An insight into reflective teaching levels of Vietnamese EFL teachers in a premier language center

Abstract

The purpose of this inquiry was to examine the degrees of reflective teaching (RT) amongst English as a foreign language (EFL) teachers working at a private language center in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam, and to provide suggestions for its successful implementation. A mixed-methods approach was employed, integrating a quantitative survey and a qualitative interview. The results evinced that although the majority of participants perceived themselves as being involved in RT practices, their self-reported levels did not consistently correlate with their actual practices. Most teachers were categorized as contextual levels, with only a minor number attaining the dialectical level. In the meantime, a few teachers were classified under the technical level. Demographic information had an insignificant impact. The results imply that supplementary professional development (PD) opportunities could be advantageous for EFL teachers in the area to enhance their RT skills. Despite being conducted in a solitary English language center, the findings of this study may have far-reaching implications for EFL teachers in other developing nations.

Keywords:

• reflective teaching levels
• Vietnamese EFL teachers
• a premier language center

1. Introduction

The contemporary epoch is characterized by rapid and ongoing transformation across global socio-economic, political, and cultural domains, necessitating individuals to equip themselves to keep pace with these multifarious developments. The phenomenon of globalization has engendered intricate interconnections between people from divergent regions of the world, facilitated by their shared economic, political, and cultural pursuits (Parente et al., 2018). This has contributed to an escalating demand for English proficiency, particularly in developing nations such as Vietnam. To meet this demand, it is incumbent upon EFL teachers to innovate their pedagogical practices and enable students to master the English language, thereby enabling them to fulfill their social and occupational aspirations. Moreover, EFL teachers’ PD constitutes a pivotal determinant of the success of educational reforms, with RT emerging as a promising approach to support teachers’ long-term development. However, scant research has delved into the perceptions, practices, and engagement of EFL teachers in the Mekong Delta with RT. Hence, this study seeks to furnish a comprehensive understanding of the levels of RT among EFL teachers in this context, and to proffer efficacious recommendations for its implementation.

This research is significantly comprehensive, spanning facets of EFL teaching, PD, and educational reforms in Vietnam’s unique environment. Primarily, it addresses a knowledge gap concerning Vietnamese EFL teachers’ RT extent, given the surging global demand for English skills. This exploration could establish a basis for future studies targeting RT practice assessment and improvement. Furthermore, by probing teachers’ RT degrees, this study could enhance the understanding of EFL teaching quality and PD status in Vietnam, recognizing teachers as the linchpin for the success of educational reforms. Anticipated findings could guide enhanced RT implementation, aiding stakeholders in crafting effective PD programs, initiating educational reforms, and formulating contextual teaching resources. Finally, examining teachers’ RT engagement could promote a culture of reflective practice, fostering continuous improvement and superior teaching outcomes.

2. Literature review

2.1. Teacher professional development

Professional development (PD) may be broadly characterized as the process of engaging in activities or training that broaden one’s knowledge and enhance one’s skills. Specifically, Richard and Farrell (2005) defined teacher professional development (TPD) as comprising any activities that are geared toward serving long-term objectives and amplifying the development and growth of teachers’ self-perception as professionals. In essence, TPD is an ongoing and never-ending process that is not only beneficial to educational institutions and student learning, but also targeted at the personal and professional growth of teachers. Thacker (2017) elucidated that Teacher Professional Development (TPD) might encompass formal undertakings such as participation in workshops and professional congregations, in conjunction with informal activities, which include the examination of professional literature and scrutinizing documentaries germane to the field of education. Amid the modern pedagogical landscape, educators are anticipated to leverage information and communication technologies to potentiate their instructional efficacy in unprecedented ways, maintain contemporaneity with the progressive evolution of educational methodologies and practices, conduct a more holistic appraisal of student profiles and requirements, and remain abreast with curriculum dynamics, research pertaining to second language acquisition, and evaluation techniques (O’Dowd & Dooly, 2022; Pharis et al., 2019). Thus, teachers must continuously partake in PD to equip themselves with the professional competencies that enhance effective teaching. In fact, PD is increasingly acknowledged as a critical determinant of teachers’ career advancement.

PD is widely regarded as conferring numerous benefits to teachers. Principally, teachers can augment their knowledge and competencies by participating in PD activities (Affouneh et al., 2020). As a result, they are capable of managing their own PD, bolstering their confidence and commitment to their craft. Additionally, involvement in PD initiatives enables teachers to stay abreast of the latest developments in their field, leading to personal milestones such as career advancements, salary escalations, and an augmented prestige (Kosnik et al., 2015). Remarkably, the impact of PD extends beyond the teacher’s personal progress and can exert a positive influence on the performance of students. Numerous studies indicate that the greater the level of professional knowledge and skills possessed by teachers, the more substantial the level of academic achievement among students (Balta & Eryılmaz, 2019; Earley & Porritt, 2014). Ultimately, PD is deemed an indispensable factor in guaranteeing the efficacy of educational reforms at every tier. To sum up, PD experiences have significant and positive effects on teachers, their professional practices, students’ academic accomplishments, as well as educational organizations.

