The Library Instructor as Learner: A Survey of Reflective Teaching Practices in U. S. Academic Libraries

Abstract

Reflective practice provides library workers with a critical opportunity to examine professional experiences, question assumptions and approaches, explore new perspectives, and develop innovative solutions to existing problems. When applied to instruction as reflective teaching, this practice better situates library instructors to meet the evolving needs of twenty-first-century library users. This research study explores how library workers engage with reflective teaching in academic libraries across the United States. A survey was distributed to academic library communities, and a total of 153 responses were collected. While 92% of respondents reported participating in reflective teaching practice in a variety of instructional contexts, results indicated that respondents have utilized a broad range of methods for reflection and experienced numerous benefits and barriers. These diverse experiences suggest that library instructors see value in reflective work and would benefit from greater training and opportunities to participate in this practice.

Headnote

Abstract

Reflective practice provides library workers with a critical opportunity to examine professional experiences, question assumptions and approaches, explore new perspectives, and develop innovative solutions to existing problems. When applied to instruction as reflective teaching, this practice better situates library instructors to meet the evolving needs of twenty-first-century library users. This research study explores how library workers engage with reflective teaching in academic libraries across the United States. A survey was distributed to academic library communities, and a total of 153 responses were collected. While 92% of respondents reported participating in reflective teaching practice in a variety of instructional contexts, results indicated that respondents have utilized a broad range of methods for reflection and experienced numerous benefits and barriers. These diverse experiences suggest that library instructors see value in reflective work and would benefit from greater training and opportunities to participate in this practice.

Keywords: reflective teaching, reflective practice, library instruction, information literacy instruction

Supporting students as they develop information, media, and digital literacy skills is a critical responsibility for twenty-first-century academic librarians. Whether through credit-bearing instruction, one-shot or course-integrated sessions, online tutorials, or more informal venues like research help, most library workers provide this support through teaching. As Booth (2010) noted, "Librarians are educators by default" (p. 40). However, the process of learning how to teach is frequently overlooked as a core requirement in Master of Library and Information Science (MLIS) programs (Dodson, 2020; Saunders, 2015). This disconnect means many library workers step into instructional roles without formal training in instructional design, teaching philosophy, or classroom best practices.

For emerging and experienced library instructors alike, reflective teaching is a critical practice that helps identify areas for improvement, celebrate teaching strengths, and inspire new pedagogical approaches. In fact, in Roles and Strengths of Teaching Librarians, the Association of College and Research Libraries (2017) positions reflection as essential to lifelong learning, noting that a teaching librarian should be a lifelong learner who "maintains enthusiasm for teaching through reflective practice and exploration of new approaches" (Lifelong Learner section). Booth (2011) also situated reflective practice as one of four pillars of instructional literacy. It is important to note that reflection can occur at different points in the teaching process, including lesson planning, content delivery, and assessment, and it brings an "attitude of constructive self-awareness" to instructional practice (Booth 2010, p. 42). In his foundational research, Schön (1983) differentiated between reflection-in-action, in which instructors experience and respond to challenges as they arise, and reflection-on-action, in which instructors reflect holistically upon their methods and experiences after instruction. The latter, in particular, can play a pivotal role in helping instructors gain expertise through an analysis of their personal experiences in the classroom. The benefits of reflection to individual and collaborative professional practices are widely acknowledged (Andretta, 2008; Graf & Harris, 2016; Sinkinson, 2011; Vidmar, 2005; Wagner et al., 2021). However, there is a dearth of literature that more broadly examines how reflective teaching is practiced at academic libraries across the United States.

This study endeavors to fill that gap by exploring how academic library instructors across the United States are engaging in reflective teaching. It aims to identify key methods and tools, frequency, outcomes, and applications, as well as perceived benefits and challenges in this work. Drawing from LIS research (including Ashwin et al., 2020; Booth, 2011), the researchers define reflective teaching as a practice in which instructors systematically reflect upon their teaching methods, outcomes, and experiences in order to enhance their teaching skills and improve future instruction. This definition was included in the survey instrument and was used throughout the rest of this study.

Literature Review

The Reflective Cycle

Since Schön's (1983) early work, researchers and practitioners have developed various models and approaches to reflective practice. Kolb (1984) constructed the four-step experiential learning cycle (concrete experience, reflective observation, abstract conceptualization, and active experimentation), which Gibbs (1988) expanded into an eightstep process with aspects like description, feelings/reactions, analysis, and personal action plans. Nearly twenty years later, Rodgers (2002) reenvisioned these steps as presence in the experience, description of the experience, analysis of the experience, and experimentation. Notably, Rodgers concluded her reflective cycle not with starting over at the initial step, but as progressing beyond the circle and moving to something new. Other models have included similar steps and additional considerations like the role of past experiences, beliefs, assumptions, and expectations, although they have differed in presenting the process as an iterative cycle, spiral, or series of steps or principles (Booth, 2011; Farrell, 2020; Ghaye & Lillyman, 1997; Larrivee, 2000).

