TEACHERS AND TEACHING

2022, VOL. 28, NO. 2, 188–205

https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2022.2062709

How do I teach? Exploring knowledge of reflective practice

among in-service EFL teachers in Ukraine
a b
Oksana Kharlay , Wei Wei and Jeremy Philipsc
a
Languages and Literature Department, Community College of Qatar, Doha, Qatar; bUniversity International
College, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macau, China; cMacau Institute for Tourism Studies,
MAcau, China

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This study seeks to investigate the scope and quality of reflective Received 4 February 2019
practice in ELT in contemporary Ukraine. 56 English as a Foreign Accepted 25 March 2022
Language (EFL) teachers were surveyed to gain a better under­ KEYWORDS
standing of reflective practice in the country. Data were collected Reflective practice; reflective
using both a quantitative (questionnaire) and qualitative (interview) practice strategies;
method. The results suggest that Ukrainian EFL teachers apply inhibitors; teacher
reflective practice consistently but not systematically in their teach­ development; teacher
ing. However, the study also reveals a significant gap in the under­ beliefs; Ukrainian EFL
standing of the concept of reflective practice between experienced teachers
and novice teachers. Teaching experience appears to be a key
differentiating factor in using reflection as a critical lens for improv­
ing their professionalism. Generally, teachers prefer peer sharing
and observations against journaling or even organised notes, which
are viewed as time-consuming and eating into a busy schedule.
Easier access to modern recording media would facilitate develop­
ment of reflective teaching pr

Introduction
Today’s broad interpretation among educators of reflective practice as a teacher’s
ability to reflect on their own action has not strayed far from Dewey’s description
of reflective practice as ‘an active, persistent, and careful consideration of any
belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of grounds that support it and
the future conclusions to which it tends’ (Dewey, 1933, p. 9).
There is a wide range of understandings of ‘reflective practice’. For Boud et al.
(1985) reflection works in symbiosis with experience. Richards (1990) proposes that
reflection combined with critical thinking can assist those who base their teaching
strategies mostly on routine modulated by instinct. Richards and Lockhart (1994)
describe reflection as a form of data collection about teaching. Self-examination and
teaching practice form the foundation for critical reflection about teaching accord­
ing to several studies (e.g., Campbell-Jones & Campbell-Jones, 2002). Brookfield
(1995) believes that reflection should encompass self-experiences both as learners

CONTACT Oksana Kharlay [email protected] Languages and Literature Department, Community

College of Qatar, C Ring Campus, P.O.Box: 7344 C-Ring, Doha, Qatar
© 2022 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-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any med­
ium, provided the original work is properly cited, and is not altered, transformed, or built upon in any way.
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 189

and teachers, students’ perspectives, colleagues’ feedback, and literature. For some,
reflection requires high levels of conscious behaviour to restructure existing knowl­
edge and insights (Korthagen, 2001).
In the past thirty years, there has seen a marked increase in the exploration of
the reflective practice concept among scholars. The foci of these studies are varied:
some have investigated educators’ overall knowledge of reflective teaching (Farrell,
1999; Richards & Lockhart, 1994). Others have explored the use of reflection in
professional development (Impedovo, 2016). Some have focused on the use of
reflective strategies within certain countries, such as Iran (Khoshsima et al., 2016),
Turkey (Kömür & Gün, 2016), Saudi Arabia (Sibahi, 2015), and the USA (Vaughn
et al., 2017). Yet, Farrell (2016) noted that half of all studies come from Asian
countries, compared to a small number originating from Europe and North
America (p. 240). The absence of research on the use of reflective practice
strategies in teaching in Ukraine is consistent with Farrell’s findings, and, when
one considers that English Language Teaching (ELT hereafter) is the one area
where interest worldwide in reflective practice strategies has grown, it is particu­
larly alarming with respect to ELT in Ukraine. As the country seeks closer
integration with the West, fulfiling its ambition of becoming a full member of
the European Union, more information should be gathered on the status of and
approaches to education, including ELT, in order to minimise differences and to
promote best practices.
This study aims to lessen the geographical imbalance in reflective practice research
and to reveal how familiar English as a Foreign Language (EFL) teachers in Ukraine are
with reflective teaching and its methodological applications.
This work represents the first study designed to investigate perceptions and uses of
reflective practice among in-service EFL teachers in Ukraine. The key research question
that this paper will aim to address is:

What are in-service EFL teachers’ views on reflective practice?

And in particular it investigates:

RQ1. What are teacher’s perceptions and knowledge of reflective practice across
different experience levels?
RQ2. What reflective strategies do teachers apply in their teaching?
RQ3. What obstacles do teachers confront in their reflective teaching?

Reflective practice strategies

Both quantitative and qualitative studies on reflection have identified several approaches to
ascertain the degree of awareness, knowledge, and application within the teaching profession.
Among the many techniques available, (e-)journaling has been advocated as
a reflective strategy that bridges theory and practice (Stevens & Cooper, 2009; Threlfall,
2014). A teaching journal can boost teachers’ critical self-analysis and raises awareness of
professional strengths and weaknesses (Cirocki & Farrell, 2017).
190 O. KHARLAY ET AL.

Peer observation followed by discussion has been found to add value through reflective
dialogue. Teachers can critically analyse their professional practice in a confidential and
non-threatening setting (Ibidem.). However, the use of peer observation and post-
observation discussions as reflective tools should not exist in a cultural vacuum but
reflect local customs and social environments.
Peer sharing has been shown to be a strategy that fosters a deeper approach to learning
through critical reflection on practice in a facilitated group (Gottesman, 2009). This
strategy can be time-consuming and requires a trusting relationship between team
members. However, the practical benefits of a colleagues’ feedback received through
reflective forums generally outweigh the costs.
Action research, a multistage classroom-based reflective tool, enables teachers to
resolve problems not solely through intuition but by following formal steps (planning,
action, observation and reflection; Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988). Once shared with
colleagues, the results of the action research can be widely beneficial, making teachers
producers, rather than passive consumers of data-based classroom practices. Some
researchers (Dana & Yendal-Hoppey, 2009) see action research as an essential step for
both personal professional development and towards broader, teacher-led, progressive
educational reforms.
Technology has contributed new reflective tools such as electronic teaching portfolios
(Levin & Camp, 2002), collaborative blogging (Cirocki & Farrell, 2017), and video
recording of lessons (Cunningham & Benedetto, 2002) making the normally internal
process of teaching reflection a more interactive, public process.
In this study, we are interested in determining which of these reflective strategies
Ukrainian EFL teachers commonly use.

