Further Criticisms of Reflective Practice
Four areas of concern
| Area | What can go wrong |
|---|---|
| Ethical | Privacy, consent, conflicts of interest, constant self-disapproval |
| Professional | Mechanical use that rationalises existing practice and reinforces prejudice |
| Pedagogic | Forcing reflection on students or teachers who are not developmentally ready |
| Conceptual | Moving ideas across boundaries without care; treating reflexivity as obvious |
Voices in the field
- Brookfield (1994, 1995): cultural and personal risks
- Ash and Moore (2002): new teachers may fall back on pre-conceived ideas if they choose not to reflect critically
The takeaway
The criticisms do not condemn reflective practice. They sharpen how to use it.
A reflective teacher who reads only the case for reflective practice has half the picture. The case against, taken seriously, is what protects the practice from collapsing into a slogan. Several writers have raised concerns. Brookfield (1994, 1995) named cultural and personal risks. Ash and Moore (2002) noted that new teachers can choose not to reflect constructively and fall back on pre-conceived understandings. Four areas of concern are worth knowing.
Ethical concerns
Ethical concerns relate to confidentiality, rights to privacy, informed consent, and professional relationships.
Confidentiality and consent
Reflective writing often involves real students and colleagues. A teacher writing about a difficult student in a journal that other people might read is making decisions about that student’s privacy. A teacher sharing a reflection in a public blog or training session needs to think about what consent has been given and whose interests are protected.
The working fix is to anonymise carefully, get explicit permission for any non-anonymised account, and treat reflective writing as carrying the same responsibilities as other professional writing about people.
Conflicts of interest
A teacher reflecting on a student she will grade later needs to be aware of how the reflection might shape her grading. A school principal reflecting on a teacher she will evaluate needs to keep the two roles separate. Conflicts of interest do not invalidate reflection; they require care.
Constant self-improvement
A subtler ethical concern is the way reflection can involve a constant striving for self-improvement. Done well, this is healthy. Done badly, it can lead to feelings of incompetence and self-disapproval. When a teacher understands “critical” to mean “negative,” she can develop a permanently negative frame of mind about her own work.
The working fix is to balance critical reflection with appreciation for what is working. The warm feedback in participatory methods is not optional; it serves the same function in solo reflection.
Professional concerns
Professional concerns arise when reflective practice is done badly or inappropriately.
Rationalising existing practice
If reflection only confirms what the teacher already believed, it becomes a way to rationalise current practice rather than question it. The teacher writes about why her current approach is the right one and emerges more attached to her existing methods than before.
The fix is to bring outside views in. Brookfield’s lenses, the critical friend, and participatory methods all push against this risk.
Reinforcing prejudice
A teacher who reflects on her students using existing assumptions can come away with the assumptions reinforced rather than examined. Reflection that does not interrogate the teacher’s own labels and framings can entrench them. This connects to Lather’s critique about the role of language in reflection.
Devaluing professional work
When reflective practice becomes a form-filling exercise required by an institution, it can devalue teachers’ professional work rather than promote it. A teacher who fills in a reflective journal because compliance demands it, without genuine engagement, gets none of the benefits and most of the costs.
Mechanical use
Where teachers follow reflective practice models in mechanical, routinised, or instrumental ways, they fall into the trap of engaging neither critical analysis nor their emotions. The model becomes a checklist.
Organisational responsibility
A subtler professional concern is that reflective practice at the level of the individual teacher can let organisations off the hook. If good practice is a matter for the teacher’s own reflection, the institution does not have to address structural issues. This shifts responsibility downward in ways that can be unfair.
The working response is to keep reflective practice at the institutional level too, alongside the individual level.
Pedagogic concerns
Pedagogic concerns relate to whether reflection is appropriate for the person being asked to do it.
Developmental readiness
Teachers and student teachers vary in their readiness to engage in critical reflection. Some are not yet ready. Pushing reflection too hard with someone who is not developmentally ready can produce superficial, strategic, guarded responses rather than genuine engagement.
The respective abilities of novice and expert practitioners are relevant here. Novices tend to follow models mechanically. Experts often do not rely on models in the same way. A reflective practice course that treats novices and experts the same misses what each needs.
Forced reflection
When reflection becomes a compulsory element of teacher education or organisational requirements, it tends to become superficial, strategic, and guarded. Teachers learn to write what assessors want to read rather than to engage honestly.
The fix is to use compulsory frameworks lightly and create space for genuinely voluntary deeper reflection alongside them. The two work better together than either alone.
Whether the reflection is voluntary, honest, and willing to surface uncomfortable truths
Compulsory reflection tends to become superficial, strategic, and guarded. Teachers learn to write what assessors want. Voluntary reflection, especially with a trusted critical friend or supportive group, can engage emotion and challenge assumptions. The form looks similar; the function is different.
Conceptual concerns
Conceptual concerns relate to how the idea of reflective practice itself is treated.
Uncritical and reductionist embrace
Reflective practice is sometimes adopted as a slogan rather than a method. Teachers say they value reflection; institutions claim to support it. The actual work of reflection is missing.
Cross-boundary transplants
Ideas about reflection often move between disciplines (nursing to teaching to social work) without sufficient care for the differences. A model that fits nursing well may need adaptation for teaching, and the adaptation often does not happen.
Reflexivity confusions
Reflexivity is a related concept easily miscommunicated. It can mean different things depending on the aims and function of the activity. A teacher who hears the word and assumes she knows what it means may be using it differently from the writer she read.
Care with definitions
The general response is to be careful with definitions. Pick a model and name it. Be specific about what is meant. Treat the concepts as contested rather than settled.
What the criticisms add up to
Taken together, the four areas of concern do not condemn reflective practice. They sharpen how to use it.
A reflective teacher who has read the criticisms tends to:
- Anonymise carefully and protect privacy
- Bring in outside views to avoid rationalising existing practice
- Watch for self-disapproval and balance critique with appreciation
- Avoid mechanical, routinised use of any single model
- Be sensitive to readiness, in herself and in others
- Keep institutional responsibility alongside individual responsibility
- Pick a model and name it rather than float on a slogan
These responses do not eliminate the concerns. They make the practice resilient enough to handle them.
The criticisms are part of the field’s maturity. A method without serious critics is usually a method that has not been examined enough. Reflective practice has been examined, found wanting in specific ways, and continues to be useful when used with awareness of its limits.