MRAS: New Findings on a Teacher Reflection Instrument Based on Digital Awareness and AI Ethics
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17977/um038v9i12026p090-100Keywords:
mras, digital literacy, teacher reflection, meta-reflective awareness, AI EthicsAbstract
The rapid development of digital technologies and the growing use of artificial intelligence in education require teachers to engage in reflective practices that integrate pedagogical reasoning, technological awareness, and ethical sensitivity. This study aims to develop and validate the Meta-Reflective Awareness Scale, an instrument designed to examine teachers’ meta-reflective awareness in technology-supported learning environments. The instrument was administered through a survey and validated using expert review, reliability testing, exploratory factor analysis, and structural modeling based on the Partial Least Squares approach. The findings indicate that the instrument demonstrates strong internal consistency and a well-defined factor structure. Two core dimensions were identified, with ethical awareness emerging as the most prominent component shaping teachers’ reflective profiles. The structural analysis confirms a strong relationship between ethical awareness and digital awareness, suggesting that moral orientation plays a central role in teachers’ readiness to engage with educational technologies. These results highlight the importance of understanding teacher reflection as an integrated process that connects cognitive, digital, and ethical dimensions. Practically, the instrument offers a useful framework for assessing reflective competence and supporting professional development in technology-enhanced educational contexts.
References
Bond, M. (2021). Digital transformation and teachers' reflective practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 105, 103428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2021.103428
Broadbent, J., & Poon, W. (2015). Self-regulated learning strategies and academic achievement in online higher education environments: A systematic review. The Internet and Higher Education, 27, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.04.007
Brown, T. A. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
Castañeda, L., & Williamson, B. (2021). Assembling digital education governance: Data and algorithms in policy. Learning, Media and Technology, 46(3), 290–305. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2021.1876089
Chen, B., & Hong, H. (2022). AI literacy for teachers: A review. Computers & Education, 180, 104446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2022.104446
Clark, A., & Chalmers, D. (1998). The extended mind. Analysis, 58(1), 7–19. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/58.1.7
DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Dewey, J. (1933). How we think. D.C. Heath.
Dignath, C., Buettner, G., & Langfeldt, H. (2008). How can students learn self-regulated strategies effectively? Educational Research Review, 3(2), 101–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2008.02.003
Ghavifekr, S., & Rosdy, W. A. W. (2015). Teaching and learning with ICT tools. The International Journal of Information and Learning Technology, 32(1), 72–85. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJILT-06-2014-0027
Grant, A. M., Franklin, J., & Langford, P. (2002). The Self-Reflection and Insight Scale: A new instrument for assessing private self-consciousness. Social Behavior and Personality, 30(8), 821–835. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2002.30.8.821
He, T., & Li, S. (2019). Digital literacy and reflective competence among teachers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 57(7), 1656–1683. https://doi.org/10.1177/0735633119854037
Holmes, W., Bialik, M., & Fadel, C. (2022). Artificial intelligence in education: Promises and implications. Center for Curriculum Redesign.
Howard, S. K., Tondeur, J., Ma, J., & Yang, J. (2021). Conceptualizing teacher digital competence. Computers & Education, 160, 104024. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2020.104024
Kember, D., Leung, D. Y., Jones, A., Loke, A. Y., McKay, K., Sinclair, K., & Yeung, E. (2000). Development of a questionnaire to measure the level of reflective thinking. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 25(4), 381–395. https://doi.org/10.1080/713611442
Kline, R. B. (2015). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press.
Lai, E. R. (2011). Metacognition: A literature review. Pearson.
Li, L., & Wang, X. (2021). Ethical dimensions of artificial intelligence in education. AI and Ethics, 1, 45–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43681-020-00014-9
MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., & Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4(1), 84–99. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.4.1.84
OECD. (2019). OECD skills outlook 2019: Thriving in a digital world. OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/df80bc12-en
Pangrazio, L. (2016). Reconceptualizing critical digital literacy. Learning, Media and Technology, 41(2), 181–198. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2015.1107093
Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.88.5.879
Pratiwi, M. D. N., Wedi, A., & Praherdhiono, H. (2018). Media pembelajaran standar lembar balik IPA sekolah dasar. JKTP: Jurnal Kajian Teknologi Pendidikan, 1(3), 195–204. https://doi.org/10.17977/um038v1i3p195-204
Reise, S. P., Scheines, R., Widaman, K. F., & Haviland, M. G. (2013). Multidimensionality and scale validation in IRT. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(1), 5–26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013164412449831
Roll, I., & Wylie, R. (2016). Evolution of metacognitive research in learning environments. Educational Psychologist, 51(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/00461520.2015.1122144
Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner. Basic Books.
Selwyn, N. (2020). Digital technologies and teachers: Future prospects. British Journal of Educational Technology, 51(6), 2140–2154. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12955
The, H. Y., & Latifah. (2025). Developing Students’ Academic Integrity Through Case Study Learning Practices . JKTP: Jurnal Kajian Teknologi Pendidikan, 8(1), 034–045. https://doi.org/10.17977/um038v8i12025p034
Williamson, B. (2020). The datafication of education. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(3), 264–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2020.1686011
Williamson, B., & Piattoeva, N. (2022). Objectivity as standardization in data-driven education governance. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 54(10), 1630–1643. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2021.1875885
Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Qoriah Rahmawati, Anwar Hadi Firdos Santosa
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Jurnal Kajian Teknologi Pendidikan allows readers to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of its articles and allow readers to use them for any other lawful purpose. The journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright without restrictions. Finally, the journal allows the author(s) to retain publishing rights without restrictions.
- Authors are allowed to archive their submitted articles in an open access repository.
- Authors are allowed to archive the final published article in an open access repository with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