The study
Education in Ukraine
Since the Declaration of Independence in 1991, the field of education has languished in
a transitional state. Its development can be divided into three main time frames and each
presents unique challenges for conducting reflective practice. In the first decade (1991—
early 2000s) the key educational aim was not ‘to develop a system—but to destroy the old
Soviet heritage’ (Kvit, 2012) with little effort towards building a cohesive replacement
framework. It saw a drift away from uniformity, top-down administration, and one-
person management—the Soviet education legacy (Kuraev, 2016). As the objective was
focused on the demographic share of people in education rather than the quality of
teaching, inevitably, the activities of this decade produced a drop in educational stan­
dards (Shandruk & Shatrova, 2015, p. 136). The second decade of reform (2003–2013)
was marked by the effort to bring the national education system in line with European
and international standards (Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine, 2002),
requiring changes at both the national and teacher levels. During this period, educators
were found unprepared to join the European Higher Education Area with its strict
requirements, so the implementation of its main instruments (e.g., the European
Credit Transfer and Accumulation System) suffered from considerable delays.
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 191

The political upheaval that had started in 2013 led to the Revolution of Dignity the
following year and activated ground-breaking changes in the education system. The
government established The National Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher
Education in 2015 and The State Inspection for Educational Institutions in 2017 and
passed a strategic regulatory document ‘The Law On Education (2014). The former was
amended in 2017 (Ukraine. The Law On Education, 2017) and it has been fiercely
criticised both domestically and internationally (Ukraine. Opinion on the Provisions of
the Law On Education of 5 September 2017, 2017). Clearly, the country’s educational
system rationalisation is still a work in progress.

ELT in Ukraine
Despite extensive efforts, overall English language proficiency in Ukraine is rated low (EF
English Proficiency Index, 2017). In 2015 the Ministry of Education and Science of
Ukraine (MESU) increased the minimum instructional hours for English (grades 5-8–
3 hours per week; grade 9–2 hours; grades 10–11–3.5 hours). So far little progress has been
achieved. The only requirements to become an English language teacher in Ukraine are
completing a four-year bachelor’s programme and obtaining a Specialist or Master’s
degree in Linguistics or Pedagogy (Bolitho & West, 2017). All the universities follow the
curricula set by the National Agency for Quality Assurance in Higher Education but in
light of recently granted autonomy, they have now more freedom to modify and amend
their teaching processes. Throughout their teacher-education, students take courses on
pedagogy, child psychology, teaching methods and methodology alongside a teaching
practicum strategically scheduled starting from year two. Regarding teacher English
proficiency, the Council of Europe’s Common Framework for Reference (CEFR) repre­
sents the most widely used benchmarking system in Ukraine. The CEFR categorises
language users into six hierarchical ability levels ranked in order of ascendency A, B and
C for the main levels (Basic User, Independent User and Proficient User). These are
subdivided into two ratings with 1 indicating lower proficiency. Using ‘can do’ statements
organised by skills and tasks as descriptors of language ability, the CEFR ranks all language
users from A1 (Breakthrough Basic User) to C2 (Fully Proficient User; Council of Europe,
2020).
MESU has benchmarked CEFR level C1 (Proficient User) as the expected English
proficiency level of secondary teachers of English in Ukraine, yet this criterion is rarely
met. The typical university English instructor’s level ranges from B2 (Independent User)
to C1 whilst school teachers average B2 (Bolitho & West, 2017, p. 82).

Research design methods

Data collection
This study implements a concurrent explanatory Mixed Methods Research approach
(Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009). In this approach, quantitative and qualitative data results
were corroborated at the inferential stage to enhance the credibility of the reported
192 O. KHARLAY ET AL.

Table 1. Participant information (n = 56).

Experience 1–5 years 6–15 years 16–34 years Total
School 1 Bogdana F (BA) Julia K (BA) Greg (MA) 8
Olya T (BA) Lyudmyla U (MA) Svitlana M (MA)
Tatyana (MA)
School 2 Anna (MA) Alvina (MA) Dmytro A (PhD) 7
Zoya I (MA) Ivanna (MA) Tamara H (BA)
Polina A (BA)
School 3 Olha Z (MA) Nataliya A (BA) Tetyana F (BA) Lyudmyla D (MA) 8
Faina E (BA) Ulyana (MA)
Evelina (MA)
Svitlana M (MA)
School 4 Yuliia A (MA) Rita V (MA) Oleksandra Natalya B (MA) Halyna (MA) 6
(BA) Liliya B (MA)
School 5 Larysa F (MA) 1
School 6 Svitlana G (MA) Mariya O (MA) Mariya H (BA) 3
School 7 Karolina (MA) Solomiya L (MA) Olena V (BA) 8
Valentyna A (MA) Pavlina A (BA) Daryna V (MA)
Phekla K (MA) Wasylyna
S (BA)
School 8 Kira I (MA) Olya S (MA) 2
School 9 Iryna T (MA) Sofiya O (BA) Yana (MA) Jevgenij E (MA) 7
Calyna O (MA) Maryna Fota W (BA)
G (BA)
School 10 Olena B (MA) Halyna (BA) 3
Kristina H (MA)
School 11 Dana H (MA) Svitlana L (MA) Zhanna (MA) 4
Vira R (MA)
Total 18 23 15 56

findings, thus, to reach a comprehensive understanding of the in-service Ukrainian EFL

teachers’ views on the reflective practice (Riazi, 2017) and to derive a three-dimensional
perspective of the issues (Creswell, 2015).

