The relationship between EFL teachers’ reflective practices and their teaching effectiveness: A structural equation modeling approach

Figures & data

Table 1. Descriptive statistics of the variables

	N	Mean	Std. deviation
Practical	115	3.49	1.11
Cognitive	115	3.71	1.07
Affective	115	4.32	2.41
Metacog.	115	2.83	.98
Critical	115	3.47	1.22
Total Ref.	115	3.50	2.20
Cl. management	115	4.21	1.11
Preparation	115	3.98	2.02
Knowledge	115	4.19	1.75
Interpersonal rel.	115	3.99	1.12
Characteristics	115	4.25	.75
Total eff.	115	3.58	2.09

Table 2. Results of Pearson correlation

	Cl. management	Preparation	Knowledge	Interpersonal rel.	Characteristics	Total effectiveness
1. Practical	.25**	.63**	.30**	.41**	.35**	.50**
2. Cognitive	.22**	.41**	.56**	.35**	.15*	.47**
3. Affective	.40**	.55**	.62**	.73**	.23**	.62**
4. Metacog.	.46**	.40**	.45**	.35**	.37**	.45**
5. Critical	.19*	.31**	.32**	.51**	.11	.42**
6. Total reflective	.31**	.42**	.54**	.69**	.29**	.61**

* Correlation is significant at the level of .05.

** Correlation is significant at the level of .01.

Figure 1. Interrelationship among teachers’ reflective practices and their teaching effectiveness.

Table 3. The results of Pearson correlation between EFL teachers’ level of teaching effectiveness and their years of experiences

	Cl. management	Preparation	Knowledge	Interpersonal rel.	Characteristics	Total effectiveness
Experience	.56**	.52**	.65**	.42**	.35**	.59**

** Correlation is significant at the level of .01.

Table 4. The results of Pearson correlation between EFL teachers’ level of reflective teaching and their years of experiences

	Practical	Cognitive	Affective	Metacog	Critical	Total Ref.
Experience	.26**	.17*	.21**	.10	.05	.15*

* Correlation is significant at the level of .05.

** Correlation is significant at the level of .01.