Despite their differences, these models have critical overlaps. Each includes an initial teaching experience, typically situated at the start of the reflective process, and describes and analyzes what occurred. An application of lessons learned through reflection is also essential, as this enables instructors to evolve their pedagogy. Reflection is generally not considered an endpoint; rather, it is a critical step that guides future instruction and prevents stagnation (Ashwin et al., 2020).

The Evolution of Reflective Praxis in Librarianship and Library Instruction

While theoretical approaches to reflective praxis are well-documented in education literature, their application to library work and instruction has developed more slowly. In the early 2000s, Doherty (2005) surveyed professional literature focused on self-reflection in librarianship and concluded that librarians were not particularly reflective practitioners. He associated this with the professional values of objectivity and impartiality in librarianship and argued for the importance of critical self-reflection in further developing theoretical approaches in the field. Similarly, in an examination of reflection in LIS research, Grant (2007) found that extensive studies on reflective practice in librarianship were lacking. While she noted that one reason for this could be that librarians are not very reflective practitioners, she observed in her research that some librarians were simply exploring reflective work in venues other than academic journals (e.g., blogs) and that others might consider reflection a private activity.

A later survey conducted by Greenall and Sen (2016) across UK libraries found that 92% of 424 respondents described themselves as reflective practitioners. Since that time, a growing number of published case studies and essays have suggested that reflective practice has become increasingly central to librarianship, particularly for library instructors endeavoring to assess and improve their teaching (Goosney et al., 2014; Graf & Harris, 2016; Leftwich, 2019; LeMire et al., 2019; Milewski & Williamson, 2017; Regan et al., 2020; Silberberg, 2024).

Moreover, for librarians who are reshaping their instruction to meet the needs of students with diverse backgrounds and experiences, reflection is an important step in critical pedagogy and practice (Tewell, 2018). Given the prevalence of one-shot instruction in academic libraries, library instructors are often positioned to participate in the banking model of education that Freire (1968/2000) critiqued, "depositing" knowledge for students to consume without critical thought or deeper engagement. Reflective teaching provides an opportunity to question power dynamics in the library classroom and interrogate the assumptions and expectations that shape one's teaching (Graf & Harris, 2016; Larrivee, 2000). As Baer (2023) observed, library instructors operate within complex information ecosystems, and reflection allows them to "individually and collectively recognize possibilities and limitations" in instruction, making "those ecosystems healthier and more sustainable" (p. 671). Furthermore, reflection is essential to developing more critical pedagogical approaches to information literacy instruction (Jacobs, 2008). Tewell (2018) drew an explicit connection between reflection and critical pedagogy, arguing that instructors who identify what they are doing and why are asking questions central to critical pedagogy. Reflective teaching allows library instructors to answer these questions and guides more equitable and effective teaching.

Methods of Reflective Teaching for Academic Librarians

Instructors can use various methods to structure reflective teaching. Reflective practice can take the form of written reflections through free-form, semi-structured, or structured journaling (Cardwell et al., 2012; Tompkins, 2009). While free-form journaling affords freedom to explore whatever felt most striking in instruction, more structured documentation allows instructors to track specific data like student preparedness, the use of a particular tool or resource, or the efficacy of educational technology (Milewski & Williamson, 2017). Other library instructors have reviewed recorded videos of their sessions to facilitate a critical examination of mannerisms, habits, and practices in the classroom (Goodsett, 2014). Additional approaches include peer observations (Goosney et al., 2014), mentor/mentee peer coaching (Vidmar, 2005), and facilitated discussions in more formal communities of practice (Regan et al., 2020).

Reflection as a Collaborative Practice

Reflective instructors often thrive in partnership with colleagues, and numerous case studies in LIS literature have detailed approaches to limited collaborations or ongoing, formal communities of reflective teaching practice. At some institutions, these collaborations involve peer observation with preand post-session discussions that guide reflection. This can be structured as a peer-coaching model in which librarians alternate in the roles of peer coach and inviting-teacher (Sinkinson, 2011) or with a single instructor conducting observations and guiding reflections (Silberberg, 2024). Community reflection may also take the form of iterative discussions and can be structured as a co-mentoring practice with a community-driven approach that supports professional development (Goosney et al., 2014). Other groups of library instructors have cultivated discussion-based communities to reflect upon specific criteria, like the efficacy of learner-driven practices (Regan et al., 2020), or to evaluate the provision of instructional services more broadly (Graf & Harris, 2016). Finally, reflection can be part of other collaborative teaching approaches, like co-teaching, allowing library instructors to learn from each other through planning, implementation, and debriefing (Matlin & Carr, 2014). A throughline in these case studies is library instructors leveraging reflective teaching to support professional development while identifying community needs.

