Hegarty's Reflective Framework

A reflective framework that is too complicated does not get used. A teacher under time pressure reaches for the simplest tool that still produces real reflection. Hegarty’s framework is one of the simplest. It has three steps. Each step has a clear purpose. Together they push the writer past description into analysis and forward action.

What the framework is for

The framework is a template that a teacher follows to structure reflective writing. The point is to move beyond basic description about an experience and into analysing actions, learning, and emotional reactions.

This shift, from description to analysis, is the hardest part of reflective writing for most teachers. Description is comfortable because it is what we do in everyday speech. Analysis is harder because it requires stepping back from the event.

Hegarty’s framework names the steps so explicitly that the writer cannot skip the analysis without noticing.

Step 1: take notice and describe

The first step is to pay attention and record what happened. This is the description stage. It sounds easy. In practice, it requires deliberate attention.

The step asks several specific questions.

1. What did I do? The actions, in the order they happened.
2. What did I know at the time? What I was working from when I made decisions.
3. What did I feel? My emotional state during the event.
4. What did I think? My thoughts as the event unfolded.
5. What did I need? What I felt I lacked, what I was wishing for in the moment.
6. What decisions were made? By me, by students, by anyone else involved.

These questions go beyond a simple narrative. A teacher answering them produces a record that includes the inside of the experience, not only the outside.

The instruction to “take notice” matters. Many teachers describe events without having actually paid attention to them. The first move is to slow down and look at what happened with care.

Step 2: analyse

The second step asks what the actions and decisions were, and why. It also asks what the teacher’s own reaction was.

This step is where the description from step 1 gets worked on.

Two specific questions guide the work.

1. What were the actions and decisions, and why these actions and decisions? This pushes past “what happened” into “why did it happen this way.” The why question is the engine of analysis.
2. What was my reaction? This treats the teacher’s reaction as part of the event, not as a separate emotional matter to be set aside.

The why question can be answered at different levels. The shallow level explains the action by reference to the immediate situation: “I gave that instruction because I needed students to start the activity quickly.” The deeper level connects the action to underlying patterns: “I gave that instruction in that tone because I was anxious about losing time, which is a pattern I notice in myself.”

A reflection that stays at the shallow level produces shallow analysis. A reflection that pushes to the deeper level produces material the teacher can work on.

The reaction question matters because the teacher’s reaction is usually data about what was happening. A strong reaction often signals that something important was at stake, even when the surface event looked routine.

Step 3: reflect, take action

The third step is forward-looking. It asks what was learned and how the learning will be used.

Two specific questions guide this step.

1. What did I learn?
2. How will I use this learning? Plan how to apply it.

The learning question requires the teacher to name something specific. “I learned that I am sometimes impatient” is too vague to act on. “I learned that when I am running short on time I cut students off mid-sentence, which damages their willingness to contribute” is specific enough to work with.

The application question requires a plan. Without a plan, learning is an idea. With a plan, learning becomes a change in practice.

A useful application plan has three components.

1. What change will be made. As specifically as possible.
2. When the change will be tried. A defined period or set of occasions.
3. How the teacher will know whether the change worked. A way to evaluate.

These three components turn step 3 from a closing reflection into the start of the next cycle.

What the framework adds compared with simpler reflection

A teacher who reflects without any framework can produce real insight. Most do not. The most common failure is staying in description.

Hegarty’s framework adds two protections against this failure.

It separates description from analysis

Steps 1 and 2 are explicitly different. The teacher cannot fold one into the other without noticing. This separation forces analysis to be a distinct activity rather than a few sentences squeezed into the end of a description.

It requires forward action

Step 3 is not optional. A reflection that stops at analysis has not used the framework. The forward step is built into the structure.

These two protections do not guarantee good reflection. A teacher can complete all three steps superficially. But the framework makes it harder to drift into pure description, and it makes the analysis-to-action move explicit rather than assumed.

Flashcard

What are the three steps of Hegarty's reflective framework, and what does each step focus on?

Tap to reveal

Answer

1. Take notice and describe (the experience). 2. Analyse (the actions, decisions, and reactions). 3. Reflect and take action (what was learned and how to apply it).

The framework moves the writer from description into analysis and then into forward action. Step 1 captures what happened including the inside of the experience. Step 2 asks why and examines the teacher’s reaction. Step 3 commits to specific learning and a plan to apply it.

Using the framework over time

Hegarty’s framework is most useful when used regularly, not as a one-off exercise.

Three patterns of use work well.

Use after critical incidents

When a critical incident happens, the framework structures the reflection that follows. The three steps fit naturally onto the kind of specific moment that critical incident reflection focuses on.

Use weekly on a chosen incident

A teacher can pick one incident from their week and run the framework over it. This is a useful regular practice that does not require an entire week to be processed at once.

Use during a focused development period

When a teacher is working on a specific aspect of their practice, the framework can be used after each lesson during a defined period. The repeated use builds up a record that can be reviewed for patterns.

The framework does not have to be used in long-form writing every time. A short version, three or four sentences per step, is enough for most reflections. The discipline is in completing all three steps, not in the length of each one.

A teacher who has used Hegarty’s framework regularly for a term tends to find that the three steps become part of how they think after lessons, even when they are not writing. The framework gets internalised.