Propositional vs. Practical Knowledge Exploring

International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning
ISSN: 2204-0552 (Print) 1833-4105 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjpl20
Propositional vs. Practical Knowledge: Exploring

the Metaphors and Images of Pre-service Teachers
Robyn Torok
To cite this article: Robyn Torok (2005) Propositional vs. Practical Knowledge: Exploring the
Metaphors and Images of Pre-service Teachers, International Journal of Pedagogies and
Learning, 1:3, 11-29, DOI: 10.5172/ijpl.1.3.11
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.5172/ijpl.1.3.11
Published online: 17 Dec 2014.
Submit your article to this journal
Article views: 1
View related articles
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rjpl20
Download by: [Flinders University of South Australia] Date: 15 March 2016, At: 22:04
International Journal
of Pedagogies and Learning 1(3), pp. 11-29. November 2005
Propositional vs. Practical Knowledge: Exploring the

Metaphors and Images of Pre-service Teachers
Robyn Torok, Education Queensland, Australia (robyn_torok@yahoo.co.uk)
This article has been anonymously peer-reviewed and accepted for publication in the International Journal of
Pedagogies and Learning, an international, peer-reviewed journal that focuses on issues and trends in pedagogies
and learning in national and international contexts. ISSN 1833-4105.
Abstract
Downloaded by [Flinders University of South Australia] at 22:04 15 March 2016
This paper examines how pre-service teachers deal with the commonly reported
theory–practice divide during their early teaching experiences by focusing on key
elements of their practical theories. The findings come from a mainly qualitative case
study of three pre-service teachers in their final year of university study. Participants
had their practical theories elucidated through an interview process, as well as several
profiling instruments. Views of how participants coped with the theory–practice
divide were narrowed to two areas: behaviour management and pedagogy. Multiple
data sources were triangulated and relationships developed on an a posteriori basis.
The findings are presented as case studies of each of the three participants.
Participants’ schooling experiences, educational philosophy and personality type were
found to be significant in influencing perceptions of the usefulness of educational
theory. A filtration system model was developed where theory flows to practice
through four main filters, with the amount of material progressing determining the
size of the theory–practice divide. The major finding was that it was not so much the
nature of this divide that was a hindrance to the development of pre-service teachers
but the constraints of teacher-centred pedagogy imposed by supervising teachers that
prevented the pre-service teachers from experimenting and developing their own
practical theories.
Introduction
Teaching is a complex task because it takes place in an environment where there are
multiple variables to consider. These complexities are exacerbated because teachers
have to cope with a myriad of external influences (Russell, 1993). On a daily basis,
educators are forced to cope with “ambiguity, unpredictability and occasional chaos”
(McNamara, 1990, p. 148).
In facing such complexity, pre-service teachers use their experiences as students

(Burn, Hagger, Mutton & Everton, 2000) as well as propositional knowledge taught in
their education courses. Johnston (1992) asserts that much educational theory taught
to teachers is known as propositional knowledge (theory), which is distinct from
practical knowledge (related to practice) held by teachers. There is often a feeling by
teachers that much academic research has little practical use in the classroom, thus
creating a theory–practice divide (Clark & Peterson, 1986; Eylon, 2000).
Consequently, pre-service teachers are left feeling ill-equipped for the complex
challenges of teaching.
11
Furthermore, there is often a conflict between university preparation and teacher

supervisor ideologies in areas such as the curriculum and the needs of the students
(Burn et al., 2000). During practicums, supervising teachers often reinforce the over
idealistic nature of university preparation courses (Kane, 1994). However, McIntyre
(1995) notes that university tutors and supervising teachers are seen as possessing
different types of knowledge and expertise, and both are important for the
development of pre-service teachers. Pre-service teachers need to develop their own
practical theories, extracting what they can from university preparation in order to
cope with the labyrinthine nature of teaching.
Research into teachers’ practical theories has found that teacher thinking does
influence teacher actions (Meijer, 2001). We also carry with us our perceptions from
our own schooling (Corney, 2000). These may influence us in a passive sense by
causing us to ritualise or imitate models in a procedural fashion without necessarily
justifying their value (Corney, 2000; Russell, 1993) or we may actively reflect on and
incorporate positive and negative schooling experiences into our practical theory
(Conners, Nettle & Placing, 1990). Such theories that govern the cognitions of
teachers are often implicit, idiosyncratic and context dependent (Hulshof & Verloop,
2002; Hunt, 1987; Marland, 1998). Moreover, teachers’ theories incorporate a diverse
range of facets such as beliefs, values, principles, practices, tactics, desirable student
states and even images and metaphors (Marland, 1993, 1997, 1998).
This project explored how pre-service teachers deal with the commonly reported
theory–practice divide during their early teaching experiences by focusing on key
elements of their practical theories.
Methodology
Design
The study was a cross-sectional, multiple case study of three pre-service teachers
(using homogeneous, purposeful sampling) from the University of Southern
Queensland. The three female students were selected on a volunteer basis and were all
in their final year of university preparation to be secondary teachers. The study was
largely qualitative; however, some quantitative dimensions were included. Consistent
with the principles of qualitative case studies, focus was on providing rich description
and understanding (Sturman, 1994; Wiersma, 2000). Data collection was conducted
using a combination of interviews and two profiling instruments.
Data collection procedures and analysis