Engaging in reflective work as part of a team or community of practice can have profound benefits for library instructors. As Reale (2017) argued, in a collaborative reflective practice, we as librarians have "esprit de corps, and we understand that reflection on our practice, both together and alone, is an added value to our teaching...we would be different professionals without our shared practice; less deep, more reactionary, more habitual, less confident" (p. 82). This showcases how iterative reflection conducted in a community can foster a culture of exchange and collaboration that promotes a holistic evaluation of instructional methods at a programmatic or departmental level.

Benefits & Challenges in Reflective Teaching

Reflective teaching can be transformative. Consistent reflection helps bridge the gap between educational theory and practice, enabling instructors to examine the ethical, political, and cultural underpinnings of the choices they make in the classroom (Tompkins, 2009). More granularly, reflective practice can be a catalyst for responding to changing needs, audiences, and/or technology (Milewski & Williamson, 2017). It allows for tracking progress on specific aspects of instruction over time (Regan et al., 2020) and moving classroom experiences from short to long-term memory, positioning instructors to learn from challenging moments and successes alike (Vidmar, 2005). Perhaps most critically for new instructors-and for many who have not received extensive teacher training- developing a reflective practice can help move beyond the "survival stage" in the classroom, where the teacher primarily focuses on their own behavior and on coping strategies for managing anxiety, to a place where they can focus on students' unique learning needs (Goodsett, 2014) and develop their "teacher-librarian identity" (Matlin & Carr, 2014, p. 62).

Despite these benefits, many librarians experience barriers to reflective teaching. Common challenges include a lack of time as well as the need for further training in reflective practice (Miller, 2020; Reale, 2017). Some studies have indicated that many libraries lack an organizational culture that provides equitable support for reflective work (Greenall & Sen, 2016; Miller, 2020). Vidmar (2005) found that reflective practice requires a vulnerability that can make practitioners feel uneasy or embarrassed, underscoring the need for safe and supportive spaces for this work. As Graf and Harris (2016) observed, reimagining instruction requires reflective practitioners to think flexibly and honestly about their work, a process that leads to more critical pedagogy. Yet, institutional support alone does not guarantee effective reflective practice; it can be challenging to cultivate a practice that goes beyond mere description to evaluate and analyze teaching experiences (Sinkinson, 2011).

Purpose of This Study

Since the early 2000s, LIS researchers have conducted surveys exploring how library workers in specific countries, such as the United Kingdom (Greenall & Sen, 2016), and academic librarians with a specific disciplinary focus, such as health sciences (Miller, 2020), have integrated reflective practice into their professional work. Additionally, recent research has included a wealth of rich, descriptive case studies examining the role of reflective teaching within individual or collaborative practices at academic libraries. However, a broad exploration of how it is practiced within the profession, particularly for academic library instructors within the United States, is absent from the literature. This study aims to fill this existing gap and develop a better understanding of reflective teaching practices. It was guided by the following research questions:

* To what extent do library workers engage with reflective teaching in academic libraries in the United States?

* What methods do library workers employ in their reflective practice?

* What barriers and benefits do library workers experience in their engagement with reflective teaching?

Methods

For this study, the authors surveyed library workers in the fall of 2024 to learn about their reflective teaching practices. The survey instrument is available at the authors' project site (Vaandering & Crego-Emley, 2025). The research population for this study was academic library workers in the United States who conduct library instruction in some capacity. To maximize participation, a call for participants was distributed to the following academic library communities via ALA Connect: Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL) Members Digest, ACRL Instruction Section, ACRL University Libraries Section, and ACRL Education and Behavioral Sciences Section. As ACRL is the premier professional organization for academic librarians in the United States, ACRL communities were targeted as the mode for distributing and advertising the survey. Specific communities associated with instruction and education were selected due to the increased likelihood that reflective teaching would be relevant to their members' professional responsibilities and interests. The call for participants described the research and invited qualifying library workers to share their perspectives. The survey was open for approximately six weeks, and two reminders were sent during that period. The authors designed the survey to take 15 to 20 minutes, and no compensation was offered to respondents.

