Embedded Files
An integrative review was selected as the methodological approach because it accommodates interdisciplinary bodies of literature and enables the synthesis of both empirical and theoretical sources. This approach supports conceptual development while generating insights for evidence-based practice (Torraco, 2005, 2016; Whittemore & Knafl, 2005).
Because double-loop learning considers both outcomes (quantitative) and processes (qualitative), a mixed-methods orientation was adopted to facilitate a comprehensive understanding and to connect these dimensions (Chen, 2015; Argyris & Schön as in Evans et al., 2012).
Search Strategy & Data Selection
Search Strategy & Data Selection
Empirical and conceptual articles were sourced from academic databases using the following characteristics:
Inclusion Criteria
Inclusion Criteria
studies published within 2015-2025 (except formative works)
critical analyses
historically marginalized voices
sources connecting disciplines
Exclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
sources that centred top-down perspectives
sources informed by middle or secondary contexts
highly specific niche contexts (like dual language programs, or Engligh Language Learning)
studies with French as minority language (e.g., core French) or alternative language immersion (Hebrew, Mandarin)
Search Terms
Search Terms
Search strings were created from combinations of keywords from the following disciplines. I also snowballed my search by reviewing reference lists on selected sources until I hit a saturation point and started eliminating sources
Each category is hyperlinked to more detail.
Disciplines of Study
Disciplines of Study
French Immersion
second language
additional language
*lingual,
retention
attrition
content-based language learning
L2
occupational justice
occupational therapy
occupational science
student participation
engagement
belonging
access
identity
rights
inclusive education,
neurodiversity
learning difference
special education
Universal Design for Learning
UDL
evidence-based practice
Job Demands–Resources theory,
J D-R
implementation
burnout
teacher attitudes
teacher workload
teacher wellbeing
double-loop learning
Methodological References
Methodological References
Aidley, D. (2018). Introducing Quantitative Methods: A Practical Guide. Macmillan Education UK.
Chen, H. T. (2015). Practical Program Evaluation: Theory-Driven Evaluation and the Integrated Evaluation Perspective. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781071909850
Creswell, J., & Guetterman, T. (2018). Educational Research: Planning, Conducting, and Evaluating Quantitative and Qualitative Research, 6th Edition. Pearson Education.
Cronin, M. A., & George, E. (2023). The Why and How of the Integrative Review. Organizational Research Methods, 26(1), 168–192. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428120935507
Groothuijsen, S. E. A., Bronkhorst, L. H., Prins, G. T., & Kuiper, W. (2020). Teacher-researchers’ Quality Concerns for Practice-oriented Educational Research. Research Papers in Education, 35(6), 766–787. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1633558
Jaakkola, E. (2020). Designing conceptual articles: Four approaches. AMS Review, 10. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13162-020-00161-0
Torraco, R. J. (2016a). Writing Integrative Literature Reviews: Using the Past and Present to Explore the Future. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606
Torraco, R. J. (2016b). Writing Integrative Reviews of the Literature: Methods and Purposes. International Journal of Adult Vocational Education and Technology, 7(3), 62–70. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJAVET.2016070106
Whittemore, R., & Knafl, K. (2006). The integrative review: Update methodology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 52, 546–553. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03621.x
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse