Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36337529›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in psychology2022

Conceptualizing the complexity of reflective practice in education.

Misrah Mohamed, Radzuwan Ab Rashid, Marwan Harb Alqaryouti

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Misrah MohamedCentre for Enhancement of Learning and Teaching, University of West London, London, United Kingdom.
Radzuwan Ab RashidFaculty of Languages and Communication, Universiti Sultan Zainal Abidin, Terengganu, Malaysia.
Marwan Harb AlqaryoutiDepartment of English Language, Literature and Translation, Zarqa University, Zarqa, Jordan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In higher education, reflective practice has become a dynamic, participatory, and cyclical process that contributes to educators' professional development and personal growth. While it is now a prominent part of educators, many still find it challenging to apply the concept for it carries diverse meaning for different people in different contexts. This article attempts to (re)conceptualize the complexity of reflective practice in an educational context. Scholars in this field have taken different approaches to reflective practice, but all these approaches consist of four main components in common: (i) reflecting; (ii) planning for future action; (iii) acting; and (iv) evaluating the outcomes. We extend the existing literature by proposing a model which integrates these four components with three key aspects of reflection: problem-solving, action orientation, and criticality. The novelty of this model lies within its alignment of the three key aspects with different levels of criticality in a comprehensive framework with detailed descriptors provided. The model and its descriptors are useful in guiding individuals who directly or indirectly involve in critical reflection, especially educators, in appraising their levels of criticality and consequently engage in a meaningful reflection.

Indexed as

criticalityproblematizingreflectionreflective practicerevised model

Identifiers

PMID36337529
PMCPMC9627277

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.