers’ experiences regarding the limited support
opportunities they identied while utilising the self-reection tool. The results showed
that some of the teachers would have preferred a more situation-specic approach so that
the self-reection would have acknowledged dierences in learning environments, learn-
ing goals and students’ backgrounds.
In the interviews, the participants highlighted the importance of context for self-
reection.
I was thinking that I have very dierent kind of courses that I teach. There are dierent kind of
goals for the courses . . . I could not think about the dierent kind of courses I teach but
generally what my goals are and how I approach matters. (Group 1)
Something that I think about constantly, and in this, is that the assumption is that there is
only a one kind of learner. In reality we have several kinds of students. The same approach
does not work with everyone . . . You can’t make everything the same. . . I did not recognise
[from the self-reection] the diversity of the students. (Group 1)
In addition, the participants noted that it is important to consider the variation between
teachers when using the self-reection as well as situational issues, such as a teacher’s
emotions inuencing the answering to the questionnaire.
As a reection moment, it was positive. I just keep wondering that you always answer to these
inventories according to your feelings at that specic moment. Like how positive or negative
feelings you have. (Group 7)
The fact that the teachers were asked to think about their teaching in general instead of
a specic context caused some interviewees to worry about the risk that some might respond
to the questionnaire from the perspective of an ‘expected ideal’ of teaching or in other ways
experience a hesitation in reection. Some interviewees thought that such instances might
not have positive inuences on pedagogical development or teaching-related well-being.
According to the participants, including a variety of relevant themes and improving the
concreteness of the self-reection, would guide teachers, especially experienced teachers,
forward.
At the same time, the generality of the self-reection may leave room for individual
variation in reection. The self-reection may serve as an initiator for reection, through
which the contextual issues become visible to teachers.
It was useful and made me reect things, but of course those certain practical issues you need
to think about yourself and what to develop based on specic situations. (Group 1)
Hence, through the reection initiated by the self-reection, individual teachers are better
able to consider their personal situations and experiences and gain ideas supporting their
pedagogical development.
596 S. MYLLYKOSKI-LAINE ET AL.
Expected support opportunities for the teachers: the deepening of reection
through collegial interaction based on the self-reection
The third theme focuses on the teachers’ experiences of the utility of the self-reection
tool based on their collective identication of the importance of collegial discussion as
part of self-reection when aiming to support teaching or well-being. In the interviews,
the participants emphasised the importance of peer interaction when reecting on
teaching-related matters. It was noted that the use of collegial discussions in reection
could reveal new insights for teaching and that interactive reection should be systematic
in the teaching profession.
I would like to have an opportunity to reect my own teaching with a colleague or with some
expert or with anyone. Then you could think about all the questions that you always have
when you are teaching. You get that a little bit through collegial support, but it would be
good to think if there could be regular or systematic opportunities for that practice. (Group 6)
Moreover, the participants saw that the self-reection would work best when utilised as
a means to enable interactive reection.
The essential thing to consider is how work communities, for example, our supervisors, how
this tool could be utilised in collegial discussions . . . If we would not have this conversation
here now then I would not care anymore. I read it in ve minutes, and nothing new. But if
I was somehow forced to, for example, with my supervisor to go through it, like why do you
think or feel this way. Then it could be a genuine tool for reection. (Group 4)
This common sharing. It would open up this analysis more. Common sharing, nding the time
for sharing, reecting. We should have more that kind of things. (Group 7)
Thus, the study design and the opportunity for group discussion led the teachers to
realise the importance of dialogical reection, through which deeper reection can occur.
According to the participants, if the self-reection was utilised to initiate reection, the
collegial discussions could then deal with more concrete aspects of teaching and work,
serving as forums for sharing experiences and good practices.
Discussion
The aim of the study was to examine HE teachers’ experiences of the use of a research-
based self-reection tool aiming to support HE teachers. The HowUTeach tool consisted
of themes related to teachers’ teaching processes, self-ecacy beliefs (Parpala & Postare,
2021), self-compassion and self-criticism (López et al., 2015; Ne, 2003), which have
shown to be relevant and interrelated factors in HE teaching (Postare et al., 2023).