Participants
The participants in the survey included 56 in-service EFL teachers (3 males, 53 females)
from 11 schools in Ukraine, ranging in age from 23 to 56. All volunteered to participate
in the survey. Non-probability (purposive) sampling was used because it focuses on
teachers who have in-depth knowledge of the area of the RQs and could make
a substantial contribution grounded in their considerable experience and knowledge
(Cohen et al., 2018; Creswell, 2015).
The participants (n = 56) were divided into three groups based on the reported years
of teaching experience. In this sample, the teaching career lengths span from 1 to 34 years
(median = 15; SD = 9.4). 11 and 23 years were determined as the arbitrary cut-off lines to
categorise the sample into three groups: novices (1–5 years of teaching experience [TE
hereafter]; n = 18), middle-career teachers (6–15 years of TE; n = 23) and experienced
teachers (16–34 years of TE; n = 15).
Thirty-seven interviewees have a master’s degree in English, eighteen teachers
a bachelor’s degree in English, and one respondent a Doctoral degree in Historical and
Comparative Linguistics. Participant information can be found in Table 1.
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 193

All 56 respondents were informed of the purpose of the survey, agreed to take part in
both the quantitative and qualitative sections, and were instructed on how to contribute.

Questionnaire
Questionnaires were used because they are relatively easy to organise, fast to
administer and comparatively straightforward to analyse (Cohen et al., 2018;
Dörnyei, 2007). Hence, in order to answer RQ1, a questionnaire adapted from
Akbari et al. (2010) was employed to quantify teachers’ attitudes and experiences
(see Appendix 1). The questionnaire this research used represents a tested and
validated, theoretically informed comprehensive instrument that synthesises both
constructs and behaviours perceived as relevant for efficiently measuring teacher
reflection (Akbari et al., 2010, p. 213). The questionnaire integrates and systemises
elements that had been previously analysed by researchers (Akbari et al., 2010;
Hansen, 1998; Richards & Farrell, 2005; Richards & Lockhart, 1994; Zeichner &
Liston, 1987). This work represents the first comprehensive analysis of Ukrainian
EFL teachers’ opinions, knowledge, and uses of reflective practice with an emphasis
on teachers’ beliefs, perceptions, aspirations, goals, and priorities in language
teaching.
Teachers were questioned on six dimensions of reflective practice with items
grouped according to related parameters and their investigative aims (Akbari
et al., 2010, p. 214). The questionnaire comprises of close-ended statements based
on a five-point nominal Likert scale ranging from 1 (‘never’) to 5 (‘always’).
Cronbach’s alpha index (α) was calculated to obtain the reliability estimates: (A)
practical dimension items (e.g., ‘I write about my teaching experiences in a diary or
a notebook’; 7 items; α = 0.69) relate to the tools and practice of reflection; (B) the
cognitive dimension (e.g., ‘I think of using/introducing new teaching techniques in
my class’; 7 items; α = 0.69) focuses on the teachers’ educational endeavours
towards developing their professionalism; (C) the affective dimension (e.g., ‘I think
about my students’ emotional responses to my instructions’; α = 0.71; 7 items) deals
with the teachers’ reflecting on how their learners respond emotionally in their
classes; (D) the meta-cognitive dimension (e.g., ‘I think of the meaning or signifi­
cance of my job as a teacher’; α = 0.75; 7 items) is concerned with questions relating
to teachers’ knowledge and view of their profession; (E) the critical dimension (e.g.,
‘I think about instances of social injustice in my own surroundings and try to
discuss them in my classes’; α = 0.81; 7 items) discusses questions about socio-
political issues of teaching, and (F) the moral dimension (e.g., ‘I talk about my
moral standards and values to my students’; α = 0.72; 7 items), which relates to
teachers’ acting as a role model for the moral development of their students.
A reliability analysis of the questionnaire items (α) allows identification of questions
that lower reliability.
80 questionnaires were sent by email (March-July 2017 and January 2018) and 56 were
collected in person at the follow-up interviews; the response rate was 70%. There were no
time constraints for questionnaire completion.
194 O. KHARLAY ET AL.

Table 2. Initial codes for interview transcripts.

Research
questions Code References
Reflective E-journaling (portfolios) Stevens & Cooper, 2009; Threlfall, 2014
strategies Peer observation Hatzipanagos & Lygo-Baker, 2006
Reflective dialogue/post observation discussions Hatzipanagos & Lygo-Baker, 2006
Peer sharing Gottesman, 2009
Action research Kemmis & McTaggart, 1988
Technological reflective tools Levin & Camp, 2002; Cunningham &
Benedetto, 2002
Others Borg, 2006
Obstacles Language learning experience
Professional development experience
Context factors: curriculum, textbooks, assessment, school
principals, peers.
Students responses/reactions
Others

Interview
The main purpose of the semi-structured interview was to encourage reflection on
and critical analysis of teaching experiences, which questionnaires alone could not
address successfully. The first author delivered all the 56 interviews (18 novices, 23
middle-career and 15 experienced teachers) in English while in Ukraine
(August 2017 and February 2018) every day for 3 to 4 hours with each lasting
about 20 minutes. The prompts for the interviews included: 1) how familiar teachers
are with reflective practice and how they define it; 2) what language teachers do in
their reflections; 3) what are the main reasons behind their choices of reflective
strategies; and 4) what obstacles do they believe prevent them from being more
reflective.
Interview questions two and three correlate with the questionnaire aiming to add
insights into the data, whilst interview questions one and four seek to enable respondents
to expand on the assessment of his or her reflective practice and possibly expose
problems related to it.