2.2. Reflective teaching

Ever since Dewey (1933) and Schon (1983, 1987) introduced the concept of reflection in language education, a multitude of definitions have been proposed by various linguists and researchers (Amulya, 2004; Korthagen et al., 2001; Postholm, 2008; Raines & Shadiow, 1995). Dewey (1933) characterizes reflection as a progression of thoughts where subsequent parts build upon preceding parts and mutually support each other, rather than a haphazard amalgamation of disparate thoughts. Thus, reflection implies that something is not believed (or disbelieved) on its own merit, but rather through something else which serves as a witness, evidence, proof, or justification, that is, as the foundation of belief. Numerous definitions of reflective practice can be traced back to the beliefs of Dewey regarding reflection. As Postholm (2008) explains, the term “reflection” is derived from the Latin word “re-flectio,” meaning “turn” (re) and “back” (flectio). Hence, reflection denotes the act of turning back and contemplating something that has already occurred. In essence, reflection is regarded as a cognitive process for examining an experience, a problem, or existing knowledge or insights (Korthagen et al., 2001). Similarly, reflection is seen as an active process of perceiving one’s own experience in order to study it in depth. Accordingly, reflection is viewed as the foundation of purposeful learning because it enables individuals to learn from their own work or experiences, rather than from books or experts. This process can be carried out prior to, during, or after the occurrence of an activity (Amulya, 2004).

Regarding teaching, reflection involves examining one’s thought patterns about classroom practice and investigating the causes behind successful or unsuccessful lessons. Therefore, it requires teachers to analyze beyond their teaching approach to understand how and why they teach in certain ways and apply their findings to benefit students (Raines & Shadiow, 1995). According to Raines and Shadiow (1995), reflective teaching (RT) surpasses thinking about teaching and provides opportunities for PD and collaboration, which can enhance teachers’ involvement in both local and national reforms. Most definitions of reflection in the literature are rooted in Dewey’s (1933) work, and within the context of this paper, reflection refers to examining one’s teaching practices. RT and reflective practice are used interchangeably. Therefore, Raines and Shadiow’s (1995) definition is utilized as the theoretical basis for this study.

2.3. Levels of reflective teaching

Reflection can be classified into different levels, and a hierarchy exists in this classification, which ranges from the basic level of reflection involving the description of actions taken in the classroom, to the most rigorous level of reflection, which is characterized by critical reflection.

2.3.1. Van Manen’s three levels of reflection

Van Manen (1995) posited that to optimize their professional maturation and advancement, educators should participate in a tripartite process of reflection. This triad encompasses technical, practical, and critical reflection. Technical reflection constitutes the foundational tier of reflective cognition, a concept Van Manen coined as “technical rationality”. This stage is centered on scrutinizing the efficacy and efficiency of pedagogical strategies deployed towards predefined objectives. At this juncture, neither the objectives nor the institutional milieu—encompassing the classroom, school, community, or societal context—are perceived as problematic.

Ascending to the second tier, practical reflection, also referred to as contextual reflection, encompasses introspection on the underpinning assumptions and predispositions that inform practical activities, alongside an assessment of the pedagogical repercussions of such actions. Every action undertaken is perceived as being tethered to specific value commitments within this reflective stage. This implies that the second stage necessitates a reflective examination of the assumptions that inform specific classroom practices and the resultant consequences thereof.

The pinnacle of this reflective triad, critical reflection or dialectical reflection, necessitates the integration of moral and ethical criteria into discussions about practical interventions. At this tier, educators contemplate the educational objectives, experiences, and actions that promote forms of life guided by considerations of justice, equity, and tangible fulfillment. Both the pedagogical practice and its contextual backdrop are viewed as problematic at this stage, prompting educators to reflect on the specific assumptions that may underpin decisions or actions, and the broader ethical, moral, political, and historical underpinnings of these assumptions. Therefore, critical reflection scrutinizes objectives and the means employed to achieve these objectives within the framework of morality and justice, positioning growth and purpose as key components.

2.3.2. Taggart and Wilson’s reflective thinking pyramid

The current investigation adopts Taggart and Wilson’s (2005) model of the reflective thinking pyramid, premised on Van Manen’s tripartite levels of reflection, to evaluate the reflective cognition of EFL instructors. The reflective thinking pyramid (Taggart & Wilson, 2005) constitutes three strata of reflection, specifically technical, contextual (alternatively termed practical), and dialectical (alternatively termed critical). This structure ascends from a rudimentary proposition to the zenith of reflection, symbolizing personal autonomy and self-comprehension. To ascertain the fitting level of reflection, a self-assessment instrument designated as the Profile is employed, aligning with the Reflective Thinking Pyramid. The ensuing scale of aggregate scores is utilized: the dialectical level is represented by scores ranging from 105–120, the contextual level is denoted by scores from 75–104, and the technical level is characterized by scores below 75. Figure 1 delineates the content of the pyramid.

Figure 1. Reflective thinking pyramid (Taggart & Wilson, 2005).