Thus, they promote teaching-related reection by focusing on relevant aspects of tea-
chers’ work (cf. Biencinto et al., 2021). The ndings showed that the HowUTeach self-
reection tool and its’ feedback component supported the teachers’ reection. Similarly,
Biencinto et al. (2021) have suggested that self-evaluation tools including the feedback,
could be utilised in supporting teachers’ reection. Three themes were identied based
on the teachers’ experiences, which were related to the enhancement and enrichment of
self-reection through the self-reection, a need for a more situation-specic approach for
self-reection, and the deepening of reection through collegial interaction based on the
self-reection.
REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 597
Based on the ndings, self-reection can enhance and enrich teachers’ self-reection by
stimulating reection and providing more variety for such reection. Similarly, previous
research has highlighted the importance of promoting systematic reection in promoting
professional development (e.g. Nel, 2021). Husu et al. (2018) have called for concrete methods
for reection to increase teachers’ awareness of the aspects inuencing their work.
Considering this, the present study highlights the importance of using a valid instrument in
self-reection, as it assures that the focus is on relevant matters supported by evidence. The
participants experienced the use of the self-reection mainly positively, although there was
variation concerning the utility of the self-reection as a support for the teachers’ teaching
and well-being. Some teachers indicated that the initiated reection might strengthen
teachers’ perceptions of pedagogically relevant matters or of themselves as teachers (see
Husu et al., 2008). According to previous studies, reection is often associated with a learning-
focused approach to teaching, as teachers’ reection on their own teaching leads to increased
pedagogical awareness (Postare & Lindblom-Ylänne, 2008). Thus, in the present study, the
self-reection promoted teachers’ reection on important teaching-related matters and also
provided useful knowledge about how to improve (see Biencinto et al., 2021). They noted that
the self-reection provided them with new insights, which they would not have necessarily
considered otherwise. For some participants, it was an empowering experience as a teacher,
which was seen as especially benecial for their teaching-related development and well-
being. However, despite the positive experience of increased reection, some teachers
indicated that the use of the self-reection did not promote any changes in their actual
teaching practices.
A limiting aspect of the self-reection was related to the lack of clarity regarding the
teaching context, which may reduce the positive inuences of the self-reection on
teaching. The ndings highlight the importance of acknowledging teachers’ varying
situations to promote relevant and inuential reection, which could be better promoted
through reection-in-action (Schön, 1987). Such issues may be related to the subject of
teaching, the teaching – learning environment, and students’ backgrounds.
The ndings indicate that the self-reection guided the participants to discuss relevant
issues together in the interviews, and thus it was seen as a helpful tool for promoting
teaching-related discussion (see Husu et al., 2008; Kurtts & Levin, 2000; Rodgers, 2002).
Further, the ndings suggest that instead of individual use, the self-reection works best
when utilised as a means for interactive collegial reection, which then creates opportu-
nities for the teachers to share experiences, learn from one another and receive support
from one another (Myllykoski-Laine et al., 2022; Pekkarinen & Hirsto, 2017). The partici-
pants in the present study highly valued the systematicity the self-reection can oer for
promoting teaching-related reection in the work communities (see Birmingham, 2023),
thus enhancing professional development through systematic reection (Rodgers, 2002).
Study limitations and further research directions
As the participants of the study were teacher educators themselves, the self-reection was
sometimes experienced as too self-evident. The teacher educators already represented the
more experienced facilitators themselves, which are required for in depth reection for
professional development (Kirkman & Brownhill, 2020). For example, the importance of
interaction in learning processes was something these teachers considered all the time in
598 S. MYLLYKOSKI-LAINE ET AL.
their teaching. In addition, when looking at the statistical measures utilised in the study
design, the participants constituted a select group of pedagogically aware professionals.
Consequently, these teachers expected more support, for instance, regarding guiding mean-
ingful interaction to promote deep learning in dierent kind of teaching situations. Thus,
these experienced teachers would benet more on the reection-in-action in which thinking
about teaching practice would occur during specic teaching situations (Schön, 1987). In
addition to further developing the self-reection tool based on the ndings of the present
study, it is important for the self-reection tool to be utilised with HE teachers working in
dierent disciplines and situations in future studies. This would provide more information
about the applicability of the self-reection in dierent teaching contexts. Finding ways to
support teachers’ teaching and well-being in dierent kinds of teaching settings is vital.