Data analysis
In order to answer the RQs, one-way ANOVA by SPSS 24 tests were carried out to
compare the frequency of applying reflective practices among the three groups of
participants at various experience levels.
Normality checks and Levene’s test were carried out and the assumptions were met
(Howitt & Cramer, 2008).
The interview transcripts were prepared by the first author and integrity checked by
the interviewees. The first and third authors coded the transcripts independently with all
the discrepancy being discussed and settled. The interviewees were approached to clarify
some of their words via email. Initial codes for interview transcripts are summarised in
Table 2.
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 195

Results
We address each Research Question in turn:

RQ1. Regarding teachers’ perception and knowledge of reflective practice across the
three experience groups, there were significant differences in some items from the four
dimensions: practical, cognitive, critical, and moral with most significant variations
found within the practical and cognitive dimensions rather than in the critical and
moral ones. The results of one-way ANOVA are reported in the table below. [Table 3]

Specifically, in the practical dimension all the items related to self-reflection practices
were reported to have significant changes, particularly item A1 ‘I write teaching experi­
ences in a diary’ [F(2,53) = 6.476, p = 0.003], item A2 ‘ I keep a file on teaching
experience’ [F(2,53) = 4.265, p = 0.019], item A4 ‘I write and talk about accomplishment
and failure of the lesson’ [F(2,53) = 4.745, p = 0.013] and item A6 ‘I observe others’
classes’ [F(2,53) = 8.965, p = 0.000]. Interestingly, the frequency of conducting indepen­
dent reflection practice, A1 and A2, was reported to have a positive linear relationship
with teaching experience, while the other two items, which involve talking to colleagues
and observing colleagues’ classes, were reported to have a non-linear relationship with
the level of teaching experience. The remaining items in the practical dimension, relating

Table 3. Descriptive data for ANOVA test (n = 56).

95% Confidence Interval for Mean
N = 56 Mean SD Lower Bound Upper Bound
A1 1 18 1.67 .686 1.33 2.01
2 23 2.39 .722 2.08 2.70
3 15 2.53 .915 2.03 3.04
A2 1 18 2.83 .924 2.37 3.29
2 23 3.39 .656 3.11 3.68
3 15 3.60 .828 3.14 4.06
A4 1 18 2.56 .856 2.13 2.98
2 23 3.13 .694 2.83 3.43
3 15 2.40 .828 1.94 2.86
A6 1 18 2.89 .832 2.47 3.30
2 23 3.70 .703 3.39 4.00
3 15 3.87 .640 3.51 4.22
B2 1 18 3.50 .857 3.07 3.93
2 23 3.91 .793 3.57 4.26
3 15 4.40 .737 3.99 4.81
B3 1 18 2.94 .873 2.51 3.38
2 23 3.83 .778 3.49 4.16
3 15 3.67 .900 3.17 4.16
B5 1 18 3.39 .979 2.90 3.88
2 23 4.09 .668 3.80 4.38
3 15 3.87 .640 3.51 4.22
E3 1 18 2.94 1.162 2.37 3.52
2 23 3.96 .638 3.68 4.23
3 15 3.87 .990 3.32 4.42
E4 1 18 2.00 1.188 1.41 2.59
2 23 2.61 .891 2.22 2.99
3 15 3.27 1.223 2.59 3.94
F5 1 18 4.06 .802 3.66 4.45
2 23 4.39 .656 4.11 4.68
3 15 4.73 .458 4.48 4.99
196 O. KHARLAY ET AL.

to sharing and seeking professional assistance from colleagues, were not reported to have
a significant change, such as sharing, discussing with colleagues and asking for peer
observations. It suggests that as teachers gain professional experience, they are more
likely to reflect on their own teaching through writing, filing, and discussing with other
colleagues informally, instead of applying formal feedback and classroom observations.
In the cognitive dimension, three items that do not involve conducting any formal
research activities and projects were reported to have significant changes, for instance,
item B2 ‘I read books and journals on effective teaching’ [F(2,53) = 5.177, p = 0.009], item
B3 ‘I participate in workshops/conference’ [F(2,53) = 5.936, p = 0.005], and B5 ‘I look at
recent professional development in journal articles’ [F(2,53) = 4.164, p = 0.021]. Other
items related to carrying out formal research investigations or writing and publishing
research results were not reported to have significant changes. It suggests that experi­
enced participants are more willing to read, study and follow suggestions from formal
research publications and conferences, than propose, conduct and publish research by
themselves. Instead, experienced EFL teachers appear to be more willing to reflect on
their teaching practice, especially teaching materials, from a social and political perspec­
tive, although these reflection practices do not look comprehensive. For example, the
more experienced teachers reported significantly higher rates in two items: E3 ‘I include
less-discussed topics in classes’ [F(2,53) = 6.807, p = 0.002] and E4 ‘I think about teaching
may affect students’ political views’ [F(2,53) = 5.580, p = 0.006].
In addition, interview data offered more insights on teachers’ self-reported knowledge
and understanding of the reflective practice across three experience groups. The results
show that 84% of teachers (47 interviewees) answered in an assertive form about the
usage of reflective practice in their teaching and acknowledged their ability to reflect as
a ‘strength’. Teachers’ responses are summarised in Table 4. Fifty percent of novice
teachers (9 interviewees) do not have a clear understanding of the concept of reflective
practice compared to middle career (65%) and experienced teachers (73%). For example,
one teacher seems to have no knowledge of the concept of reflective teaching although
she wishes to improve her knowledge: ‘I do not have comprehensive knowledge on the
reflective practice to be honest. Being I am a new teacher (it is my third semester), I am
struggling with bridging the gap between theory and practice. Obviously, I have many
knowledge gaps, but I am working hard on becoming a better teacher.’ (Anna, 1,5 years
of TE)
This form of response differs sensibly to the typical middle career and experienced
teachers’ reply, which instead describes reflective practice as a ‘systematic reflection on
teachers’ practices within the classroom’ (Greg, 33 years of TE) and stresses its usefulness
at both personal and professional levels.