Figure 1. A pyramid displaying three levels of reflective teaching, including dialectical, contextual, and technical levels

As shown in Figure 1, at the technical stratum, teachers construct a singular, unidimensional schema of the issue at hand, concentrating on anticipated educational outcomes and instructional methods and behaviors. This level omits considerations for alternative solutions and overlooks the understanding, emotional state, intent, and individual traits of the students.

In the contextual (or practical) stratum, educators endeavor to elucidate the foundational circumstances that engender the problem, while correlating their pedagogical approaches with students’ developmental progression.

At the dialectical (or critical) stratum, educators contemplate the ramifications of societal conditions and information on students and engage in a comprehensive understanding of ethical, moral, and social issues. Reflection at this level encompasses the ability to appraise a situation from a panoramic perspective, and educators integrate ethical, political, and social contexts into their instructional planning and implementation.

2.4. Related studies

RT has been extensively implemented at diverse levels of education throughout the globe, ranging from primary to tertiary. Within the scope of this study, several research works are scrutinized to establish the underlying framework. Yanping and Jie (2009) carried out a study to investigate the role of reflection in facilitating the process of TPD among a cohort of female teachers in China. Qualitative research was utilized, and four techniques were frequently utilized, namely, teaching journals or diaries, lesson reports, surveys and questionnaires, and observations. Soodmand Afshar and Farahani (2018) probed Iranian EFL teachers’ perceptions of RT, the obstacles hindering RT, and the influence of academic degree and teaching experience. In another study, Moradkhani (2019) delved into EFL teachers’ perspectives regarding two prevailing reflection approaches, teaching journals and peer observation. The results indicated that the participants preferred peer observations over teaching journals. Nguyen and Walkinshaw (2018) executed an action research in a Vietnamese public university and found that reflection had a positive impact on the participants’ teaching skills. Lastly, Nguyen et al. (2015) scrutinized the literature on RT and proposed various strategies, such as video recordings, study groups, and teaching portfolios, to advance the practice of RT among Vietnamese teachers. Notwithstanding the widespread adoption of RT at diverse educational tiers globally, there exists a dearth of scholarship that specifically concentrates on the application of RT in the milieu of language centers in Vietnam. This inquiry endeavors to bridge this lacuna by scrutinizing the self-perceived levels of RT among EFL teachers in this precise setting. Moreover, the investigation of the influence of demographic variables on teachers’ self-perceived levels of RT practices was conducted in a cursory manner.

3. Methods

3.1. Research design

The current inquiry forms a component of a larger initiative executed by Hung and Thuy (2021). With the explicit acquiescence of the initial authors, the research consortium was accorded permission to employ the primary data for the exigencies of this investigation. Specifically, this study appropriated the quantitative data from Hung and Thuy (2021) to gain insight into Vietnamese teachers’ perceptions of their RT practices. Consequently, this research adopted a mixed-methods design, which initiated with the quantitative survey data from the Hung and Thuy (2021) study, followed subsequently by a qualitative interview. The integration of these methodological approaches cultivated a comprehensive understanding of the research subject matter, which extends beyond the scope of the analysis conducted by Hung and Thuy (2021). As per McKim’s (2017) observations, mixed-methods research is advantageous because different methods can reinforce each other to form a complete research picture. While quantitative data yields generalizable outcomes concerning the frequency and extent of trends, qualitative data provides a subtler and more intricate outlook on the phenomenon. Employing both techniques facilitates a holistic evaluation of the social phenomenon by analyzing both the outcomes and processes. To explore the research themes, the study employed a questionnaire and a semi-structured interview as research tools. The questionnaire served to gather quantitative data on the self-perceived levels of RT among teachers. This method is effective for obtaining a considerable amount of information in a brief period and offers insight into the participants’ views and beliefs (Connolly, 2007). However, the questionnaire has its limitations, necessitating the use of a qualitative method to attain a more profound understanding of the circumstances. The semi-structured interview was utilized to collect qualitative data and acquire participants’ detailed experiences. This technique is particularly useful for providing researchers with a clearer understanding of the situation (Kallio et al., 2016). In conclusion, implementing both quantitative and qualitative approaches in this study produced a dependable and valid collection of data and allowed for the identification of findings that were not predetermined.

3.2. Participants

The present study was carried out within the bounds of the English language center. The selection of the institution and its participants was based on a number of factors, such as convenience, accessibility, and participant willingness. The chosen institution is conveniently located within a practical distance, and the participants expressed an ardent interest in taking part in the study. Moreover, the research team had a profound knowledge of the TPD program implemented in this center, making it an ideal site to scrutinize their own practices and acquire profound insights into concepts that they thought they had grasped before (Ross & Bondy, 1996). Furthermore, this location was selected to offer the participants opportunities to appraise their levels of RT. The investigation summoned 49 teachers, encompassing 13 males (26.5%) and 36 females (73.5%), who were between the ages of 22 and 39 to participate in completing the questionnaires. According to Table 1, the majority of participants had more than two years of teaching experience, with 51% having from 2–5 years of teaching experience and 37% having more than five years of teaching experience. Nonetheless, 12% of the teachers had less than two years of teaching experience. In terms of teaching qualifications, most of the participants held a Bachelor’s Degree (80%), whereas the remaining portion held a Master’s Degree (20%).