Although a time characterised by increased distance teaching serves as the context of this
study, the ndings are expected to bring light to important aspects related to supporting HE
teaching in general.
Conclusions
The present study showed that HE teachers appreciate opportunities to receive support for
their teaching and well-being even if the reection would be general, reection-on-action
(Schön, 1987). Increased reection can help teachers become more aware of important
matters related to their work (see Biencinto et al., 2021; Husu et al., 2008) and strengthen
their beliefs of their competence as teachers (see Postare et al., 2023). However, the
relevance of reection needs to be further promoted through an acknowledgement of the
varying situations the teachers are dealing with. In addition, it seems that self-reection
and processing of feedback individually are not enough, and there need to be opportu-
nities to share experiences and engage in discussions with peers (see Kurtts & Levin, 2000).
The ndings suggest that dialogical reection initiated by self-reection on relevant
matters should be included systematically in the practices of HE organisations, which can
then support both individual teachers and teaching communities (see Myllykoski-Laine
et al., 2022; Rodgers, 2002). The present study is expected to give insights into broader
applicability of systematic reection to support higher education teaching.
Acknowledgments
We thank the participants who contributed their time to respond to the questionnaire and
participate in the focus group interviews. We thank Viivi Virtanen from Häme University of
Applied Sciences for the development of feedback concerning self-compassion and self-criticism.
Disclosure statement
No potential conict of interest was reported by the author(s).
Funding
This research was supported by a nancial award from the University of Jyväskylä designated for
high-quality research on teacher education [KOPTUKE/JYU.Edu].
REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 599
Notes on contributors
Siru Myllykoski-Laine is a doctoral researcher at the University of Turku. Her research focuses on
teaching and learning in higher education; she is interested in the pedagogical culture of higher
education and pedagogical development of academic communities.
Anna Parpala is an Adjunct Professor and University Lecturer (title of Docent) at the
University of Helsinki. She is a university pedagogy expert and developer of the
HowULearn measurement instrument used nationally and internationally. She contributes
to several scientic journals and collaborates actively in international research projects. Her
research focuses on learning, teaching, and quality enhancement in higher education
context.
Telle Hailikari is a principal research scientist at Häme University of Applied Sciences. She is also an
Adjunct Professor (title of Docent) of university pedagogy at the University of Helsinki. Her research
focuses on learning, procrastination and psychological well-being.
Liisa Postareff is a senior research scientist at Häme University of Applied Sciences. In addition, she is
an Adjunct Professor (title of Docent) of university pedagogy at the University of Helsinki. Her
research focuses broadly on learning and teaching in higher education, especially on learning and
teaching processes, academic emotions, and psychological wellbeing.
ORCID
Siru Myllykoski-Laine http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3968-9792
Anna Parpala http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5822-6983
Telle Hailikari http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1355-2985
Liisa Postare http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9134-1163
Research consent
Informed consent was gathered from the participants to utilise their responses for the research.
Information on voluntary participation and data privacy (purpose and procedures of the study, data
handling and storage, guarantee of anonymity) were provided to the participants.
References
Aloe, A. M., Amo, L. C., & Shanahan, M. E. (2014). Classroom management self-ecacy and burnout:
A multivariate meta-analysis. Educational Psychology Review, 26(1), 101–126. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s10648-013-9244-0
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-ecacy: The exercise of control. Freeman.