Table 4. Summary of participant responses about their knowledge of reflective practice (n = 56).
Teachers No knowledge Little knowledge Familiar with Good understanding
Novice 9 (50%) 4 (22%) 3 (17%) 2 (11%)
N = 18
Middle career 0 2 (9%) 6 (26%) 15 (65%)
N = 23
Experienced 0 0 4 (27%) 11 (73%)
N = 15
Total N = 56 9 6 13 28
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 197

Mature teachers thus recognise that the in-class discussion of sensitive political and
social topics might influence the students’ view even if the topic is only approached as an
initiator of foreign language practice. For example, a teacher commented: ‘Contemporary
Ukraine is a country in the state of transition. As a patriot, I would like to see our next
generations live in their motherland and develop it. I gladly talk to my students about
political and economic reforms in my lessons to make them more aware of the country’s
status quo.’ (Halyna, 33 years of TE).

RQ2. On a practical level, both survey and interview data reveal that experienced, middle
career and novice teachers all use reflection as a critical lens for improving their teaching
with some differences in terms of their choice of specific strategies. Table 5 lists the mean
of participants’ responses to the seven items in relation to their practical dimension of
reflective practice in a descending order. It shows that those reflective practices involving
oral communications with peers are more popular than practices which ask for filling or
drafting formal written reports.

The same pattern can be observed from the interview data, where the participants
seem to be more willing to use informal reflection strategies with their students and on
their own. Those reflection strategies involved with formal investigation, research reports
or external evaluations do not receive the same level of acceptance. The response below
was typical:

“To my mind, reflective teaching means looking at what you do in the classroom, thinking
about why you do it, and thinking about if it works – a process of self-observation and self-
evaluation. At the end of the lesson, I try to observe my lesson myself. I try to find out which
aspects of my teaching help me in my job and help my students to learn my subject” (Vira R.,
6 years of TE)

Table 6 presents a summary of interview data. Student feedback, technological reflective

tools and peer sharing were reported as the most frequently used reflective strategies,
while writing teaching portfolios, conducting action research and participating in reflec­
tive dialogues are the least mentioned strategies.
To elaborate the interview data, most teachers without much teaching experience
mentioned learner feedback on lesson effectiveness as an indicator of their lesson success.
The feedback is typically obtained orally, immediately after the lesson and less commonly
in a written form. However, some teachers run small-scale surveys once a month to
collect their students’ feedback to be considered in future lesson planning. One typical
quote is reported below

Table 5. Practical dimension of reflective practice (n = 56).

Item Practical dimension of reflective practice Mean SD
A5 I discuss practical/ theoretical issues with my colleagues. 3.71 0.76
A3 I talk about my classroom experiences with my colleagues and seek their advice/feedback. 3.68 0.69
A6 I observe other teachers’ classroom to learn their efficient practices. 3.48 0.83
A2 I have a file where I keep my accounts of my teaching for reviewing purposes. 3.27 0.84
A4 After each lesson, I write about the accomplishments/failures or I talk about the lesson to 2.75 0.84
a colleague.
A7 I ask my peers to observe my teaching and comment on my teaching performance. 2.54 0.63
A1 I write about my teaching experiences in a diary or a notebook. 2.20 0.84
198 O. KHARLAY ET AL.

Table 6. Summary of interview data (n = 56).

Total N = 56
Novice Middle Career Experienced
Code N = 18 N = 23 N = 15
E-journaling (portfolios) 1 1 0
(3.5%, 2 out of 56 mentioned)
Peer observation 5 19 2
(46%, 26 out of 56 mentioned)
Reflective dialogue/post observation discussions 0 0 0
Peer sharing 12 15 8
(63%, 35 out of 56 mentioned)
Action research 1 1 0
(3.5%, 2 out of 56 mentioned)
Technological reflective tools 13 7 6
(46%,26 out of 56 mentioned)
Student feedback 23 12 4
(70%, 39 out of 56 mentioned)

“What I practice every lesson is getting my students’ feedback. It may come in different
ways: they reflect orally or fill in some questionnaires that I read and analyse. I often discuss
the issues with my colleagues. We share our experience; I may learn some useful things to
make my teaching more efficient.” (Zhanna, 19 years of TE)

Secondly, English teachers see the need to have modern technical support in order to
facilitate and improve their reflective practice. The most frequently stated method is to
either video record their own lessons for self-evaluation and reflection or review senior
teachers’ lessons. Two typical quotations are reported below.

“To improve my personal reflective practice, I should think about using new teaching
techniques, read books, articles, surf the internet. I enjoy participation in workshops, con­
ferences, seminars which are related to teaching issues. However, I have no interest in any
kind of research because it’s of no practical use for me in my job.” (Svitlana L., 13 years of TE)

“Besides, teachers do not have a technical capacity to record the lessons. Seeing a lesson as
a viewer would definitely help teachers get a new perspective of the process of a lesson and
new approaches.” (Dmytro A., 24 years of TE)

Interestingly, watching and recording English classes is thought mainly a tool for self-
reflection, while sharing recordings with colleagues or discussing them were not men­
tioned or considered by the interviewees.
Thirdly, although reflection involves openly sharing personal strengths and weak­
nesses in teaching and could represent an unsettling experience for some people, 63% of
all the interviewees reported that discussions with colleagues is one of the preferred and
effective reflective tools for reflection. Again, discussions are taking place in an informal
way, not linked to observations.

“I discuss a lot of issues with my colleagues teaching them something and learning some­
thing from them.” (Tamara H., 18 years of TE)

RQ3. In relation to the third research question, professional development and context
factors were reported as the main obstacles which prevent teachers from conducting
reflection practices. Bearing in mind the most frequently mentioned reflective strategies,
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 199

Table 7. Participant responses (n = 56).