The survey was administered online via Qualtrics and did not collect any personally identifiable information from participants. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Rhode Island reviewed and approved the study, designating it exempt from IRB oversight. After an initial literature review, the survey was designed to identify trends in reflective teaching, including frequency, methods, benefits, and barriers associated with this practice in the context of academic librarianship. The survey provided respondents with the following definition of reflective teaching:

A practice in which instructors systematically reflect upon their teaching methods, outcomes, and experiences in order to enhance their teaching skills and improve future instruction. Within the library, this work can take many forms and may engage professional librarians, paraprofessionals, graduate students, and other library workers.

Most survey questions collected quantitative data using fixed response questions informed by LIS research on reflective teaching; however, some qualitative data was collected through a small selection of free-text questions.

Results

Demographics

The survey received a total of 153 responses, although response rates varied by question because most questions were optional and some used conditional routing. Respondents were affiliated with higher education institutions spanning the Carnegie classifications. The majority of respondents were from doctoral universities (59%) or master's colleges or universities (21%) (see Table 1). Additionally, more respondents (67%) were affiliated with libraries at public institutions than private institutions (32%).

The pool of respondents included library workers at various stages in their careers. The majority of respondents (74%) had at least six years' experience working in academic libraries as a professional, paraprofessional, or graduate student. Sixteen percent of respondents had 3-5 years of experience, 8% had 1-2 years, and only 1% had less than a year of experience. Years of experience with library instruction in any type of library (not just academic libraries) followed a similar pattern (see Figure 1).

A majority described engaging in reflective teaching as part of their work in an academic library (92%), while the remaining respondents reported no experience with reflective teaching. Those who indicated no prior experience with reflective teaching were routed to the end of the survey to communicate if any barriers prevented their participation in reflective teaching.

Experiences Structuring Reflective Teaching

The survey asked respondents to identify how they structured their reflective practice, delving into the instructional contexts, frequency, and methods that characterize their reflective work. Respondents identified all instructional contexts in which they practice reflective teaching (see Table 2). A majority (65%) indicated that they used the practice across multiple contexts. The most common settings included one-shot instruction (98%), online asynchronous instruction (43%), and course-integrated instruction (41%).

There was variation in how often respondents engaged in reflection. Of respondents who described the frequency of their practice (n = 116), almost half (45%) reflected on each instruction session, while 26% practiced reflective teaching cyclically, at the conclusion of each semester or term. Respondents reported a rich diversity of methods for reflecting on their teaching practice (see Table 3), with informal discussions with colleagues (74%), freeform journaling (50%), and scheduled discussions with colleagues (41%) being the most popular. Interestingly, some respondents' comments suggest that there is still some professional misunderstanding of what constitutes reflective teaching. For example, some respondents described how student feedback impacts their future teaching, which, while important, was outside the scope of reflective teaching as defined in this study.

While many reported practicing reflective teaching within a community, almost all indicated that they also do so independently. Out of 116 respondents, 96% said they practiced reflective teaching individually, and over half described conducting this practice in a community, which included colleagues at the department or team level (41%) or as part of a more formal community of practice (18%). Of those whose reflective teaching was written or recorded (n =101), 20% reported sharing records from their reflective practice with a supervisor or instruction coordinator, 16% with a broader teaching team or department, and 7% with a community of practice.

Of 116 respondents, 60% asserted that peer evaluation or observation is part of their reflective teaching practice. In a follow-up question, 65 respondents provided more detail and shared what form peer evaluation and observation took in their practice (see Table 4). Among the latter respondents, the most common practice was periodic observations with feedback from colleagues, and the least common was sharing video recordings of instruction sessions with colleagues.

Perceptions of Benefits and Barriers in Reflective Praxis

Many respondents reported deriving benefits from their reflective teaching (see Figure 2). The most common benefits that respondents identified from the list provided in the survey were identifying successes and failures in the classroom, creating more effective lesson plans, creating more effective learning objects (e.g., handouts, worksheets, class surveys), and increasing confidence in the classroom. For example, in an open-ended question about how respondents apply what they learn through reflective teaching, one respondent stated that reflective teaching was encouraging to them as an instructor:

Doing this [reflective teaching] over several years helped me to see that the learning process is continual, so that I don't need to feel so discouraged about one specific session not going as well as I would have liked...the accumulation of multiple sessions and seeing patterns across them was most helpful to see what works and what doesn't work as well.

Many respondents also found reflective practice helpful for tracking student assessment, setting goals, and developing a better understanding of instruction for a liaison area or program of study. One explained, "I find that reflective practices helps [sic] me reveal goals that I had not previously articulated to myself. Once I see that I actually have a particular goal, I can better evaluate whether it's appropriate for the future." Notably, fewer respondents indicated that reflective teaching helped them build community with other instructors in their library, institution, or other libraries.