Interviews
Owing to the voluminous nature of data, interviews were recorded on audio (micro
cassette) in conjunction with concurrent notetaking. Participants were interviewed in a
relaxed setting (a café) and were provided with an outline of the types of questions
that would be asked. Participants were also assured of the anonymity of all data
recorded.
a) Narratives on life history – participants were asked to give a brief description of

their life history in relation to their schooling experience (primary and secondary).
From this description, key experiences and elements from participants’ life histories
12
were extracted and crossreferenced against other data sources. Of particular interest
were experiences that have had a significant impact on the participants’ practical
theories.
b) Teachers’ practical theories – interviews began informally, looking at metaphors

and images of teaching. Subsequently, a detailed checklist of questions was used to
elucidate fully all aspects of participants’ practical theories. This checklist, based on
the categories outlined by Marland (1998), was also used for coding responses and is
presented in the appendix.
c) Critical incidents – analysis of critical incidents has been an important part of

examining teachers’ practical theories in a number of studies (Conners et al., 1990;
Koustelini & Persianis, 2000). Participants were asked to focus on incidents relating
to behaviour management and pedagogy that occurred during their cumulative

practicum experiences, as these have been noted to be of primary concern to pre-
service teachers (Kane, 1994).
d) Views on coping with the theory–practice divide – participants were asked to

expound on aspects of congruence and conflict between their pre-service preparation
and their practicum experiences in the two aforementioned focus areas: behaviour
management and pedagogy.
Instruments
a) Philosophy of Education Inventory (PEI) – Zinn’s (1996; cited in Katzenmeyer &
Moller, 1996) instrument was designed to measure and interpret a teacher’s
philosophical orientation in the area of education. This instrument provides a
structured framework for asking questions relating to a teacher’s beliefs and values
relating to education. The instrument uses a seven point Likert scale with items
ranked from strongly disagree to strongly agree. There are fifteen items in the
inventory, each with five sub-items. The results provided the strength of participants’
philosophical orientations across five different philosophies (see Table 1) with the
range of possible scores being from 15 to 105 in each area (Zinn, 1996; cited in
Katzenmeyer & Moller, 1996, pp. 134-136).
Table 1: Summary of philosophical orientations

Philosophy type Purpose Student Teacher role
Behavioural education Education for Masters one step before Manager
compliance with another
standards
Comprehensive General education for Gains knowledge and Authoritative controller
education life understanding
Progressive education Education for problem Experiences valued, Expert
solving in society active participant
Humanistic education Education for self Motivated, self directed Organiser
actualisation
Social change Education for Autonomous, Facilitator
education transforming society empowered
13
b) Simplified Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (Jung Topology Test, n.d.) (SMPTI) – this
instrument is a personality test based on four indices and is provided online by
humanmetrics. The original Myers-Briggs Type Indicator has 126 items and requires
administration by a qualified psychologist. In order to bypass this restriction, the
simplified 72 item version (using a yes/no scale), available online at
http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp, was given to participants and
scored online. As a limitation, it must be acknowledged that the SMBTI will have
slightly lower validity and reliability than the original MBTI. However, for this study,
this instrument was used as a profiling aid in conjunction with a number of other
qualitative techniques. It was not used as a definitive diagnostic instrument; rather it
was used as a tool to help build a picture of the participant.
The SMBTI is based on four indices that give the predilection between two opposing
poles. These indices and the poles are summarised from Myers and McCaulley (1985)
in Table 2.
Table 2: Summary of indices of the MBTI

Index Pole 1 Pole 2
1) Extroversion–Introversion Extroversion (E) – external Introversion (I) – internal focus
(EI) (Orientation) focus on people and objects on concepts and ideas
2) Sensing–Intuition (SN) Sensing (S) – rely on five senses Intuition (N) – relies on less
(Ways of perceiving) and the observable obvious process of intuition
3) Thinking–Feeling (TF) Thinking (T) – decide Feeling (F) – decide based on
(Ways of judging) impersonally based on logic personal feelings or values
4) Judgement–Perception (JP) Judgement (J) – preference for Perception (P) – preference for
(Ways of dealing with the the judgment process (index 3) a perceptive process (index 2)
outside world)
From these four indices there are 16 types. Each type has distinct characteristics and is
used to help with profiling participants. In addition to giving the personality type, the
online scoring system gave the relative strength of that preference. Owing to validity
issues, these relative strengths were interpreted with caution.
Validity and reliability

Hoepfl (1997) indicates that reliability is the foundation and precondition of validity.
The characteristics and life contexts of participants are fully described in order to
enhance reliability, as advocated by LeCompte and Goetz (1982). In addition, all data
collection procedures are carefully outlined to enhance reliability (Corney, 2000;
Hoepfl, 1997; LeCompte & Goetz, 1982). Furthermore, using a clear checklist,
providing rich descriptions and using a mechanical recording device (taperecorder)
enhanced the reliability of this study (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982).
The status and role of the researcher are a key issue in the validity of qualitative
research (LeCompte & Goetz, 1982). Not having any supervisory connection with the
pre-service teachers has distinct benefits and avoids possible conflicts of interest and
fears of bias as noted by Corney (2000). Furthermore, source checking with
participants was conducted to enhance validity (Hagner & Helm, 1994; Wiersma,
2000).
14
Triangulation was achieved through the comparison of multiple data sources and
collection methods to enhance validity (Sturman, 1994; Wiersma, 2000). Theories and
models were developed on an inductive basis and were developed and tested in terms
of their explanatory coherence, symmetry and simplicity (Haig, 1995).
Results and Discussion

Case study 1: Renee
Renee’s practical theories
Renee specialises in secondary science and mathematics. When asked for images of
good teaching, Renee responded in terms of two key dimensions: motivating students;
and enhancing understanding. This balance was admired by Renee in one of her
female high school science teachers who made science fun, enabled good learning and
inspired Renee to become a science teacher. In terms of motivation, Renee alluded to
this as both an art and a skill: “You have to trick them [students] to think they are
goals that they want….You have to try and make it interesting”. Understanding and
avoiding misconceptions were important issues for Renee in science owing to the
importance of concepts.
When probed for a metaphor for her teaching, Renee responded with the idea of being
a coach – not one who yells but rather one who directs and motivates. Having students
feel confident, as well as respecting one another, were key goals for Renee. She had a
strong belief that students should “respect each other and learn to work together”.
Renee’s image of the ideal classroom was small groups working together to solve
problems, even though such a classroom may seem noisy and out of control to some.
Renee did not subscribe to the “old fashioned classroom”. This picture complemented
well Renee’s idea of a good teacher: a person who can think ahead, be organised yet
flexible and have a sense of humour and not worry about mishaps.
Bridging the theory–practice divide

In both the investigated areas of behaviour management and pedagogy, Renee clearly
indicated differences between university theory and the practice of teaching.
Renee recounted a critical incident during one of her practicums that related to both
areas. It was a Year 8 maths lesson that was fun, designed around four different
activities without involving textbook work. Yet, despite Renee’s impressions, the
supervising teacher was critical, indicating that the class was too noisy and the
activity not structured enough. Furthermore, Renee could not believe how negative
the supervising teacher was towards the students while overlooking positive aspects of
the lesson.
In preparation for behaviour management, Renee conducted an external behaviour

management course but was critical of its content: “It [the course] was not practically
based. It was hard to adopt. What could I do with this information? They were only
theories and were not relevant”.
Renee emphasised the need for a practical, hands on approach, yet she did not agree
with the yelling/punishment style of management used in schools. This view seems to
have been influenced by Renee’s negative experiences, particularly in primary school.
15
As a result, Renee preferred a consequence-based system and the use of positive

reinforcement and also supported the schools policy to remove disruptive students
from the classroom by sending them outside.
The theory–practice divide in the area of pedagogy was even more substantial for
Renee: “Uni and schools are 100% opposite. Uni focuses on rich task outcomes,
productive pedagogies and cooperative learning, where school focuses on direct
teaching and the teacher guided classroom”.
Renee had a clear concept in her mind about the nature of this divide and tended to
deal with this by striking a balance between the demands of theory and practice:
In theory, good teaching is about motivating students to learn…getting them to
investigate something and address misconceptions. In practice, the confines of
school and assessment structures stops good teaching from being that, with the
emphasis on getting the content across and helping them get good marks – it’s
assessment driven. I would love it if it was the first one [theory], but in reality
I have to balance it out.
Relationship between practical theories and the theory–practice divide

In order to aid understanding of this relationship, results for Renee on the two
inventories are summarised in Table 3.
Table 3: Renee’s philosophical and personality profiles

Philosophical Profile Personality Profile
Philosophy of education (order of Myers-Briggs Type: ENFJ (Extroverted, Intuitive,
preference): Feeling, Judging):
Progressive education - 75 Slightly extroverted (1%)
Behavioural education and social justice Moderately expressed intuitive personality (33%)
education -74 Moderately expressed feeling personality (33%)
Comprehensive education – 68 Moderately expressed judging personality (50%)
Humanistic education - 62
Renee seemed able to ‘balance out’ the demands of theory and practice and Table 3
gives some indications why. Renee shows no single obvious philosophical preference,
with three different philosophies showing only a maximum one point difference and
only a 13 point range for all five. Consistent with her practical theories, Renee prefers
a progressive approach (problem solving) but also realises that this must be balanced
with more traditional approaches.
Constraints of content and time were clearly noted as impinging on Renee’s preferred
way of teaching using investigation and problem solving. Constraints from her
supervising teacher were found to be particularly problematic for Renee: “You don’t
get much chance to practise your own way of teaching. The supervising teacher has
made their position clear!”.
Such an approach is also reflected in this dialogue on difficult students:

Author: What sought of tactics do you use? For example, how would you deal
with a difficult class after lunch?
16
Renee: It depends on my mood. I would get students back on task or I may do

something completely different.…I would act differently if the [supervising]
teacher was watching. If they were not watching, I would do something
completely different.
An analysis of Renee’s personality profile indicates that the ENFJ type is particularly
adept in complex situations that require the judging of many variables (The portrait of
the teacher idealist eNFj, 2004). In Renee’s case, a bigger dilemma was not so much
handling the theory–practice divide as the constraints imposed by some of her
supervising teachers. In the area of behaviour management, Renee was critical of the
artificial nature of practicum in that “You can’t change things around in five weeks;
the practicum is too short”.
Case study 2: Heidi

