This type of thinking involves more flexibility and complex reflective thought.

The foundations of the concept of “reflective thinking” which is one of the higher-order thinking skills, are based on Dewey (1933). In Dewey’s opinion, reflective teachers continually question their goals and actions, and can evaluate the effects of their practices and results in the short term and long term (Molallem, 1997). The general framework of the concept of reflection is based on John Dewey’s suggestions in 1933. Teachers need to question the reasons behind their choices. Three features that a reflective teacher should have are classified as open mindedness, responsibility and sincerity. On the other hand, Schön (1983) proposes two levels of reflection as “reflection-in-action” (during the event) and “reflection-on-action” (after the event).

Reflection is expressed as individual’s assessment of the existing situation based on his/her experiences, reaching a new and original result based on his/her own perspective by making sense of the situation. In the reflection behavior that emerges at the end of this process, variables such as cognitive states and teaching methods and techniques followed in the process are effective. It is also defined as individuals’ thinking about what is going on in the environment during and after the learning-teaching process and making changes they need in the light of their thoughts (Başol & Evin-Gencel, 2013; Denton, 2011; Kazu & Demiralp, 2012; McCollum, 2002; Ünver, 2007).

According to Dewey (1933), in order for reflection to exist, current information needs to be organized, rearranged, and effectively structured and transformed into appropriate behavior in a solution-oriented way. Because it is known that teachers whose skills of reflective thinking are not sufficiently developed repeat the existing or previous teaching practices. In addition, Dewey (1933) stated that “reflective thinking” has a close relationship with open mindedness, sincerity and responsibility, which reveals the interpretation that individuals are successful to the extent that they can reflect what they have learned by internalizing it in the light of their experiences (Dilekli, 2018; Dilekli & Orakcı, 2019; Orakcı, Dilekli, & Erdağ, 2020; Orakcı, 2021; Toraman, Orakcı, & Aktan, 2020). Learning is also successful to the extent that individuals can reflect their learning to real life. In the constructivist approach that forms the content and basic philosophy of the curriculum, one of the main goals of learning is the realization of reflection (Başol & Evin-Gencel, 2013; Tok, 2008). It includes a multi-dimensional thinking system such as reflective thinking, questioning the objectives of a subject, checking the results of applications, short and long-term thinking, taking into account feedback, being open to criticism and suggestions, being open to innovations and self-development (Cruickshank, Bainer, & Metcalf, 1995; Norton, 1994).

The improvement of higher-order thinking skills is directly connected with reflective thinking skills and functionality of the teacher in practice. The effective communication skills and the quality of the teacher in the guidance process play a part in the development of the students' full learning, and the development of reflective thinking skills in the students since a reflective thinking teacher is an individual who focuses on lifelong learning, is focused on development, is open-minded and has the ability to effectively plan and evaluate the teaching process by making self-assessment (Norton, 1994). Educating students with high-level thinking skills targeted in primary education programs depends on the successful implementation of these programs. The reflective thinking skill of the teacher is directly proportional to the aim of raising sensitive and understanding students with problem-solving skills and a bias-free perspective. Teachers with reflective thinking skills guide the students in the learning process, teach their students how to access information and create an environment where their students can express themselves freely (Ersözlü, 2008; Sánchez-Martí, Sabariego Puig, Ruiz-Bueno, & Anglés Regós, 2018; Semerci, 2007; Ünver, 2003). According to Evin-Gencel and Güzel-Candan (2014), having individuals gain reflective thinking skills also enables them to have the ability to look at himself /herself critically and make a qualified self-assessment. “Reflective thinking” requires practitioners, that is, teachers to supervise themselves and make self-judgments during teaching-learning process (Aydın & Çelik, 2013; Dilekli, 2019).

According to “Constructivist Learning Theory”, learning has its origin in the previous knowledge of the learner and can be observed by the learner himself /herself since learning is an individual process. Therefore, it requires focusing on individual learning and the needs of the learner in the learning process (Nunan, 1997; Wang, 2011), which is only possible by raising the learner as an autonomous individual. According to Holec (1987), “learner autonomy” means that the learner takes on his / her own learning responsibilities. Decision making ability of the learner in the learning process constitutes indispensable feature of this concept (Crabbe, 1999; Little, 1995, 1997; 1999). In other words, the learner is not a container in which the information is filled, but the one who decides what information to learn and how to process it. Benson (2001) defined “learner autonomy” as the capacity to take control of three levels of learning including “learning management”, “cognitive processes” and “learning content”. “Learner autonomy” brings about the conscious spread of appropriate strategies within the scope of certain learning activities and throughout the learning process, and these strategies are developed taking into account individual differences (Little, 1999). According to Holec (1981), autonomy is a feature of the learner, not of learning. This feature is not innate. Depending on whether the learning process is open or closed for autonomy, it is more or less acquired by the learner. Little (1997) emphasizes that even though autonomy is interpreted as the learner's own individual and independent decisions, human beings are a social being and interaction is important in the development of autonomy. Learners may not know what is best for them at the beginning of the learning process. Therefore, they must be supported (Nunan, 1997). On the other hand, Cremin, Burnard, and Craft (2006) emphasized that standing back can improve autonomy by giving the opportunity for individuals to follow their own interests and shape their learning. Little (1995) also stated that having learners gain learner autonomy depends on whether a teacher is autonomous or not. “Learner autonomy” is not an easy process that is gained or learned at a time because it requires time, effort, responsibility, and the support of autonomous teachers. In summary, active and effective learning experience requires learner autonomy which is recognized as an essential principle of learning (Orakcı & Gelişli, 2017, 2019).

The concepts of “cognitive flexibility”, “reflective thinking” and “learner autonomy” are rapidly coming to the fore in the world. As mentioned before, “cognitive flexibility” is relevant to the capacity to recreate knowledge in multiple ways resting on changing situational demands. The eventual objective of “cognitive flexibility” is to enable individuals to improve their ability to understand different situations (Graddy, 2001). In other words, “cognitive flexibility” is that individuals can adapt their cognitive processing strategies to new and unexpected situations. As Kloo et al. (2010) emphasized, “cognitive flexibility” also allows the use of regulatory strategies to evaluate by prompting individuals to frame problems, analyse situations, and argue the benefits and drawbacks of various alternatives. On the other hand, Jiménez Raya and Vieira (2015) underline that promoting individuals in terms of critical reflection about their needs, interests and beliefs will lead to greater levels of cognitive involvement, and learner autonomy in learning. In addition, Wu and Koutstaal (2020) found out in their study that enabling participants to have the opportunity to autonomously choose tasks contributed to their creative thinking, and cognitive flexibility. When the aforementioned were evaluated, “cognitive flexibility”, “reflective thinking” and “learner autonomy” can be thought to be connected and have an effect on each other.

When the studies conducted were examined, no studies were found to explore student teachers' cognitive flexibility, learner autonomy and reflective thinking together. “Cognitive flexibility”, “learner autonomy”, “reflective thinking” can be of great significance for teacher training. Extracurricular reading habits and place of residence may also have an influence on these variables. “Cognitive flexibility” can be thought to affect both learner autonomy and reflective thinking. Therefore, “cognitive flexibility” was regarded as a mediating role in the study. The present study with the large sample of student teachers tries to explore the effects of extracurricular reading habits and place of residence on “cognitive flexibility”, “learner autonomy”, and “reflective thinking” by probing the relationships between these variables. For this purpose, the study addressed answers to the questions below:

Is there a significant relationship between “cognitive flexibility”, “learner autonomy”, and “reflective thinking”?

Do “cognitive flexibility”, “learner autonomy”, and “reflective thinking” differ with regard to extracurricular reading habits and place of residence?

Is “reflective thinking” a significant predictor of “learner autonomy” when the level of “cognitive flexibility” is formulated as a mediator variable?