Respondents identified several barriers that hinder their reflective teaching (see Figure 3). Of 125 respondents, 100 shared that they had experienced at least one barrier. Lack of time was rated as the most commonly experienced obstacle to reflective work. Responses indicated this may be a particular challenge for those at small institutions where librarians have a wide range of responsibilities. One respondent expressed that they "wear multiple hats, and reflection is easy to put aside and then forget about entirely." However, lack of knowledge and training, as well as lack of institutional or departmental support, were also reported as deterrents to reflective teaching. Some respondents also reported that they did not prioritize reflective teaching because they were unsure of its value. For example, one respondent shared personal disinterest in reflective teaching due to their belief that "ultimately there are only so many ways to teach keywords and trying to stress over ways to improve and then just landing back on what I was doing is not helpful."

Discussion

Findings from this survey indicate that library workers are leveraging reflective teaching practices across a variety of instructional contexts. While reflective teaching was most commonly reported in the context of one-shot instruction, respondents shared that they reflect both individually and in community in many other instructional settings, mirroring the diversity of teaching opportunities in academic libraries. A broad range of reflective methods and approaches was reported along with varied benefits and barriers, which are explored in further detail below.

Growing Engagement with Reflective Teaching

While this study focuses explicitly on the application of reflective practice to library instruction, findings align with trends seen in recent research that suggest reflection is becoming a more common practice in libraries. Like Greenall and Sen (2016), who found that 92% of survey respondents identified as reflective practitioners, this study also found that 92% of respondents reported engaging in reflective practice, although it did not ask participants if they considered themselves reflective practitioners generally. This percentage is somewhat higher than that reported by Miller (2020), who found that only 77.4% of medical/health services librarians identified as reflective practitioners, although 88.7% reported previously engaging in reflective practices and/or writing. These findings may suggest that either library workers have become more reflective than previously reported by Doherty (2005), or-as Grant (2007) suggested-that they have engaged in this work primarily in the private sphere or through informal venues, which could explain the dearth of research on reflective practice in the early 2000s. Moreover, the increase in reflective teaching case studies in LIS literature over the last two decades further underscores its rising prevalence.

Given the ubiquity of the one-shot library session, it is unsurprising that the most common application of reflective practice was to one-shot sessions, with all but two respondents utilizing reflective teaching in one-shot instruction. The acknowledged limitations of and frustrations with one-shot sessions (Bastone & Clement, 2022; Bowles-Terry & Donovan, 2016; Pagowsky, 2021) may partially explain why some respondents questioned the value of reflective teaching to their practice, with some respondents noting that there are limits to the innovation and creativity possible in a one-shot setting. However, on the whole, survey responses indicated that many felt reflecting on these sessions still provided an opportunity to identify patterns and trends in teaching, fostering innovation and experimentation. Encouragingly, respondents reported also employing reflective teaching in a variety of contexts beyond the one-shot, finding other ways to integrate and apply the practice. These findings mirror studies like Goosney et al. (2014), in which reflective practices were applied to one-shot, course-integrated, and even web-based instruction. As reflective work has not been reserved solely for traditional, in-person modalities, many library instructors seem to see value in reflecting upon their teaching regardless of the method of delivery.

Reflection: Public and Private

The survey results reveal a juxtaposition between reflection as a private process versus a community endeavor. Almost all respondents reported reflecting on their instruction individually, even if they also reflected with colleagues or other partners. As reflection often requires sitting with discomfort, beginning the process alone can be natural for many practitioners. Reale (2017) noted, reflection "can be a humbling experience...one in which we are challenged to interrogate our own truths, our own way of being...We do the work alone and together" (p. 86). This underscores the highly personal nature of reflective work and echoes numerous case studies that describe individual reflections that are then synthesized or debriefed in larger group settings (Graf & Harris, 2016; Regan et al., 2020).

This interplay between public and private reflection is also evident in the high rate of respondents who reported sharing their reflections with others, like supervisors or instruction coordinators. While some reported opting to include their reflections in reports to demonstrate self-growth, others were required to share their reflections. One respondent expressed concerns with an institutional mandate to include teaching reflections in annual reviews:

I see serious problems with this practice as I don't believe a true reflection (which makes the librarian vulnerable to exposing weaknesses and failures) should have any role in an annual review...It will not be a true exercise in reflection unless the librarian has enough trust in their supervisor to not hold identified weaknesses or failures against them.