Heidi’s practical theories
Heidi specialises in secondary visual arts and history. Heidi’s image of a good teacher
was that of a facilitator, someone who provides a landmark or a map of where
students are now and where they are going.
Heidi’s metaphor of teaching focused on gardening, with the key idea of having
something produced, such as food which can be eaten. Learning is like a tree with the
roots, trunk and branches undergoing continual development. Growth was a core
concept in Heidi’s metaphor, indicating a central focus on pedagogy.
Heidi sees students’ life stories as an access point to learning. This way, students can
make their own connection with content by relating it to their family history, for
example. Heidi subscribed to a balance between inquiry-based/student-directed
learning and more traditional, teacher-directed approaches: “Negotiate with students
based on interest…create interest by relating to their world for example engage boys
in visual arts by looking at cars. Identify with their world rather than try to impose a
unit”.
In terms of values, Heidi’s key value was that of self honesty through reflective
practice: “Being honest with yourself as a teacher, looking at what didn’t work and
why”.
Relating with students should be based on respect and this is achieved by modelling,
according to Heidi. She also indicated that one should not be too strict and realise that
students get excited and have fun. If students were unmotivated, she would use
strategies such as discussing something of interest, telling them a humorous story,
getting the students to stand up and stretch or even taking them outside. Heidi prefers
her classrooms to be discussion based: “…not too quiet, but not too loud either.
Students should be engaged and involved. Chatter should be subject-based”.
Attributes of a good teacher, according to Heidi, include flexibility, honesty, openness,

creativity, humour and connecting to students’ interests. In terms of pedagogy, Heidi
believes in using a wide range of strategies such as group work, mind maps and
experiments to engage students.
17

Pedagogically, in contrast to Renee, Heidi indicated that the theory–practice
differences were quite small. Strategies taught at university such as productive
pedagogies, problem solving, making work relevant and scaffolding were all useful as
they “…gave structure and skills to teach. They helped to gain confidence”. Heidi
used a blend of strategies from university and her practicum experiences.
One area of incongruence noted was that schools advocated more traditional
pedagogical approaches than university with no practical real world links, whereas
university theories were much more contemporary and involved combined units and
making work relevant. In bridging this divide, Heidi noted that practical experiences
gave her a chance to make “…ideals more practical and to get a better sense of timing
and flow”. However, she also noted the idea that supervising teachers and schools
often failed in their attempts to make work relevant to students.
In the area of behaviour management, the theory–practice divide was much more
substantial. The perspectives of the university and the supervising teacher were not
just different but opposite. Heidi recalls:
At university we were told never to send students out, don’t yell or single kids
out and don’t give lines. At school we did send kids out which was effective if
followed up….Teachers also yelled, embarrassed kids, threatened to send to
the deputy, gave lines or made them copy out of the book for the whole lesson.
Heidi was forced to deal explicitly with this divide during her third practicum when
facing a very challenging history class. She recounted a critical incident where a
particular student would not keep quiet or stay seated. When sent outside, the student
walked up and down the corridor pulling faces at other students. This event was
significant for Heidi because she realised the importance of follow up and also
because of the emotional impact on her: “It was the first time I got angry and
emotional. I realised – O my God! I have to deal with this everyday!”
In terms of dealing with dilemmas, Heidi adopted a pragmatic approach: “Go with
what works”. Heidi tended to adopt more of the strategies advocated by her
supervisors, such as seating plans, sending students out and at times raising her voice.

Heidi’s philosophical and personality profiles are summarised in Table 4.
Table 4: Heidi’s philosophical and personality profiles

Philosophy of education (order of Myers-Briggs Type: INFJ (Introverted, Intuitive,
Progressive education - 89 Moderately expressed introvert (44%)
Behavioural education - 86 Moderately expressed intuitive personality (44%)
Humanistic education – 84 Moderately expressed feeling personality (33%)
Comprehensive education and social Slightly expressed judging personality (22%)
justice education - 75
18
Similarly to Renee, Heidi did not show an overtly strong philosophical preference,
with the first three types only five points apart, indicating no clear orientation.
Congruent with her stated pedagogical preferences, a problem solving approach is
preferred, but also traditional behavioural approaches are needed.
Heidi’s image of teacher as a facilitator fitted in well with her wide range of
pedagogical strategies. Having students learn and reach their learning potential was a
key goal for Heidi, which seems to have been firmly implanted by an experience at
high school, recounted as follows:
I had this maths teacher in high school that used to come to school in a
tracksuit, thongs and shirt. He never taught us, we used to just sit there and
have a chat. We didn’t learn or get any help. I enjoyed it at the time but later
realised its effect. I make sure that it does not happen in my classroom.
Heidi’s underlying attitude here seems to be one of “I will not let my students suffer
the pain of not learning as I did”. Furthermore, making work relevant was still
important to Heidi as it was a core belief about learning, even though the school
system did not always attach the same level of importance to this belief.
Examining this relationship is more complex in the area of behaviour management,

where the theory–practice divide is much greater. The aforementioned critical incident
dealing with student behaviour seemed to have a profound impact, making Heidi
realise she needed to learn how to deal effectively with incidents to avoid emotional
stress, particularly as she is an introverted (I) and feeling (F) Myers-Briggs
personality type.
Age appropriate management (being less strict with other students) was another
important concept mentioned by Heidi. Striking the balance with behaviour
management was indicated by Heidi to have best been modelled not by university or
supervising teachers but by her own high school art teacher, whom she saw as having
a positive impact.
Case study 3: Sharyn

