Investigating Written Reflection and Its Relation to Language Teaching Strategy Change: A Self-study
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reflection has received wide encouragement and adoption in the teacher education, and the teachers engaging in reflection are believed to be able to gain new insights into their teaching. As one of the prominent ways of reflection, written reflection is widely promoted in the teacher education of English Language Teaching. However, the relationship between reflection and improved teaching is still largely unclear and under-researched. This study focuses on teacher's written reflection and its relation to teaching practice change. It adopts a self-study lens to examine the Chinese researcher-participant's written reflections produced in the two microteaching sessions for an English teaching practicum course at a Canadian university, to investigate the role of written reflections in the researcher-participant's self-perceived teaching strategy change across the two microteaching sessions. The study identifies the researcher-participant's teaching strategy change: from teacher-centered method to student-centered method. It also finds that written reflection increases the researcher-participant's awareness of addressing the teaching issues and helps identify the core reason behind these issues, which motivates the researcher-participant to enact the teaching change and also provides the direction for the teaching change. This study provides practical implications for the encouragement of student-centered method in the teacher education of English language teaching.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it