This concern-that reflection requires a degree of privacy and safety to enable vulnerability-is recurrent throughout the literature. Greenall and Sen (2016) observed that ethical complications may arise if self-documented failures or weaknesses are used for performance evaluation. Many librarians who have piloted community-based reflective teaching initiatives have taken pains to avoid this dynamic by removing or deconstructing hierarchy to make reflection intrinsically-driven so that participants can reflect honestly without fear of reprisal (Goosney et al., 2014; Sinkinson, 2011).

Benefits & Barriers in Reflective Teaching Practice

While this study's survey employed a list of possible reflective teaching benefits different from those of Greenall and Sen (2016) and Miller (2020), all three studies indicate that library workers highly value reflection as a means to identify successes and failures and plan for the future. For reflective instructors, this emphasizes the importance of continually questioning classroom practices and exploring new approaches rather than relying solely on "tried and true" methods (Armstrong, 2019, pp. 379-380). However, this study is unique in highlighting that one major benefit of reflection is honing learning objects like handouts, worksheets, and class surveys. For example, one respondent noted that while they do not write down their teaching reflections, they use reflective thinking to revise handouts and lesson plans. Learning objects are critical not only for educating and engaging students but also for assessment, which plays an essential role in conveying the value of academic libraries to external stakeholders. As such, library administrators would benefit from providing more time for reflective practice so that librarians are better equipped to design the tools and assessments needed to communicate library impact effectively.

Because collaboration is integral both to the reflective practices highlighted in many published case studies (Goosney et al., 2014; Graf & Harris, 2016; Regan et al., 2020; Silberberg, 2024; Sinkinson, 2011) and to respondents in this survey, it is surprising that building community is less commonly perceived as a benefit of reflective teaching. Less than half of respondents identified "building community with instructors in your library" as a benefit of reflective practice, and the numbers were even lower for building community with other colleagues. Greenall and Sen (2016) similarly reported low numbers for respondents who perceived reflective practice as benefiting work relationships or sharing experiences with others. While it is unclear why building community ranks less highly as a benefit of reflective practice, it seems to suggest that more work is needed to create safe, supportive spaces for collaborative reflection. Several respondents alluded to this, sharing that they had practiced reflective teaching collaboratively at prior institutions but found their current workplace less conducive for this work. One respondent shared:

I had colleagues at my previous institution that I could regularly talk to about instruction and have them observe me. At my current institution, we don't really have a culture like that...I'm not sure how you build a culture that appreciates this practice when half your department is tenured and well established in their teaching practices.

Until more library instructors see the value of reflective practice, its potential for building community is likely to remain less recognized.

Lack of time is among the best-documented barriers to reflective work. Greenall and Sen (2016) and Miller (2020) found that librarians rated lack of time as the most common barrier to reflective practice, and findings were similar in this study. Sinkinson (2011) argued that a lack of time for reflection could lead to less effective instruction in the future, a statement echoed by a respondent who shared, "My reflective practice has not been nearly as consistent as it was pre-pandemic...I just don't have the time to devote to doing this anymore, and as a result, my instruction has become a lot more rote and less creative."

Finally, library instructors would benefit from a clearer definition of reflective teaching that outlines promising methods and approaches. In this survey, some respondents claimed to participate in reflective teaching by casually thinking about their sessions or reviewing feedback from students, methods that fell outside the scope of the authors' provided definition of reflective teaching. Researchers like Moon (2007) and Larrivee (2000) have been right to observe that the absence of a concrete, widely accepted definition for reflective teaching can be a challenge for practitioners. As Corrall (2017) argued, the recognition of reflective practice as an area of competency would better prepare librarians for this work. While some libraries do consider reflection as essential to library work (Hussong-Christian, 2013), more effort is needed to prioritize reflection in librarianship.

Limitations

One of this study's limitations was its relatively small sample size of 153 respondents, representing a small fraction of those who teach in academic libraries across the United States. Additionally, due to nonresponse bias, the study may have drawn more participants interested in reflective teaching; this could explain why only 8% of respondents reported no experience with this practice. Therefore, it is challenging to make generalizations about barriers to reflective teaching. Furthermore, new and emerging librarians were underrepresented in this study, with only 26% of respondents reporting fewer than 6 years of experience in academic libraries. This could, in part, be the result of distributing the call for participants via professional organizations that may be cost prohibitive to new librarians. Further research and targeted outreach are needed to discover if there is a correlation between reflective practice and higher levels of instructional experience or more years in the field.

Another challenge of this study is the lack of standardized definitions for reflective teaching methods in the scholarly literature and, more specifically, in this survey. This study utilized a broadly inclusive survey to capture if and how academic library workers perceive themselves as engaging in reflective teaching. As such, specific methods (e.g., informal discussions with colleagues, free-form journal reflection) were not explicitly defined. This may have produced variation in the formality and structure of reflective practice reported. Furthermore, librarians' reflective practices may evolve in response to past reflection or changing needs. Survey respondents may have struggled to communicate the nuances of their reflective practice over time within the limited scope of the survey.