Sharyn’s practical theories
Sharyn specialises in secondary art and Studies of Society and the Environment
(SOSE). Sharyn’s image of a good teacher was described in one key word: eclectic.
Sharyn’s image looked at three aspects: the individual needs or self-esteem of the
child; social aspects (interactions of students); and their classroom environment.
Social issues were an integral part of Sharyn’s image of teaching and this was related
to the way she works: “I work analytically and emotionally”.
Not surprisingly, when asked for a metaphor, Sharyn gave that of a social worker,
with her focus being on building individual and classroom connections. This sense of
social awareness and justice comes from an incident in Sharyn’s life when she was in
4th or 5th class and was falsely accused of breaking another student’s arm, in addition
to being abused by the student’s parent. The outcome and effect were significant:
“The kids supported me and ostracised the other kid….It gave me a sense of fairness
and social justice….It gave me an awareness of others’ needs and the need for self-
protection”.
19
This experience also influenced Sharyn’s goal of teaching, which is one of

empowering students. Socialisation and subject-based discussion are an important
measure of student progress as well as a desirable student state for Sharyn, who gave
the example of one girl in her art class who opened up in dialogue and this was seen
as a significant outcome.
In terms of pedagogy, Sharyn indicated a strong belief that students should see
relevance in what they are learning. Strategies for art were seen as different from
SOSE, with art based on demonstration and scaffolding with more interaction
between students and within students. Art was also seen as an area for self expression:
“Art is not as threatening as SOSE. Art is a safe area for kids to talk; it’s very
subjective and very diverse”.
In terms of implementing her ideas and ways of teaching, Sharyn has indicated the
strong contextual influence of school structures:
I’ve been in a very structured school and thought it would be very difficult to
do this in a particular area and yet I’ve been in another school where I could
do it very easily….I see the necessity of structure but I think structure should
be flexible.

In the area of behaviour management, Sharyn found that there were theory–practice
differences, but these were not contrary to each other. Although strategies at
university were theory-based, students could add their own personal ingredients,
enabling these theories to become a “bag of tricks up your sleeve”. By comparison,
strategies used by supervising teachers were much more specific, such as sending out
of the room, checking homework each day and giving playground cleanup after two
warnings.
Sharyn was able to recall in detail the management approaches of several of her
supervising teachers and their subsequent effects. The first teacher was very
structured and strict and used sarcasm. Although students did some very good work,
Sharyn saw this as detrimental to students’ self-esteem. The second teacher was more
relaxed and the students were more autonomous. The third teacher was a
motivationalist who used a lot of teacher direction and as a result there was a
perceived loss of individuality of the students. Sharyn’s strategy was to adopt a more
flexible approach, ignore certain behaviour of students and get students to think about
their behaviour and consequences.
Pedagogical approaches studied at university were seen as useful, particularly in their

ability to motivate and engage students. Strategies were mainly associated around
student-centred, inquiry-based learning. Sharyn also found the strategies used by
some of her supervising teachers to be useful, such as demonstrations, open-ended
questions, games and discussions.
There were, however, some areas of conflict. Pedagogical approaches portrayed by

the university were outcomes-based and student driven, whereas Sharyn found that
some of her supervising teachers were too structured and lessons were too teacher-
20
directed and that she did not have the flexibility to change the format.

Sharyn’s philosophical and personality profiles are summarised in Table 5.
Table 5: Sharyn’s philosophical and personality profiles

Philosophy of education (order of Myers-Briggs Type: INFJ (Introverted, Intuitive,
Social justice education - 96 Moderately expressed introvert (33%)
Progressive education - 95 Moderately expressed intuitive personality (56%)
Humanistic education - 88 Distinctly expressed feeling personality (67%)
Behavioural education – 82 Slightly expressed judging personality (1%)
Comprehensive education - 79
As indicated in her practical theories, social justice education is a core philosophical

concept for Sharyn as well as a governing principle of her behaviour. Philosophical
preferences for educational relevance and the need to develop self-esteem and
awareness were also indicated.
In bridging the theory–practice divide in the area of behaviour management, Sharyn

was exposed to a variety of theories and approaches. On examination of her practical
theories, it was clear that Sharyn would not use any approach that had a negative
impact on students’ self-esteem or undermine her strong commitment to social justice.
Even though, from an eclectic approach, the perceived use of sarcasm could elicit
high standards of work, it was contrary to Sharyn’s core philosophy, which was
indelibly printed by some early life experiences.
In the area of pedagogy, Sharyn’s strong preference towards feeling, indicated both by
her statements and by her Myers-Briggs results, seemed to result in a conflict over the
rigid nature of the teacher-directed classroom. This was exacerbated by conflicting
with her strong belief in developing a sense of community in the classroom. Sharyn
was able to recall in detail the positive and negative aspects of her supervising
teachers, as well as teachers in her past, and to use aspects that met two criteria: 1)
they were effective; and 2) they were congruent with her strong orientation towards
social justice and developing a sense of community.
Findings and Implications