Total N = 56
Novice Middle Career Experienced
Obstacles to reflection N = 18 N = 23 N = 15
Lack of professional development experience 13 10 6
(52%, 29 out of 56 mentioned)
Others: Heavy workload (79%, 44 out of 56 mentioned) 18 19 7
Others: Lack of time and no incentives (1 mentioned) 1 0 0

the two obstacles reported which prevent the participants from conducting informal
reflections on their own are a lack of professional development experience and heavy
workloads. Table 7 summarises participants’ response data.

Replies suggest there is a lack of rigorous professional training and development of

reflective practice within teacher-training for ELT. To be more specific, English teachers
seemed to require more professional development activities on reflective practice orga­
nised and promoted by schools. They stated that more workshops, webinars and confer­
ences should be organised by their educational institutions, a strong sign for localising
externally promoted new teaching pedagogies and educational technology. They expressed
keen interest in new and modern trends and tendencies in teaching languages on both the
national and international levels. For example, one novice teacher commented:

“There is a need of more conferences and even webinars to spread the word about such thing
as reflective practice, because our country doesn’t care enough about its citizens’ future.”
(Valentyna A., 2 years of TE)

These findings are in line with literature from other contexts. Among the inhibitors to
efficient reflection, teachers indicate foremost a lack of adequate professional training, as
found in a targeted study by Afshar and Farahani (2017). Despite the wide choice of
teaching resources available on the internet, teachers stress the benefit of having orga­
nised colloquia with colleagues. Doubtless, they would gain greatly from knowledge
sharing and, as a result, their reflective practice would improve significantly. Clearly,
more training should be given to the teachers to encourage more formal recordings of
reflective practice. To succeed, the academic institutions should also offer practical
support by allocating time and resources. According to The Law ‘On Education’ overview
by the current Ukrainian Minister of Science and Education, teachers should ‘expend
more energy, prepare for lessons, and be able to manage the class at a high level’
(Hrynevych, 2018, para 14). Although these ‘noble and ambitious’ sentiments are clearly
easy to subscribe to, they should be matched by action, which in practical terms means
a substantial boost in investment in both resources and people. This support should also
be fairly distributed between urban and rural settings, with the latter often at the fringe
and last to benefit from national initiatives.
In addition, teachers, in particular young teachers, indicated time constraints and
workload as the two major hindrances preventing them from carrying out regular
reflection on their teaching. As a result, some teachers asked for incentives to participate
in the organised professional development events. Two participants commented:
200 O. KHARLAY ET AL.

“Having fewer classroom hours a week would help me to improve my personal reflective
practice. I would have more time to analyse the lesson.” (Svitlana M., 13 years of TE)

“It would also be good to have some paid time for observing the colleagues’ lessons with
further discussion” (Zoya I., 4 years of TE)

Discussion and concluding remarks

This study found significant differences in the responses for the four dimensions (prac­
tical, cognitive, critical, and moral) across the three experience sample groups.
There is also evidence suggesting that EFL teachers apply reflective practice more to
the affective and meta-cognitive dimensions. Most significant variations are found within
the practical and cognitive dimensions rather than in the critical and moral ones. Further,
they also employ feedback from their students and post-observation discussions with
their colleagues as the main strategies to gain a perspective on their practices. Through
comparison and peer observations they reflect on their approach in the classroom and
lesson planning, learning from theirs and others’ mistakes. However, these practices are
mostly oral and often unrecorded. This inclination to reflection appears to develop with
years of experience, although while remaining within informal, unofficial, and unstruc­
tured settings.
The more experienced participants in the survey dedicate more time to keeping up
with developments in the field through publications and conferences but are much less
likely to assume a pro-active role, either because of personal disposition and/or time
constraints.
Finally, in relation to the third research question, professional development and
context factors were reported as the main obstacles preventing teachers from conducting
reflection practices.
In summary, this study confirms that experienced teachers may conduct more
reflective practice than their novice counterparts, but they do not develop their
reflective capacity in a comprehensive, systematic way. In other words, they reflect
on certain areas more often than some others. For example, in this study, experienced
teachers are more likely to reflect on two areas that Akbari et al. (2010) calls the
‘practical and cognitive dimensions’. Although the more mature participants reported
a higher frequency of reflecting social and political dimensions of their language
teaching practice, the limited areas indicate a lack of confidence or understanding of
reflective practice.
Further, some reflective strategies appear to be more popular than others. Informal
and oral communications with peers and colleagues without formal investigation and
evaluation from external members are more commonly preferred by teachers in Ukraine.
For instance, although reflection involving openly sharing personal strengths and weak­
nesses in teaching can be perceived as ‘face-threatening’ to many, the majority of
interviewees indicated that peer-sharing may represent a more suitable strategy for
reflection (similar to Cirocki & Farrell, 2017). Indeed, for peer-sharing to become an
effective tool for reflection, it must be based on trust, active listening, cooperation, and
communication, which together help to reduce anxiety and the fear of being negatively
evaluated during the reflective process (Ladyshewsky, 2004). Similarly, colleagues’
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 201

feedback from post-observation discussions of practical and theoretical issues is mostly

