Reflective–inspirational learning model in teaching research methodology in higher education: an analysis of student reflections

Eva Latipah

doi:10.14421/edulab.2025.102.01

Authors

Eva Latipah Universitas Islam Negeri Sunan Kalijaga Yogyakarta, Indonesia https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7551-8347 (unauthenticated)

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14421/edulab.2025.102.01

Keywords:

Ethics, Islamic higher education transformation, Reflective pedagogy, Research methodology

Abstract

Purpose – This study aims to describe and analyze the Reflective-Inspirational Learning Model applied in the Research Methodology course at the university level. It explores students’ learning experiences within a pedagogical approach that integrates reflection, inspiration, and academic ethics to foster conceptual understanding, moral awareness, and motivation toward research engagement.
Design/methods/approach – A descriptive qualitative design with embedded quantitative data was employed. The data were drawn from 30 written reflections of students in the Biology Education Study Program during the first semester of the 2025/2026 academic year. Using content analysis, the reflections were coded, categorized, and quantified to identify dominant themes and their frequency. Inter-rater reliability (r = 0.87) was ensured to strengthen coding consistency, and descriptive statistics supported the thematic interpretation.
Findings – The results show that the reflective-inspirational model effectively enhanced students’ research competence and ethical consciousness. Quantitatively, 83% of students described the class as inspiring and motivating, 76% emphasized ethical awareness and honesty, and 70% reported increased confidence to conduct research. Thematic analysis revealed four main categories: learning comfort (80%), ethical awareness (70%), research literacy (76%), and reflective self-growth (68%). The most memorable topics were data collection techniques (40%), research ethics and plagiarism awareness (27%), instrument validity and reliability (17%), and problem formulation (10%). These findings confirm that the model fosters conceptual understanding, moral integrity, and academic motivation.
Research Implications/Limitations – The model can serve as an innovative pedagogy for improving research literacy and ethical sensitivity in higher education. However, its contextual limitation—focused on one study program—calls for further validation through larger and longitudinal studies.
Originality/Value – This research contributes original insights by integrating reflective learning and inspirational teaching within research instruction. The combination of qualitative and quantitative evidence demonstrates that humanistic, value-based approaches can holistically strengthen students’ research competence, ethics, and self-confidence.

References

Al-Attas, S. M. N. (1991). The concept of education in Islam: A framework for an Islamic philosophy of education. ISTAC.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice Hall.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgement of taste. Harvard University Press.

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. Jossey-Bass.

Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.

Durkheim, É. (1925). Moral education: A study in the theory and application of the sociology of education. Free Press.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.

Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative action: Reason and the rationalization of society (Vol. 1). Beacon Press.

Hamre, B. K., & Pianta, R. C. (2006). Student–teacher relationships. In G. G. Bear & K. M. Minke (Eds.), Children’s needs III: Development, prevention, and intervention (pp. 59–71). National Association of School Psychologists.

Hasan, N. (2012). Islam in the public sphere: Politics of piety and pop culture in Indonesia. South East Asia Research, 20(3), 361–377. https://doi.org/10.5367/sear.2012.0105

Hasan, N. (2018). Islamic populism in Indonesia and the Middle East. NUS Press.

Kementerian Agama Republik Indonesia. (2025). Kurikulum cinta: Pendidikan berbasis nilai, empati, dan kasih di perguruan tinggi keagamaan Islam. Direktorat Pendidikan Tinggi Keagamaan Islam.

Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi Republik Indonesia. (2021). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi Nomor 31 Tahun 2021 tentang penelitian dan pengabdian kepada masyarakat di perguruan tinggi. Kemdikbudristek.

Kementerian Pendidikan, Kebudayaan, Riset, dan Teknologi Republik Indonesia. (2025). Peraturan Menteri Pendidikan Tinggi, Sains, dan Teknologi Nomor 39 Tahun 2025 tentang penyesuaian capaian pembelajaran lulusan perguruan tinggi keagamaan Islam. Kemdikbudristek.

Kohlberg, L. (1981). Essays on moral development: Vol. 1. The philosophy of moral development. Harper & Row.

Korthagen, F. A. J. (2017). Inconvenient truths about teacher learning: Towards professional development 3.0. Teachers and Teaching, 23(4), 387–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2016.1211523

Latipah, E. (2020). Self-regulated learning in Islamic perspective: Integration between cognitive, metacognitive, and spiritual dimensions. Jurnal Psikologi Pendidikan dan Konseling, 6(1), 30–41. https://doi.org/10.26858/jpkk.v6i1.13873

Latipah, E. (2021). Motives, self-regulation, and academic achievement in Islamic higher education: The mediating role of self-efficacy. International Journal of Instruction, 14(1), 947–964. https://doi.org/10.29333/iji.2021.14156a

Mayring, P. (2000). Qualitative content analysis. Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 1(2), Article 20. https://doi.org/10.17169/fqs-1.2.1089

Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. Jossey-Bass.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). SAGE Publications.

Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach: Exploring the inner landscape of a teacher’s life. Jossey-Bass.

Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The mirror-neuron system. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27, 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230

Rodgers, C. (2002). Defining reflection: Another look at John Dewey and reflective thinking. Teachers College Record, 104(4), 842–866. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9620.00181

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68

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

Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.

Zimmerman, B. J. (2002). Becoming a self-regulated learner: An overview. Theory Into Practice, 41(2), 64–70. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15430421tip4102_2