Biencinto, C., Garcia-Garcia, M., Carpintero, E., Villamor, P., & Torrecilla, S. (2021). Psychometric
properties of the ProciencyIn+ E rubric: self-evaluation of teaching skills. Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 70, 101040. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2021.101040
Birmingham, C. (2023). Experiencing pedagogical reection as the virtue phronesis. Reective
Practice, 24(5), 604–617. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2023.2212888
Bluth, K., & Ne, K. D. (2018). New frontiers in understanding the benets of self-compassion. Self
and Identity, 17(6), 605–608. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2018.1508494
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in
Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
Husu, J., Toom, A., & Patrikainen, S. (2008). Guided reection as a means to demonstrate and develop
student teachers’ reective competencies. Reective Practice, 9(1), 37–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14623940701816642
600 S. MYLLYKOSKI-LAINE ET AL.
Ilie, M. D., Van Petegem, P., Mladenovici, V., & Maricuţoiu, L. P. (2024). Dynamics of change of
academics’ teaching approaches: a latent prole transition analysis. Studies in Educational
Evaluation, 81, 101349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2024.101349
Kelley, M., Curtis, G. A., Craig, C. J., Reid, D., & Easley, A. (2022). Reection through critical friendship:
promoting growth of teachers. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1056471. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.
2022.1056471
Kirkman, P., & Brownhill, S. (2020). Rening professional knowing as a creative practice: Towards
a framework for self-reective shapes and a novel approach to reection. Reective Practice, 21(1),
94–109. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2020.1712195
Kurtts, S. A., & Levin, B. B. (2000). Using peer coaching with preservice teachers to develop reective
practice and collegial support. Teaching Education, 11(3), 297–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/
713698980
López, A., Sanderman, R., Smink, A., Zhang, Y., van Sonderen, E., Ranchor, A., & Schroevers, M. J.
(2015). A reconsideration of the self-compassion scale’s total score: self-compassion versus self-
criticism. PLOS ONE, 10(7), e0132940. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132940
Mladenovici, V., & Ilie, M. D. (2023). A cross-lagged panel model analysis between academics’
conceptions of teaching and their teaching approaches. Studies in Higher Education, 48(11),
1767–1780. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2023.2213716
Mula-Falcón, J., Cruz-González, C., & Lucen, C. (2022). Burnout syndrome in university teachers:
a review of the literature. The International Journal of Educational Organization and Leadership, 29
(2), 33–46. https://doi.org/10.18848/2329-1656/CGP/v29i02/33-46
Myllykoski-Laine, S., Postare, L., Murtonen, M., & Vilppu, H. (2022). Building a framework of
a supportive pedagogical culture for teaching and pedagogical development in higher
education. Higher Education, 85(4), 937–955. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-022-00873-1
Ne, K., & Germer, C. (2017). Self-compassion and psychological well-being. In The Oxford handbook
of compassion science (pp. 371–385). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/
9780190464684.001.0001
Ne, K. D. (2003). The development and validation of a scale to measure self-compassion. Self and
Identity, 2(3), 223–250. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860309027
Nel, B. P. (2021). Reection: a powerful tool for teachers to examine their own teaching. Africa
Education Review, 18(1–2), 87–98. https://doi.org/10.1080/18146627.2022.2135011
Parpala, A., & Postare, L. (2021). Supporting high-quality teaching in higher education through the
HowUTeach self-reection tool. Ammattikasvatuksen aikakauskirja, 23(4), 61–67. https://doi.org/
10.54329/akakk.113327
Pekkarinen, V., & Hirsto, L. (2017). University lecturers’ experiences of and reections on the
development of their pedagogical competency. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research,
61(6), 735–753. https://doi.org/10.1080/00313831.2016.1188148
Postare, L., Lahdenperä, J., Hailikari, T., & Parpala, A. (2023). The dimensions of approaches to
teaching in higher education: a new analysis of teaching proles. Higher Education, 88(1), 37–59.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-023-01104-x
Postare, L., & Lindblom-Ylänne, S. (2008). Variation in teachers’ descriptions of teaching:
Broadening the understanding of teaching in higher education. Learning & Instruction, 18(2),
109–120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.01.008
Rodgers, C. (2002). Dening reection: Another look at John Dewey and reective thinking. Teachers
College Record, 104(4), 842–866. https://doi.org/10.1177/016146810210400402
Salimzadeh, R., Saroyan, A., & Hall, N. C. (2017). Examining the factors impacting academics’
psychological well-being: A review of research. International Education Research, 5(1), 13–44.
https://doi.org/10.12735/ier.v5n1p13
Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reective practitioner: towards a new design for teaching and learning
in the professions. Jossey Bass.
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2010). Teacher self-ecacy and teacher burnout: A study of relations.