Conclusion

This study fills a gap in existing literature by exploring the use of reflective teaching amongst library workers in academic libraries across the United States. Results indicate reflective teaching is a critical practice that enables professionals to better understand and hone their teaching. Library workers utilize a number of methods, including journaling and discussions, to engage in reflective teaching. While lack of time and support can be substantial barriers to reflective work, practitioners report a wide range of benefits to the planning, implementation, and assessment of their instruction. Future research should be conducted to develop a more nuanced understanding of these barriers and benefits, particularly in respect to critical pedagogy. Additionally, while this study identified the frequency with which practitioners engage in reflective teaching, more information is needed to explain when in the instruction cycle library workers are leveraging reflective practice-whether as part of instructional design, implementation, or assessment at either individual or programmatic levels.

Finally, there is a need for more research on how ALA-accredited MLIS programs are introducing reflective teaching and practice to future library instructors. While some studies have investigated how information science programs in the United Kingdom integrate and center reflective practice (Andretta, 2008; Greenall & Sen, 2016), a corresponding focus on training in ALA-accredited programs is currently absent from the literature.

Sidebar

Vaandering, A. G., & Crego-Emley, A. (2025). The library instructor as learner: A survey of reflective teaching practices in U. S. academic libraries. Communications in Information Literacy, 19(2), 220-241.

References

References

Andretta, S. (2008). Promoting reflective information literacy practice through Facilitating Information Literacy Education (FILE). Health Information and Libraries Journal, 25(2), 150-153. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2008.00775.x

Armstrong, A. (2019). New models for instruction: Fusing the ACRL Framework and Roles and strengths of teaching librarians to promote the lifelong learning of teaching librarians. College & Research Libraries News, 80(7), 378-386. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.80.7.378

Ashwin, P., Boud, D., Coate, K., Hallett, F., Keane, E., Krause, K.-L., Leibowitz, B., MacLaren, I., McArthur, J., McCune, V., & Tooher, M. (2020). Reflective teaching in higher education (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic.

Association of College and Research Libraries. (2017). Roles and strengths of teaching librarians. American Library Association. https://www.ala.org/acrl/standards/teachinglibrarians

Baer, A. (2023). Meaningful work when work won't love you back: Sociological imagination and reflective teaching practice. portal: Libraries & the Academy, 23(4), 671-681. https://doi.org/10.1353/pla.2023.a908697

Bastone, Z., & Clement, K. (2022). Serving everyone or serving no one? Examining the faux-equity of the one-shot. College & Research Libraries, 83(5), 780-794. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.83.5.780

Booth, C. (2010). Build your own instructional literacy. American Libraries, 41(6/7), 40-43.<https://americanlibrariesmagazine.org/2010/04/30/build-your-own-instructionalliteracy/

Booth, C. (2011). Reflective teaching, effective learning: Instructional literacy for library educators. ALA Editions.

Bowles-Terry, M., & Donovan, C. (2016). Serving notice on the one-shot: Changing roles for instruction librarians. International Information & Library Review, 48(2), 137-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/10572317.2016.1176457

Cardwell, C., Lux, V., & Snyder, R. J. (2012). Beyond simple, easy, and fast. College & Research Libraries News, 73(6), 344-347. https://doi.org/10.5860/crln.73.6.8778

Corrall, S. (2017). Crossing the threshold: Reflective practice in information literacy development. Journal of Information Literacy, 11(1), 23-53. https://doi.org/10.11645/11.1.2241

Dodson, M. (2020). On target or missing the mark? Instruction courses in LIS graduate programs. Public Services Quarterly, 16(2), 83-94. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228959.2020.1745131

Doherty, J. (2005). Towards self-reflection in librarianship: What is praxis? Progressive Librarian, (26), 11-17.

Farrell, T. S. C. (2020). Reflective teaching (Rev. ed.). TESOL International Association.

Freire, P. (2000). Pedagogy of the oppressed (M. B. Ramos, Trans., 30th anniversary ed.). Continuum. (Original work published 1968)

Ghaye, A., & Lillyman, S. (1997). Learning journals and critical incidents: Reflective practice for health care professionals. Quay Books.

Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Further Education Unit.