Table 1. Participant demographic information for questionnaire (Hung & Thuy, 2021)

Background Information		Frequency	Percentage (%)
Age	23–29 years old	37	75.5
	30–39 years old	12	24.5
Teaching experience	Less than two years	6	12
	From 2 to 5 years	25	51
	More than 5 years	18	37
Educational qualifications	Master	10	20
	Bachelor	39	80
Gender	Female	36	73.5
	Male	13	26.5

With the goal of achieving a more profound comprehension of teachers’ self-perceived levels of RT, the research team conducted interviews with six teacher participants who were deliberately selected based on their questionnaire responses. The interviews were categorized into three groups that corresponded to a comprehensive score scale, comprising dialectical level ranging from 105–120, contextual level from 75–104, and technical level below 75. As a result, the interviewees were strategically placed into Group I (dialectical level), Group II (contextual level), or Group III (technical level). Table 2 displays the demographic information of the interviewees.

Table 2. Participant demographic information for interviews

Groups	Interviewees	Scores	Gender	Age	Teaching experience	Educational qualification
Dialectical	Teacher A	108	Female	30	8 years	Master
	Teacher B	106	Female	26	4 years	Bachelor
Contextual	Teacher C	96	Female	30	7 years	Master
	Teacher D	87	Male	26	4 years	Bachelor
Technical	Teacher E	62	Female	38	16 years	Bachelor
	Teacher F	60	Female	23	1.5 years	Bachelor

3.3. Data collection instruments

3.3.1. Questionnaire

The present study employed a meticulously structured survey questionnaire, incorporating closed-ended items to gather quantitative data via standardized questions presented in a uniform order to all participants. The use of a questionnaire represents a judicious and expeditious approach to eliciting a voluminous quantity of data, especially from a broad cohort of respondents in a constrained timeframe. Moreover, provided the questionnaire is executed adroitly, the consequent data may be obtained and subjected to analysis with facility. Furthermore, questionnaires are commonly deemed a more reliable and economically expedient modus operandi, both in terms of temporal and pecuniary resources (Cohen et al., 2017). The questionnaire comprised two distinct sections, the first of which was composed of four demographic items designed to extract information on lecturers’ age, gender, educational qualifications, and teaching experience. The second segment of the research instrument incorporated a 4-point Likert scale (“1 = seldom”, “2 = situational”, “3 = on a regular basis”, and “4 = almost always”) designed to measure participants’ engagement with RT practices. To this end, the research team utilized the Profile, a diagnostic tool that is aligned with the Reflective Thinking Pyramid, to assess teachers’ self-assessed levels of RT. The Profile’s items, which were derived from a list of teacher attributes that previous research had identified as indicative of reflective thinking, were designed by Taggart and Wilson (2005). The instrument comprised 30 items in total, with the initial 15 items focusing on teachers’ responses when faced with problem situations. The remaining 15 items delved into their approaches towards the preparation, execution, and evaluation of a lesson. The Profile’s primary objective was to determine teachers’ baseline levels of reflection and to document their progress over time.

The survey instrument was subjected to a preliminary trial with a cohort of 29 educators, whose teaching environments mirrored those of the intended respondents. The initial version of the survey was disseminated via electronic mail and implemented using Google Forms as a platform. The quantitative data procured from this preliminary survey were subjected to statistical analysis through the application of the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), with the intent to verify the reliability of the instrument. The results yielded 28 valid cases and a single invalid case from the accumulated data, accompanied by a relatively elevated reliability coefficient for the trial survey (α = 0.86). These findings indicated that the survey instrument was deemed reliable for formal administration. Respondents who participated in the preliminary trial were deliberately excluded from the primary research study.

3.3.2. Semi-structure interviews

Qualitative research methods typically involve a less formal researcher-participant relationship than their quantitative counterparts, facilitating participants’ more comprehensive responses. To gain in-depth insights into the participants’ self-perceived levels of RT, semi-structured interviews were conducted to gather additional information on their responses to the research topic. The interview was also deployed as a tool to cross-verify the questionnaire results. The interviewees comprised six individuals, drawn from three participant groups: “dialectical”, “contextual”, and “technical” teachers. Each interview session was composed of 13 open-ended questions, seeking to elicit the interviewees’ optimal responses to specific scenarios. The interviews, with a duration of roughly 60 minutes each, were conducted in-person and with the interviewees’ consent. They were also invited to freely express their experiences with respect to RT. The written responses of the interviewees underwent qualitative analysis. Before the official interviews, the research team members scrutinized the 13 interview questions. The interviews were held after the questionnaires were distributed. After the representative participants were selected, the researchers contacted them via email and phone, arranging the interviews’ location and time to suit their convenience. The interviews were conducted in Vietnamese, and the researchers translated them into English. Each participant was interviewed in-person, and the responses were carefully recorded and noted with the participants’ approval.