The findings of this study are presented in the context of a filtration system model,
which has been developed by the author from the three case studies. This model views
the journey from theory to practice as flowing through a number of filters, with
theories either being discarded or progressing at each filter. However, before
examining the model itself, it is first necessary to examine how the filters that go into
the filtration system are constructed.
Figure 1, developed by the author, shows that there are three main aspects which
affect filter construction: life experiences; personality type; and teaching philosophy.
Although there may be more, factors have been limited to what were examined in this
study. Furthermore, these three factors interrelate with one another. For example, life
experiences from participants schooling past have influenced their philosophy.
21
Figure 1: Construction of filters for the filtration system
CONSTRUCTION OF FILTERS FOR FILTRATION SYSTEM
Life
experiences
Personality Teaching
type Philosophy
Filters for filtration system
Congruent with the findings of many other studies (Burn et al., 2000; Conners et al.,
1990; Corney, 2000; Koutselini & Persianis, 2000; Marland, 1998), the life histories
of participants had a significant impact on their practical theories. More specifically,
in the area of behaviour management, negative experiences early in life, especially in
the primary years, impacted on all three participants in a considerable way. For Renee
and Heidi it influenced them to avoid harsh discipline measures and for Sharyn it
created her core belief of social justice. This is an example of the interrelation
between life experiences and teaching philosophy. These negative experiences are
later avoided as teachers (Conners et al., 1990). In terms of pedagogy, the main prior
influences seem to be from high school. All three participants gave an example of a
high school teacher who was a role model; furthermore, for Renee and Heidi the
teacher was in their subject area. Clearly, life experiences are paramount in how
participants construct their filters.
All three participants confirmed the unique and idiosyncratic nature of teachers’
practical theories (Corney, 2000). None of the participants indicated an overtly strong
philosophical preference, which supports Marland’s (1998) assertion that the practical
theories of pre-service teachers are partial and underdeveloped. Nevertheless,
philosophical orientation was shown to influence how participants viewed and filtered
their experiences. Personality type is also an important factor in filter construction.
Perhaps the most striking example is Heidi’s personality and its influence on how she
dealt with behaviour management problems, directing her to adopt pragmatic
solutions.
Once the filters have been constructed, they are then used in the filtration system,
where theory passes through a series of filters to get to practice. Participants’ practical
theories were found to provide the framework or context for this system. From this
study, four main filters have been identified and these are discussed in turn. The
model is overviewed in Figure 2 (developed by the author).
22
Figure 2: Filtration system model for integrating theory into practice
Theory
Teachers’ practical theories provide framework for integrating theory into practice
Filter 1
Simplification filter: Metaphors and

images reduce complexity
Discard unnecessary
Filter 2 complexity
Test for potential usefulness filter
Discard that which is

perceived as not useful
Filter 3
Congruence with beliefs and values

filter
Developmental constraints Discard that which

imposed by supervising conflicts with beliefs
Filter 4 teacher or values
Experience filter: Trial, error and

reflection
Discard what
Specific context
doesn’t work
constraints
Teaching
practice
The size of the theory–practice divide is determined by how much theory is allowed
to progress through the filters. The size and nature of the divide were found to be
unique to individuals based on the construction of their filters.
The first filter in Figure 2 is the simplification filter. Here unnecessary complexity is
discarded as participants focus on what is important to them. Metaphors in particular
highlighted core philosophies and areas of focus of the participants (Mayer &
Marland, 1997; Wallace, 2001). For example, Sharyn’s metaphor of a social worker
was reflective of her philosophical orientation of social justice. Images and metaphors
were also found to be indicative and congruent with participants’ beliefs and values as
23
supported by Yero (2001).
Testing for perceived usefulness is the second filter in Figure 2. In the case of Renee,
much of the theory she learned, particularly in the area of behaviour management, was
discarded at this point and would not proceed any further. Furthermore, in agreement
with Corney (2000), strategies from university were adopted only when they were
perceived as being practically useful.
In order to pass through the third filter, theories or strategies must be congruent with
participants’ own personal beliefs and values. Entwistle, Skinner and Entwistle (2001)
noted that beliefs are imperative in guiding teachers’ thinking, reasoning and action.
Participants in this study would not violate core beliefs, and this was particularly
indicated with Sharyn, when an effective method was rejected owing to its violation
of her social justice beliefs. Ambrose, Philipp, Chauvot and Clement (2003) reported
that not only do beliefs influence perception but they also act as a filter that reduces
complexity. Beliefs played a similar role in this study, indicating what was most
important for each participant in addition to providing directions and boundaries
towards action.
The final filter is the experimentation phase of trial, error and reflection, which is
critical for pre-service teacher development (Marland, 1998). Differences in theory
and practice in the area of behaviour management were dealt with on a pragmatic
basis, particularly shown by Heidi. This finding is consistent with other reports (Kane,
1994; Marland, 1998). Differences between theory and practice in the area of
pedagogy were much more problematic to deal with owing to the external constraints
imposed. This is shown in Figure 2 as the blockage between filters three and four. In
trialling strategies, participants had to obtain a balance between teacher-centred and
student-centred pedagogy being limited by external constraints.
An interesting point of this study was the fact that it was these conflicts caused by
external constraints outside the participant’s locus of control that seemed to cause the
highest levels of anxiety rather than any theory–practice gaps. Although Renee found
large theory–practice gaps in both areas of behaviour management and pedagogy, she
was still able to integrate these differences into her own style. Renee portrayed the
irrelevance of theoretical material as a small annoyance rather than a source of
frustration. These were simply eliminated at filter two. For Heidi, these differences
meant experimenting and finding out what works, which is a very common strategy
for pre-service teachers (Kane, 1994). This meant elimination of failed strategies at
filter four. Sharyn rejected behaviour management approaches that conflicted with her
beliefs at filter three. In summary, the three participants were all positive in their
ability to use various strategies in dealing with such dilemmas. This is because
participants are in control of the operation of their filters.
On the other hand, the perceived lack of autonomy was seen as a source of hindrance
in dealing with theory–practice issues. Criticism has often been levelled at university
teacher preparation courses for their theoretical nature and practical irrelevance (Clark
& Peterson, 1986; Eylon, 2000). However, this study indicates that schools, and in
particular supervising teachers, must share responsibility in relation to the constraints
they place on pre-service teachers to develop their own craft. In this study, Renee and
24
Sharyn, in particular, noted constraints imposed by supervising teachers in limiting