carried out in informal settings based on the mutual interchange of information. The
feedback is typically obtained orally immediately following the lesson and less commonly
in a written form. However, even though positive outcomes for journal writing as
a reflective tool have been confirmed in recent studies (Farrell, 2016; Zulfikar &
Mujiburrahman, 2018), far fewer interviewees reported this strategy.
Apart from the formal and evaluative reflective practices, teachers also express a keen
interest in systematic professional training; they also feel they would benefit from
updated recording techniques including video to analyse and reflect on their work (as
illustrated by Cunningham & Benedetto, 2002).
Last, none of the teachers mentions action research as a reflective strategy. This could
be due to either a lack of awareness or reluctance in applying this strategy, since it is
a multi-staged reflective tool that requires time and effort. However, Sowa (2009)
documented growth in developing reflective skills and a raised level of confidence
among teachers after being involved with action research. Again, teachers would benefit
from further training and guidance.
In relation to the main obstacles in promoting better reflective practice, the main reason
is given as not having enough technical resources available onsite to help them develop
reflective skills, which is in consistent with the findings from other studies (similar to
Harford & MacRuairc, 2008). Unfortunately, most schools in Ukraine do not provide
teachers with video recording equipment that would allow staff to film their lessons for
further analyses. Undoubtedly, in this digital era, integrating modern technology would
greatly benefit English teachers in general and reflective practice specifically. Obviously, this
is not an issue to be solved at classroom level but as a priority for school improvement. The
lack of equipment could be addressed both at the institutional (local) and national levels.
The application of reflective practices among EFL teachers in Ukraine based on this
study of 56 English professionals shows high variability and inconsistent methodologies.
However, it emerges that most teachers are willing to embrace new strategies and
implement them in their teaching. This is in contrast with the view of the Minister of
Education of Science (Hrynevych, 2018, para. 15) who sees teachers’ refractory instincts
towards change as the ‘potential roadblock’ against ‘changing the Ukrainian school into
a school for contemporary life’. These study findings show the opposite: not resistance
from the teaching body but a willingness to develop professionally. Better, more con­
sistent, and supported reflective practice could play a significant role in the development
of the Ukrainian educational system.
The development of a systematic approach in reflections by English teachers should be
considered a high priority in the framework of educational reforms in Ukraine. Starting
at the university level, pre-service teachers would be introduced to training courses aimed
at developing their knowledge and understanding of the reflective practice. Regular
application of reflective strategies during their teaching practicum would lay the founda­
tions of a fruitful teaching career.
In terms of current in-service teachers, they should be introduced and receive regular
training on the reflective strategies according to their confidence on the method (i.e.
action research) and allowed to participate in professional development activities both on
a school and national level. Online platforms could allow teachers to share their best
practices and find solutions to existing problems.
202 O. KHARLAY ET AL.

In terms of engagement in adopting the technique from the more refractory elements
in the in-service professionals, this should be part of a broader approach where the moral
dimension of the teaching profession rekindles the ‘vocational’ aspect of the job. A more
emphatic approach to the needs and welfare of the learners could feedback into the
personal development of the teaching professional: the reflective practice would be the
catalyst of this project.
These strategies if run concurrently would be instrumental in the journey towards
a better-educated nation.
This study represents the first step in a series of large-scale surveys of teachers’
attitudes, and it will form the bases of further comparisons within Ukraine and against
other national educational systems.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes on contributors
Oksana Kharlay was born and educated in the west of Ukraine. She holds a PhD in General
Linguistics. She also has a TESOL Certificate from the University of Queensland, Australia and the
Cambridge DELTA diploma. Oksana’s main interest lies in teacher education, ESL, and program
development. In Community College of Qatar, Oksana Kharlay is an Academic Coordinator and
Assistant Professor in the Languages and Literature Department.
Wei Wei is an Associate Professor at University International College, Macau University of
Science and Technology. He obtained his Ph.D. from School of Education, University of Leeds,
UK. His areas of research are language assessment and testing, computer assisted language
teaching and learning.
Jeremy Phillips has a BA from The University of Toronto, a Master’s degree in ELT from The
University of Reading, the CELTA and the DELTA. He has taught in Canada, Korea, The Czech
Republic, Turkey, Japan and Macau. His research interests include academic English, teacher-
training and materials development.

ORCID
Oksana Kharlay http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4839-1496
Wei Wei http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1919-3178

References
Afshar, H. S., & Farahani, M. (2017). Inhibitors to EFL teachers’ reflective teaching and EFL
learners’ reflective thinking and the role of teaching experience and academic degree in
reflection perception. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 19
(1), 46–67. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2017.1351353
Akbari, R., Behzadpoor, F., & Babak, D. (2010). Development of English language teaching
reflection inventory. System, 38(2), 211–227. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2010.03.
003
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 203

Bolitho, R., & West, R. (2017). The internationalisation of Ukrainian universities: The English
language dimension. British Council. https://www.teachingenglish.org.uk/sites/teacheng/files/
Pub-UKRAINE-REPORT-H5-EN.pdf
Borg, S. (2006). Teacher Cognition and Language Education: Research and Practice. London:
Continuum.
Boud, D., Keogh, R., & Walker, D. (1985). Reflection: Turning experience into learning. Kogan
Page.
Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. Jossey-Bass.
Campbell-Jones, B., & Campbell-Jones, F. (2002). Education African American children:
Credibility at the crossroads. Educational Horizons, 80(3), 133–139.
Cirocki, A., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2017). Reflective practice for the professional development of
TESOL practitioners. The European Journal of Applied Linguistics and TEFL, 6(2), 5–24. http://
www.reflectiveinquiry.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/RP-special.pdf
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morison, K. (2018). Research methods in education/Louis Cohen,
LawrenceManion and Keith Morrison. Includes bibliographical references and index. (8th
ed.). New York: Routledge.
Council of Europe. (2020). The CEFR levels. https://www.coe.int/en/web/common-european-
framework-reference-languages/level-descriptions
Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed method research. Sage.
Cunningham, A., & Benedetto, S. (2002). Society for information technology & teacher education
international conference. Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education
(AACE). Using Digital Video Tools to Promote Reflective Practice. http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/
viewdoc/download;jsessionid=5E734AE384A6EFD1D06A2C6A0DA4BD32?doi=10.1.1.552.
3316&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Dana, N. F., & Yendal-Hoppey, D. (2009). The reflective educator’s guide to classroom research.
Thousand Oakes CA. Corwin Press.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the education
process. D.C. Health.
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics: Quantitative, qualitative and mixed
methodologies. Oxford University Press.
EF English Proficiency Index. (2017). https://www.ef.com/__/~/media/centralefcom/epi/down
loads/full-reports/v7/ef-epi-2017-english.pdf
Farrell, T. S. C. (1999). Understanding reflective teaching. Teaching and Learning, 19(2), 52–63.
https://repository.nie.edu.sg/bitstream/10497/382/1/TL-19-2-52.pdf
Farrell, T. S. C. (2016). Anniversary article. The practices of encouraging TESOL teachers to
engage in reflective practice: An appraisal of recent research contributions. Language Teaching
Research, 20(2), 223–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168815617335
Gottesman, B. L. (2009). Peer coaching in higher education. Rowman and Littlefield.
Hansen, D. T. (1998). The moral is in the practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(6),
653–655. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00014-6
Harford, J., & MacRuairc, G. (2008). Engaging student teachers in meaningful reflective
practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 24(7), 1884–1892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.
2008.02.010
Hatzipanagos S, & Lygo-Baker, S. (2006). Teaching Observations: A meeting of Minds?
International Journal of Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 17(2), 97– 05. https://
www.researchgate.net/publication/228632667_Teaching_observations_A_meeting_of_minds
Howitt, D., & Cramer, D. (2008). Introduction to SPSS in psychology (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
Hrynevych, L. (2018, January 10). Education as a part of national security: What will change for
teachers and students. The Ukrainian Week. https://ukrainianweek.com/Society/207388
Impedovo, M. A. (2016). Becoming a reflective in-service teacher: Role of research attitude.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 41(1), 100–112. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.
2016v41n1.6
Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (1988). The action research reader (3rd ed.). Deakin University Press.
204 O. KHARLAY ET AL.