3.4. Data analysis

The quantifiable data garnered from the questionnaire was encoded and analyzed using the SPSS. To ensure the reliability of the questionnaire, a Scale Test was administered as a preliminary step. Following this, a Descriptive Statistics Test was carried out to determine the mean, maximum, minimum, and standard deviation of the questionnaire items. Subsequently, an Independent-Samples T Test was utilized to investigate the relationship between the levels of RT and the demographic characteristics of the participants. The recorded qualitative data collected from the interviews was delimited by the research team to extract the participants’ overarching ideas. Thereafter, based on the recorded data and notes, the researchers transcribed the participants’ responses in Vietnamese to obtain a more profound comprehension of their thoughts. The transcriptions were meticulously scrutinized by the researchers, and any ambiguity was addressed by reaching out to the participants for clarifications. The Vietnamese transcriptions of the interviews were then translated into English by all members of the research team. Finally, the data was interpreted and thoroughly scrutinized for presentation in the research.

4. Results

The study employed the Reflective Thinking Pyramid (Taggart & Wilson, 1998), which depicts three tiers of RT. These levels (and corresponding total scores) comprise (a) the Dialectical level (105–120); (b) the Contextual level (75–104); and (c) the Technical level (below 75). The outcomes of the aggregate scores from the Profile in relation to the Reflective Thinking Pyramid are presented in Table 3.

Table 3. Teachers’ overall level of RT

N	Minimum	Maximum	Mean	SD
49	60	108	90.71	8.12

As is evident from the aforementioned table, the summative scores of teachers derived from the Profile demonstrate a spectrum that ranges from 60 to 108. This variation implies that the RT levels of teachers oscillate between the technical level (below 75) and the dialectical level (105–120). Collectively, the teachers examined present an average RT level situated at the contextual level (M = 90.71, SD = 8.12).

A further examination utilizing Descriptive Statistics was implemented to verify the count of participants situated in each level of RT in relation to their corresponding mean score.

Table 4 displays the data pertaining to the levels of RT exhibited by the participants. It is noteworthy that an overwhelming majority of the teachers (90%) evaluated themselves at the contextual level of RT (Mean = 91), while only a handful of participants (6.12% and 4.08%, respectively) were found to be at the dialectical and technical levels of RT. These results reinforce the notion that a large proportion of the teachers rely on RT to interpret and inform their practices, bridge the gap between theory and practice, and develop pedagogical proficiency. In contrast, a negligible number of teachers appear to concentrate solely on the strategies utilized or contemplate ethical, social, and political matters in their professional pursuits. The results gleaned from the Profile substantiate the aforementioned conclusion.

Table 4. Teachers’ three levels of RT

Levels of RT	Mean score	Frequency	Percentage (%)
Dialectical level	106.33	3	6.12%
Contextual level	91	44	89.80%
Technical level	61	2	4.08%

The results of this study are in line with prior research indicating that the majority of teachers generally operate at the contextual level of RT. Rahimi and Chabok’s (2013) study, which examined EFL teachers in a language institute, similarly found that most teachers were at the second level of reflection. Moreover, Soisangwarn and Wongwanich (2014) reported that most Thai teachers exhibited “reflection-in-action” characteristics that are comparable to the contextual level. The consistencies observed across different cultural and educational contexts may reflect universally prevalent teaching practices and reflection patterns. Yet, they could also be reflective of shared pedagogical heritage and similarities in Asian educational systems, emphasizing a more teacher-centered approach, thus limiting the chances of teachers reaching the dialectical and transformative levels. Nonetheless, the present study reveals some contrasts with prior research. For instance, while Rahimi and Chabok (2013) observed some teachers at the dialectical level, this investigation discovered only 3 out of 49 teachers operating at this level. On the contrary, Soisangwarn and Wongwanich (2014) found that some Thai teachers were operating at the highest level of reflection, which is the transformative level, a level not observed in the current research. This could suggest that cultural and institutional constraints, such as educational policies or traditional views on teaching in Vietnam, might limit the capacity for teachers to achieve the highest levels of reflection. Concerning the variation in RT scores discovered in this study, it is consistent with the notion that teachers’ reflective abilities can differ widely, even within the same institution or context. This highlights the importance of creating PD programs that can cater to teachers’ specific reflective needs, rather than employing a one-size-fits-all approach.

To investigate the potential correlation between the demographic characteristics of the teachers and their levels of RT, an Independent-samples t-test was conducted on the mean score of the teachers’ total scores obtained from the Profile. The results of the analysis are succinctly presented in Table 5.