Teaching & Teacher Education, 26(4), 1059–1069. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2009.11.001
Swain, S. S. (1998). Studying teachers’ transformations: Reections as methodology. The Clearing
House, 72(1), 28–34. https://doi.org/10.1080/00098659809599381
REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 601
Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (2004). Development and use of the approaches to teaching inventory.
Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 409–424. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-004-0007-9
Ulusoy, M. (2016). Field experiences in teacher education: The perceptions and qualities of written
reections. Teaching in Higher Education, 21(5), 532–544. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2016.
1160215
Viskovich, S., & De George-Walker, L. (2019). An investigation of self-care related constructs in
undergraduate psychology students: self-compassion, mindfulness, self-awareness, and inte-
grated self-knowledge. International Journal of Educational Research, 95, 109–117. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.ijer.2019.02.005
Yin, S., Guan, X., Zhang, Y., Li, Y., Jobe, M. C., & Ahmed, M. Z. (2023). The impact of Chinese primary
school teachers’ sense of work meaningfulness on organizational commitment: a chain media-
tion model. Psychology Research and Behavior Management, 3477–3488. https://doi.org/10.2147/
PRBM.S425043
Zee, M., & Koomen, H. M. (2016). Teacher self-ecacy and its eects on classroom processes, student
academic adjustment, and teacher well-being: A synthesis of 40 years of research. Review of
Educational Research, 86(4), 981–1015. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654315626801
602 S. MYLLYKOSKI-LAINE ET AL.
Appendices
Appendix 1
Appendix 2
Interview questions
●How did you experience receiving the feedback?
●Where would you place your experience of the feedback in regards it being either a positive or
negative and either a useful or not useful experience?
●Did you recognise yourself from the feedback?
●What kind of emotions did you have when you received the feedback?
●How did the feedback help you to increase your understanding of your approaches to teaching
and their development?
●How did the feedback help you to increase your understanding of your teaching-related self-
ecacy beliefs and their strengthening?
Appendix 1. Scales and items of the HowUTeach self-reflection tool.
Scale Items
1. Interactive
approach
In my teaching, I create situations where I encourage students to
discuss their thoughts and opinions about the topic.
I set aside teaching time so that the students can discuss among
themselves about the key concepts of the subject.
In teaching situations, I provide an opportunity for students to deepen
their understanding about the subject through discussion.
2.Transmissive
approach
The majority of my teaching time is spent transmitting information to the
students about the topic.
My teaching is focused on the good presentation of information to the students.
The most important goal of my teaching is to deliver what I know to the students.
3. Unreflective
approach
I have trouble understanding how I can help the students learn.
The students’ learning process is so complicated that it is challenging for me to
understand how I can support it as a teacher.
It is difficult for me to understand what learning is all about.
4. Organised
approach
I am organised and systematic as a teacher.
I put a lot of effort into my teaching.
I spend a lot of time to prepare my teaching.
5. Teaching-related
self-efficacy beliefs
I believe I can cope with my teaching tasks.
I am confident that I can manage even in the most difficult teaching situations.
I am certain, that I have the necessary pedagogical skills to manage in teaching tasks.
I am confident that the students learn from my teaching.
6. Self-criticism I’m disapproving and judgemental about my own flaws and inadequacies.
When I fail at something important to me I become consumed by feelings of inadequacy.
When I fail at something that’s important to me, I tend to feel alone in my failure.
7. Self-compassion I try to be understanding and patient towards those aspects of my personality I don’t like.
When something painful happens I try to take a balanced view of the situation.
I try to see my failings as part of the human condition.
The participants were instructed to response to the items from the perspective of their distance teaching experiences. The
validation of the scales 1–5 has been reported by Postareff et al. (2023). The scales 6–7 have been developed for the
HowUTeach questionnaire based on K. D. Neff (2003).
REFLECTIVE PRACTICE 603
●How did the feedback help you to increase your understanding of the meaning of self-
compassion in teaching?
●How could the provided development ideas in the feedback be utilised in your own actions?
●How could the feedback be developed further?
●From what kind of teaching-related aspects you wish you could receive feedback?
604 S. MYLLYKOSKI-LAINE ET AL.