Khoshsima, H., Shirnejad, A., Farokhipour, S., & Rezaei, J. (2016). Investigating the role of
experience in reflective practice of Iranian language teachers. Journal of Language Teaching
and Research, 7(6), 1224–1230. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.17507/jltr.0706.22
Kömür, Ş., & Gün, Ş. (2016). English language teachers’ reflective practices for understanding their
teaching processes. The Journal of Language Teaching and Learning, 2016(2), 14–27. https://
www.jltl.com.tr/index.php/jltl/article/view/27
Korthagen, F. A. J. (2001). A reflection on reflection. In F. A. J. Korthagen (Ed.), Linking practice
and theory: The pedagogy of realistic teacher education (pp. 51–68). Erlbaum.
Kuraev, A. (2016). Soviet higher education: An alternative construct to the western university
paradigm. Higher Education, 71(2), 181–193. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10734-015-9895-5
Kvit, S. (2012). Country would benefit from further European integration. University World News,
229. https://www.universityworldnews.com/post.php?story=20120705122144461
Ladyshewsky, K. R. (2004). Peer Coaching & Professional Development. Curtin University of
Technology. https://academicleadership.curtin.edu.au/local/docs/learnlead/program_
resources/module_resources/CC_as_Academic_Leader/Ladyshewsky_Peer_Coaching.pdf
The Law On Education. (2014). 1556-VII. 01.07.2014. https://zakon.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/1556-
18#Text
Levin, B., & Camp, J. (2002). Reflection as the foundation for E-Portfolios. In A. D. Willis,
J. Price, & N. Davis (Eds.), Proceedings of SITE 2002 – Society for information technology &
teacher education international conference March 18-23, 2002. Nashville, Tennessee (pp.
572–576). https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED472225.pdf
Ministry of Education and Science of Ukraine. (2002). The national doctrine of the development of
the Ukrainian education in the 21 century. https://zakon2.rada.gov.ua/laws/show/347/2002
Riazi, M. A. (2017). Mixed methods research in language teaching and learning. EQUINOX.
Richards, C. J. (1990). Beyond training: Approaches to teacher education in language teaching.
Language Teacher, 14(2), 3–8. https://markandrews.edublogs.org/files/2010/05/training-v-devel
opment-11.pdf
Richards, C. J., & Farrell, T. S. C. (2005). Professional development for language teachers.
Cambridge University Press.
Richards, C. J., & Lockhart, C. (1994). Reflective teaching in second language classrooms.
Cambridge University Press.
Shandruk, S., & Shatrova, Z. (2015). Higher education reform in Ukraine during the transition
period: On the path to renewal. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(6), 135–144.
Sibahi, R. (2015). Exploring reflective practice among college EFL teachers in Saudi Arabia. Arab
World English Journal, 6(2), 337–351. doi:https://dx.doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol6no2.26
Sowa, P. A. (2009). Understanding our learners and developing reflective practice: Conducting
action research with English language learners. Teaching and Teacher Education: An
International Journal of Research and Studies, 25(8), 1026–1032. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
tate.2009.04.008
Stevens, D. D., & Cooper, J. E. (2009). Journal keeping: How to use reflective writing for learning,
teaching, professional insight and positive change. Stylus Publishing.
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2009). Foundations of mixed methods research: Integrating quanti­
tative and qualitative approaches in the social and behavioral sciences. Sage Publications.
Threlfall, S. J. (2014). E-journals: Towards critical and independent reflective practice for students
in higher education. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary Perspectives, 15(3),
317–332. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2014.900012
Ukraine. Opinion on the Provisions of the Law On Education of 5 September 2017. (2017). European
commission for democracy through law (Venice commission). https://www.venice.coe.int/web
forms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-AD(2017)030-e
Ukraine. The Law On Education. (2017). European commission for democracy through law (Venice
commission). https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDL-REF
(2017)047-e
 TEACHERS AND TEACHING 205

Vaughn, M., Parsons, S. A., Keyes, C., Puzio, K., & Allen, M. (2017). A multiple case study of
teachers’ visions and reflective practice. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary
Perspectives, 18(4), 526–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2017.1323731
Zeichner, K. M., & Liston, D. P. (1987). Teaching student teachers to reflect. Harvard Educational
Review, 57(1), 23–48. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.57.1.j18v7162275t1w3w
Zulfikar, T., & Mujiburrahman, M. (2018). Understanding own teaching: Becoming reflective
teachers through reflective journals. Reflective Practice: International and Multidisciplinary
Perspectives, 19(1), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623943.2017.1295933