Table 5. Teachers’ RT levels in relation to demographic characteristic

Demographic Characteristics	Groups		N	Mean	SD	p
Gender	Female		36	90.81	9.41	0.90
	Male		13	90.46	2.37
Age	23–29		37	90.41	7.01	0.65
	30–39		12	91.67	11.21
Teaching experience	Pair 1	Less than 2 years	6	91.50	5.47	0.46
		2–5 years	25	89.16	7.13
	Pair 2	Less than 2 years	6	91.50	5.47	0.80
		More than 5 years	18	92.61	9.91
	Pair 3	2–5 years	25	89.16	7.13	0.19
		More than 5 years	18	92.61	9.91
Educational qualifications	Bachelor		39	91.03	7.20	0.60
	Master		10	89.50	11.44

As evinced by Table 5, the outcomes of the Independent-samples T Test revealed that there were no significant differences between distinct demographic groups, namely gender, age, teaching experience, and educational qualifications, concerning the mean scores of teachers’ total scores from the Profile. To elucidate further, the T-test discerned no meaningful variations in the mean scores between female and male teachers (Mfemale = 90.81; Mmale = 90.46; p = .90); between the 23–29 years-old and 30–39 years-old teachers (M = 90.41 and M = 91.67, respectively; p = .65); and between the teachers with bachelor degree and those with master’s degree (Mbachelor = 91.03; Mmaster = 89.50; p = .60). Moreover, no significant differences were observed in the mean scores between the teachers with less than 2-year experiences and those with experience of 2–5 years (p = .46); between the teachers with less than 2 years and those with more than 5 years of experience (p = .80); and between the teachers with experience of 2–5 years and those with more than 5 years of experience (p = .19). These findings substantiated the claim that teachers’ gender, age, teaching experience, and educational qualifications have no bearing on their levels of RT.

The present study’s outcomes are congruent with previous research that has shown no significant discrepancies in RT levels among teachers based on their demographic characteristics. Akbari, Behzadpoor and Dadvand’s (2010) investigation found no meaningful association between teachers’ gender and their reflection level, while Oosterheert and Vermunt’s (2001) study revealed no significant distinctions in the levels of reflection between inexperienced and seasoned teachers. These results suggest that RT is a universal quality of effective teaching that is not influenced by demographic variables. Adding depth to this understanding, the institutional culture and educational policies, aspects closely tied to Vietnam’s broader socio-cultural context (Dang et al., 2013), had a significant impact on the teachers’ reflective practices. This implies that while individual demographic characteristics might not play a substantial role, systemic and cultural factors in Vietnam could influence the way teachers reflect. Based on these findings, it is clear that RT training programs should be developed to cater to the diverse needs of teachers, irrespective of their gender, age, teaching experience, or educational qualifications. However, these programs, especially in a context like Vietnam, must also account for and address the potential influences of the broader socio-cultural and institutional factors. The aim should be to enhance teachers’ reflective practices, regardless of where they are starting from. In general, the present research emphasizes the importance of RT in teacher education and emphasizes the requirement for further research in this field.

When interrogated concerning the prominent elements in RT, each pedagogue asseverated that the pedagogy employed is of preeminent import. A fecund pedagogical approach ensures effective teaching and learning. The instructors characterized the pedagogy utilized as having a direct impact on the students’ outcomes and the culminating objectives of the lesson. The ensuing deliberations pertain to the matter of pedagogical elements in RT. Certain excerpts were as follows:

In my opinion, the teaching methodology has a bearing on the academic achievements of students, which represents the ultimate aim of my pedagogical instruction. (Teacher B)

I am preoccupied with my teaching methodology, students’ response to pedagogical exercises, and the ultimate objectives of the lesson. Achieving the lesson objectives equates to the fulfillment of the instructor’s duty. (Teacher D)

I am concerned with both the content and the modality of the lesson, as these factors significantly influence the caliber of my pedagogy and the academic attainment of my students. (Teacher E)

The participants’ responses manifest an unequivocal view that teaching methodology is an exceptionally critical aspect of teaching, as it facilitates the attainment of lesson objectives. However, apart from teaching methodology, teachers who belong to the “dialectical” and “contextual” groups with higher mean scores evinced substantial attention to other facets of their teaching. Drawing from their accounts during the interviews, specifically the two anecdotes from their teaching experiences, it is inferable that Teachers B and C regarded their students’ attributes as a highly pertinent issue. They were concerned about their students’ sentiments, inclinations, and family background and utilized this knowledge to adjust and refine their instructional approaches. The responses presented below attest to this claim.

I modify my pedagogical blueprint according to the distinctive attributes of my pupils in each class. […] Subsequently, in any collaborative task or activity, I devote considerable attention to distributing student groups evenly to prevent any sensation of inequity. […] During my interactions with my learners, I discovered some who are bereft of parents or whose parents have undergone separation. Consequently, I am more vigilant in crafting materials or assignments on the subject of family.