student-centred pedagogy. Although context variables are expected to impact on
teaching (Eylon, 2000) and pre-service teachers will be influenced by many variables
including the supervising teacher (Moallem & Applefield, 1997), in this case there
was a more negative influence on allowing these pre-service teachers to experiment
with more student-centred pedagogies. As indicated in Figure 2, supervising teachers
can impose a restriction or blockage of flow between filters three and four, preventing
pre-service teachers from experimenting with more student-centred pedagogies.
A case study by Stern (1997) found strong disagreement in practical theories between
the supervising teacher and the pre-service teacher. Although it would be both
undesirable and fallacious to generalise from disagreements of this nature, more
important is that such conflicts do exist and can be problematic. As Marland (1998)
points out, a cycle of trial, error and reflection is essential for developing practical
knowledge. When constraints are imposed on this cycle then true practical knowledge
cannot be effectively developed. The frustration conveyed, particularly by Renee and
Sharyn, supported this assertion.
Rigano and Ritchie (1999) describe two types of relationships between supervising
teachers and pre-service teachers: the master–student apprenticeship; and the
cognitive apprenticeship. All three participants indicated a more master–student
orientated apprenticeship, where they largely followed, or were constrained by, the
directives and teacher centred pedagogy of their supervisors. Such an approach is not
uncommon, but unfortunately tends to perpetuate the transmission of teacher-centred
pedagogy from one generation of teachers to the next (Klein, 2004). As indicated in
this study, participants were impelled to change their preferred pedagogical approach
in order to satisfy their supervising teachers. On the model, this is indicated in Figure
2 by the circle between filters three and four.
In contrast to a master–student apprenticeship, a cognitive apprenticeship involves a

shared problem solving approach, with more autonomy and engagement from the pre-
service teacher (Rigano & Ritchie, 1999). Dealing with such events in this way
develops reflective thinking and reduces the tension between theory and practice
(Gimbert, 2000; Rigano & Ritchie, 1999; Russell, 1993).
Conclusion
This study indicated that, although a theory–practice divide exists, pre-service
teachers deal with it in their own unique, idiosyncratic ways, which are influenced by
factors such as their life experiences at school, personality and teaching philosophy.
Practical theories of participants were used as a guiding framework. The filtration
model system indicates that, in the progression from theory to practice, knowledge
passes through a number of filters. Moreover, it was not so much this divide that is a
source of hindrance and frustration; rather, it was the external constraints on teacher-
centred pedagogy imposed during the practicum that negatively affected the cycle of
trial, error and reflection needed by pre-service teachers to develop their craft.
25
Acknowledgments
Special thanks to the three participants in this study – Renee, Heidi and Sharyn – for
all their time, effort and valuable insights. In addition, special thanks to Dr Dorothy
Andrews for her assistance, review and feedback on this study.
References
Ambrose, R., Philipp, R., Chauvot, J., & Clement, L. (2003). A web-based survey to
assess prospective elementary school teachers’ beliefs about mathematics and
mathematics learning: An alternative to Likert scales. In N. A. Pateman, B. J.
Dougherty & J. T. Zilliox (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2003 joint meeting of PME
and PMENA (vol. 2, pp. 33-39). Honolulu, HI: Curriculum Research and
Development Group, College of Education, University of Hawaii.
Burn, K., Hagger, H., Mutton, T., & Everton, T. (2000). Beyond concerns with self:
The sophisticated thinking of beginning student teachers. Journal of Education

for Teaching, 26(3), 259-279.
Clark, C., & Peterson, P. (1986). Teachers’ thought processes. In M. Wittrock (Ed.),
Handbook of research in teaching (3rd ed.) (pp. 285-296). New York:
Macmillan.
Conners, R., Nettle, E., & Placing, K. (1990). Learning to become a teacher: An
analysis of student teachers’ perspectives on teaching and their developing craft
knowledge. In M. Bezzina & J. Butcher (Eds.). The changing face of
professional education (pp. 208-217). Sydney, NSW: Australian Association for
Research in Education.
Corney, G. (2000). Student geography teachers’ pre-conceptions about teaching
environmental topics. Environmental Education Research, 6(4), 313-330.
Entwistle, N., Skinner, D., & Entwistle, D. (2001). Student teachers’ conceptions of
‘good teaching’. Glasgow, UK: Scottish Council for Research in Education
Centre, Faculty of Education, University of Glasgow. Retrieved October 20,
2004, from http://www.scre.ac.uk/forum/forum2001/entwistle.html
Eylon, B. S. (2000). Designing powerful learning environments and practical theories:
The knowledge integration environment. International Journal of Science
Education, 22(8), 885-890.
Gimbert, B. (2000). Nurturing an intern learning community in a professional
development school culture: Spaces for voice and multiple perspectives. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, New Orleans, LA.
Hagner, D. C., & Helm, D. T. (1994). Qualitative methods in rehabilitation research.
Rehabilitation Counselling Bulletin, 37(4), 290-304.
Haig, B. D. (1995). Grounded theory as scientific method. In A. Neiman (Ed.),
Philosophy of education yearbook. Philosophy of Education Society. Retrieved
November 30, 2003, from http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/EPS/PES-
Yearbook/95_docs/haig.html
Hoepfl, M. C. (1997). Choosing qualitative research: A primer for technology
education researchers. Journal of Technology Education, 9(1), 1-16.
Hulshof, H., & Verloop, N. (2002). The use of analogies in language teaching:
Representing the content of teachers’ practical knowledge. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 34(1), 77-90.
Hunt, D. (1987). How to be your own best theorist. Theory Into Practice, 26(1), 512-
519.
26
Johnston, S. (1992). Images: A way of understanding the practical knowledge of

student teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 8(2), 123-136.
Jung Topology Test. (n.d.). Retrieved April 18, 2004, from
http://www.humanmetrics.com/cgi-win/JTypes2.asp
Kane, R. (1994). Beginning teachers: Survival at the expense of intelligent action.
Retrieved March 15, 2003, from http://www.aare.edu.au/94pap/kaner94.269
Katzenmeyer, M., & Moller, G. (Eds.) (1996). Awakening the sleeping giant:
Leadership development for teachers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Klein, M. (2004). The premise and promise of inquiry based mathematics in pre-
service teacher education: A poststructuralist analysis. Asia-Pacific Journal of
Teacher Education, 32(1), 35-48.
Koutselini, M., & Persianis, P. (2000). Theory–practice divide in teacher education at
the University of Cyprus and the role of the traditional values of the Orthodox
Church. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(4), 501-521.