Goodsett, M. (2014). Reflective teaching: Improving library instruction through selfreflection. Southeastern Librarian, 62(3), 12-15. https://doi.org/10.62915/0038-3686.1520

Goosney, J. L., Smith, B., & Gordon, S. (2014). Reflective peer mentoring: Evolution of a professional development program for academic librarians. Partnership: The Canadian Journal of Library & Information Practice & Research, 9(1). https://doi.org/10.21083/partnership.v9i1.2966

Graf, A. J., & Harris, B. R. (2016). Reflective assessment: opportunities and challenges. Reference Services Review, 44(1), 38-47. https://doi.org/10.1108/RSR-06-2015-0027

Grant, M. J. (2007). The role of reflection in the library and information sector: a systematic review. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 24(3), 155-166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2007.00731.x

Greenall, J., & Sen, B. A. (2016). Reflective practice in the library and information sector. Journal of Librarianship and Information Science, 48(2), 137-150. https://doi.org/10.1177/0961000614551450

Hussong-Christian, U. (2013). Adapting and using instruction proficiencies to encourage reflection, goal setting and professional development. Communications in Information Literacy, 6(2), 160-172. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2013.6.2.126

Jacobs, H. L. M. (2008). Information literacy and reflective pedagogical praxis. Journal of Academic Librarianship, 34(3), 256-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2008.03.009

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice Hall.

Larrivee, B. (2000). Transforming teaching practice: Becoming the critically reflective teacher. Reflective Practice, 1(3), 293-307. https://doi.org/10.1080/713693162

Leftwich, A. M. (2019, January 30). Reflective journaling: A daily practice. The Librarian Parlor. https://libparlor.com/2019/01/30/reflective-journaling-a-daily-practice/

LeMire, S., Sullivan, T. D., & Kotinek, J. (2019). Embracing the spiral: An action research assessment of a library-honors first year collaboration. The Journal of Academic Librarianship, 45(5), Article 102042. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acalib.2019.05.010

Matlin, T. R., & Carr, A. (2014). Just the two of us: Those who co-teach, co-learn. Collaborative Librarianship, 6(2), 61-72. https://doi.org/10.29087/2014.6.2.05

Milewski, S. D., & Williamson, J. M. (2017). Developing a reflective practice template for citation management software instruction. Reference & User Services Quarterly, 57(1), 6-11. https://journals.ala.org/index.php/rusq/article/view/6435/8500

Miller, J. M. (2020). Reflective practice and health sciences librarians: Engagement, benefits, and barriers. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 108(1), 17-28. https://doi.org/10.5195/jmla.2020.777

Moon, J. (2007). Getting the measure of reflection: Considering matters of definition and depth. Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice, 6(4), 191-200. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1460396907006188

Pagowsky, N. (2021). The contested one-shot: Deconstructing power structures to imagine new futures. College & Research Libraries, 82(3), 300-309. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.82.3.300

Reale, M. (2017). Becoming a reflective librarian and teacher: Strategies for mindful academic practice. ALA Editions.

Regan, M. T., Young, S. W. H., & Mannheimer, S. (2020). Improving learner-driven teaching practices through reflective assessment. Evidence Based Library & Information Practice, 15(3), 59-77. https://doi.org/10.18438/eblip29729

Rodgers, C. (2002). Seeing student learning: Teacher change and the role of reflection. Harvard Educational Review, 72(2), 230-253. https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.72.2.5631743606m15751

Saunders, L. (2015). Education for instruction: A review of LIS instruction syllabi. The Reference Librarian, 56(1), 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2014.969392

Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. Basic Books.

Silberberg, E. (2024). Fostering self-reflection on library instruction: Testing a peer observation instrument focused on questioning strategies. Journal of Information Literacy, 18(1), 136-158. http://doi.org/10.11645/18.1.54

Sinkinson, C. (2011). An assessment of peer coaching to drive professional development and reflective teaching. Communications in Information Literacy, 5(1), 9-20. https://doi.org/10.15760/comminfolit.2011.5.1.99

Tewell, E. (2018). The practice and promise of critical information literacy: Academic librarians' involvement in critical library instruction. College & Research Libraries, 79(1), 10-34. https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.1.10

Tompkins, E. (2009). A reflective teaching journal: An instructional improvement tool for academic librarians. College & Undergraduate Libraries, 16(4), 221-238. https://doi.org/10.1080/10691310903355937

Vaandering, A.G., & Crego-Emley, A. (2025). Reflective teaching practices among library workers. Open Science Framework. https://osf.io/axqdz/

Vidmar, D. J. (2005). Reflective peer coaching: Crafting collaborative self-assessment in teaching. Research Strategies, 20(3), 135-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resstr.2006.06.002

Wagner, S., Mann, E., & Marshall, A. (2021). Toward a thoughtful assessment practice: Using reflection to guide library instruction assessment. The Reference Librarian, 62(1), 23-33. https://doi.org/10.1080/02763877.2021.1913466