(Teacher B)

My intention is to foster a sense of community or familial ties within my classroom, thereby enabling my students to experience a secure and relaxed environment conducive to optimal learning outcomes. (Teacher C)

In a manner similar to the other teachers, Teacher A, who demonstrated a dialectical level of teaching, prioritized not only teaching methodology but also her students. Her interview notes revealed that she reflected on her students’ responses and subsequently modified her teaching approach to ensure the most appropriate activity for upcoming classes. In terms of ethical considerations, Teacher A stated that when reviewing her lessons, she evaluated herself to determine if she had adequately prepared and taught the students with sincerity, which she deemed to be critical qualities of a competent teacher. Teacher A remarked:

There exist three crucial aspects that are of concern to me: content knowledge, pedagogical approach, and wholeheartedness. I firmly believe that I must approach teaching with utmost dedication and consider it an essential tenet of my professional ethos. I continuously remind myself to instruct my pupils with my heart, treating them with warmth and affection. I am confident that once my students perceive this level of dedication and affection from me, they will be incentivized to devote themselves to their studies with greater zeal. (Teacher A)

Aggregated, these outcomes substantiate the inference that there are some existed disparities in the pedagogical aspects that the participants deemed significant while practicing RT. Without exception, all the teachers gave heed to the teaching methodology when appraising their instruction, as it exerted a powerful influence on teaching and learning consequences. Nonetheless, in contrast to educators with inferior average scores who solely concentrated on the teaching methodology and its implementation for the attainment of teaching goals, those with higher averages incorporated other considerations such as students’ reactions, emotions, and social background. In some instances, they even contemplated social and ethical values.

The results of this study are consistent with previous research that has shown that there are differences in the aspects of teaching that teachers consider significant when practicing RT. For example, in a study by Malmir and Mohammadi (2018), teachers who scored higher on a measure of reflective practice were found to place more emphasis on student-centeredness, critical thinking, and self-directed learning in their teaching. Similarly, in a study by Brockbank and McGill (2012), teachers who were more reflective were found to pay more attention to their students’ learning experiences and to adopt a more holistic view of teaching. Considering the Vietnamese context, teachers predominantly operate at the contextual level, consistent with the present study. Such an inclination might be attributed to the traditionally Confucian-influenced pedagogical paradigm prevalent in Vietnam (Tho, 2016), which emphasizes respect for teachers and authority, hence potentially limiting the breadth of teachers’ reflections to certain predefined contextual factors.

The present study adds to this body of literature by highlighting the importance of considering not only teaching methodology but also students’ reactions, emotions, and social background, as well as social and ethical values when practicing RT. This aligns with the notion of “critical reflection”, which involves considering not only the technical aspects of teaching but also the social, political, and ethical dimensions of education (Hickson, 2011). In the Vietnamese context, this might suggest that for teachers to ascend beyond the contextual level of reflection, a shift in the education paradigm might be necessary. That includes, but is not limited to, encouraging more student-centered learning, fostering critical thinking, and promoting a culture of active reflection on broader social and ethical aspects of education.

These findings collectively underline that teachers’ reflective practice is a complex and multifaceted process. Consequently, it becomes essential for teacher education programs, especially in contexts like Vietnam, to address these complexities and equip teachers with the skills and tools necessary to effectively engage in reflective practice.

5. Conclusion

The objective of this study was to explore the levels of RT amongst EFL teachers in the Mekong Delta of Vietnam, and to provide suggestions for its implementation. To achieve this, a mixed-methods approach was employed, integrating a quantitative survey and a qualitative interview. The study revealed that even though the majority of participants perceived themselves as being involved in RT practices, their self-reported levels were not consistently mirrored in their actual practices. The findings imply that EFL educators in the Mekong Delta could benefit from additional PD opportunities to enhance their RT skills. Additionally, the study emphasizes the significance of utilizing both quantitative and qualitative research methodologies to obtain a thorough understanding of multifaceted social phenomena. Even though this study was limited to a solitary English language center, its findings may have far-reaching implications for EFL teachers in other developing nations.

6. Implications

The outcomes concerning the levels of RT exhibited by the participants in this investigation bear crucial implications for EFL teachers in the Mekong Delta and other developing nations. The results reveal that a substantial majority of teachers in this context rely on RT to inform their practice and enhance their pedagogical proficiency. Nevertheless, there are disparities in the pedagogical aspects that teachers consider significant while practicing RT. While some educators focus solely on the strategies implemented or contemplate ethical, social, and political matters in their professional pursuits, others incorporate diverse considerations such as students’ reactions, emotions, and social background, and even deliberate over social and ethical values. The results of the Independent-samples T Test imply that teachers’ gender, age, teaching experience, and educational qualifications have no influence on their levels of RT. Therefore, it is critical for EFL educators in the Mekong Delta and other developing nations to enhance their RT skills despite these demographic factors. In summary, these findings suggest that EFL teachers in the Mekong Delta could derive benefits from further PD opportunities to refine their RT skills and connect theory and practice. It is also essential for EFL educators to consider a broad range of pedagogical aspects and engage in RT practices that consider ethical, social, and political issues, as well as students’ reactions, emotions, and social background.

Moreover, the fact that a considerable proportion of teachers in the sample utilize RT to bridge the gap between theory and practice and enhance their pedagogical proficiency implies that this approach may be a valuable tool for teacher PD in other contexts as well. Additionally, the result that most teachers evaluated themselves at the contextual level of RT, rather than at the dialectical and technical levels, implies that there may be opportunities for developing higher-level reflective skills. This could be addressed through targeted PD programs that focus on developing more advanced reflective skills. Lastly, the lack of significant differences in RT levels across different demographic groups suggests that RT is a universal practice that is relevant and accessible to all teachers, regardless of their gender, age, teaching experience, or educational qualifications. This finding highlights the importance of promoting RT as a fundamental component of teacher education and PD programs.

7. Limitations

The research in question possessed a restricted scope, given that it solely took place within the confines of a solitary English language center. Moreover, the employment of the convenience sampling technique to select participants may have resulted in a biased sample. Furthermore, the sample size was rather meager, comprising just 49 teachers, predominantly female and equipped with comparable educational qualifications, thereby potentially failing to represent the diversity of the teaching profession. Additionally, dependence on self-reported data could have fostered a proclivity for social desirability bias, thereby potentially resulting in an overestimation or underestimation of actual RT practices. Lastly, despite using both quantitative and qualitative research methods, the study employed only a questionnaire and a semi-structured interview as its sole research instruments, which may have been insufficient in comprehensively capturing the intricacies of RT practices.

8. Recommendations for further studies

Considering the limitations of the study, various recommendations for further research could be pursued. Firstly, future investigations may endeavor to broaden their scope beyond a solitary English language center to other educational environments to augment the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, alternative sampling techniques could be implemented to increase the representativeness of the sample, such as stratified or random sampling. Employing a larger sample size would also be beneficial in augmenting the statistical power of the outcomes and enhancing the diversity of participants in terms of gender, ethnicity, and educational qualifications. To mitigate social desirability bias, upcoming studies could potentially consider integrating other data sources, such as observation or peer evaluations, to corroborate self-reported data. Furthermore, a more extensive interviewing process, involving more participants, would enable a more profound comprehension of the experiences and perspectives of teachers in relation to RT practices. Finally, future research could consider utilizing a more extensive range of research instruments, such as focus groups or case studies, to comprehensively investigate the complexities of RT practices.

Besides, further research could delve into various facets of RT practices. For instance, longitudinal studies could explore the developmental trajectory and evolution of these practices over an extended period. Cross-cultural studies could delve into whether RT practices vary across diverse cultures and countries. Technology-enhanced RT practices could investigate how technology can be harnessed to augment these practices. Research on the impact of RT practices on student outcomes could scrutinize the association between these practices and academic achievement and engagement. Teacher education and training could investigate the integration of RT practices into these programs to bolster teacher effectiveness. Mixed-methods research could provide a more thorough understanding of these practices by combining quantitative and qualitative research methods. Collaborative reflective practice could explore the impact of peer mentoring or coaching on teacher PD and student learning outcomes. The role of school leadership could be scrutinized to assess how school leaders can promote and bolster RT practices. Additionally, research on the influence of teacher motivation and self-efficacy on RT practices could examine how these factors relate to the adoption and implementation of these practices. Finally, the impact of RT practices on teacher well-being could be explored to examine the relationship between these practices and teacher well-being, such as job satisfaction and burnout.

Disclosure statement

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

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Le Thanh Thao

Pham Trut Thuy is a lecturer at Nam Can Tho University, where she primarily teaches courses on language skills, translation, and interpretation. She is currently preparing for her Ph.D. studies, and her research interests focus on teacher professional development.

Pham Trut Thuy

Le Thanh Thao is a lecturer at Can Tho University, specializing in language skills courses. He also serves as an editor for Jurnal Komunikasi Pendidikan, an international journal managed by Universitas Veteran Bangun Nusantara. LE’s research interests include TESOL, educational policies, and classroom-based studies.

Nguyen Anh Thi

Nguyen Anh Thi is currently a lecturer of English at Can Tho University, Vietnam. His main research interests involve pre/in-service teacher training, teacher education and language teaching methodology, particularly in the field of Task-based Language Teaching (TBLT). Most of his publications on TBLT and English language teaching were oriented towards the development of a researched-pedagogy. An overarching goal of his research is to promote positive educational practices and experience exchange among researchers, teachers, and the like.

Phuong Hoang Yen

Phuong Hoang Yen is currently an associate professor at the School of Foreign Languages, Can Tho University, Vietnam. She carries studies on language teaching approaches, students’ learning autonomy, self-regulated learning strategies and teachers’ professional development. She published articles in different journals and is the editor of one Scopus-indexed book on alternative assessment in language teaching.

Huynh Thi Anh Thu

Huynh Thi Anh Thu is an English lecturer with a passion for language and literature. She holds a Master’s degree in TESOL from Can Tho University, Vietnam, and has extensive experience teaching English to university students. She is committed to helping her students improve their language proficiency and develop their critical thinking skills.

Nguyen Huong Tra

Nguyen Huong Tra teaches French at School of Foreign Languages, Can Tho University, specializing in French as a Foreign Language Didactics. She holds a Master’s degree in Language Science from the University of Rouen, France, and a Doctorate in Language Science from the Free University of Brussels, Belgium. Dr. Nguyen’s research interests include French language didactics, action research, and linguistics research.