LeCompte, M., & Goetz, J. (1982). Problems of reliability and validity in
ethnographic research. Review of Educational Research, 52(1), 31-60.
Marland, P. (1993). Exploring teachers’ professional craft knowledge: The
Queensland study. In M. Batten, P. Marland & M. Khamis (Eds.), Knowing how
to teach well: Teachers reflect on their classroom practice (pp. 34-46).
Melbourne, Vic: Australian Council for Educational Research.
Marland, P. (1997). Towards more effective open and distance teaching. London:
Kogan Page.
Marland P. (1998). Teachers’ practical theories Implications for preservice teacher
education. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher education & Development, 1(2), 15-
23.
Mayer, D., & Marland, P. (1997). Teachers’ knowledge of students: A significant
domain of practical knowledge? Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education,
25(1), 17-35.
McIntyre, D. (1995). Initial teacher education as practical theorising: A response to
Paul Hirst. British Journal of Educational Studies, 43(4), 365-383.
McNamara, D. (1990). Research on teachers’ thinking: Its contribution to educating
student teachers to think critically. Journal of Education for Teaching, 16(2),
147-161.
Meijer, P. C. (2001). Similarities and differences in teachers’ practical knowledge
about teaching reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Research, 94(3),
171-185.
Moallem, M., & Applefield, J. (1997). Instructional systems design and preservice
teachers’ processes of thinking, teaching and planning: What do they learn and
how do they change? In Proceedings of selected research and development
presentations at the 1997 national convention of the Association for Educational
Communications and Technology (pp. 14-18). Albuquerque, NM: Association
for Educational Communications and Technology.
Myers, I., & McCaulley, M. H. (1985). Jung’s theory of psychological types and the
MBTI ® instrument manual: A guide to the development and use of the Myers-
Briggs type indicator. Retrieved September 18, 2004, from
http://www.capt.org/The_MBTI_Instrument/Overview.cfm
Rigano, D., & Ritchie, S. (1999). Learning the craft: A student teacher’s story. Asia-
Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 27(2), 127-143.
27
Russell, T. (1993). Teachers’ professional knowledge and the future of teacher

education. Journal of Education for Teaching, 19(2), 205-216.
Stern, B. S. (1997). Relations among college supervisors, cooperating teachers, and
student teachers in a reflective teacher education program. Paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.
Sturman, A. (1994). Case study methods. In T. Husen & T. Postlethwaite (Eds.),
International encyclopaedia of education (2nd ed.) (pp. 640-646). Oxford, UK:
Pergamon Press.
The portrait of the teacher idealist eNFj. (2004). Retrieved December 3, 2004, from
http://keirsey.com/personality/nfej.html
Wallace, S. (2001). Guardian angels and teachers from hell: Using metaphor as a
measure of schools’ experiences and expectations of General National
Vocational Qualifications. Qualitative Studies in Education, 14(6), 727-739.
Wiersma, W. (2000). Research methods in education: An introduction (7th ed.).

Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Yero, J. L. (2001). Beliefs. Retrieved December 3, 2004, from
www.TeachersMind.com
28
Appendix: Framework for Teachers’ Practical Theories

The following framework, based on Marland (1998), shows various categories of
teachers’ practical theories, as well as sample questions that could be asked.
Images
This includes specific scenarios or pictures of what good teaching is like.
Metaphors of teaching
Teachers describe in their own words “teaching is like...”. How teachers describe their
own role is valuable. Common metaphors may include coach, social worker, dictator,
etc. Metaphors of rich tasks and productive pedagogies will be asked.
Aims or goals
What is your main goal when teaching students?

Values
What is most important and valuable in teaching?
Beliefs
How do you believe students learn?
Rules
Are specific procedures on how a class is run.
Principles
Are more generalised than rules.
Tactics
Deal with ‘what if?’ and unpredictable situations.
How do you handle an afternoon lesson when students are unmotivated?
Desirable student states
What should students be doing in a desirable state? For example, should they be
quietly working?
Student progress
How do you determine if a student is making progress?
Teacher attributes
What are the attributes of a good teacher?
Contextual variables
What school factors impact on your teaching?
Pedagogical content knowledge
E.g., how do you teach students science?
29

Propositional vs. Practical Knowledge Exploring

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Propositional vs. Practical Knowledge Exploring

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

International Journal of Pedagogies and Learning

ISSN: 2204-0552 (Print) 1833-4105 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rjpl20

Propositional vs. Practical Knowledge: Exploring

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.5172/ijpl.1.3.11

Published online: 17 Dec 2014.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

Propositional vs. Practical Knowledge: Exploring the

In facing such complexity, pre-service teachers use their experiences as students

Furthermore, there is often a conflict between university preparation and teacher

Data collection procedures and analysis

a) Narratives on life history – participants were asked to give a brief description of

b) Teachers’ practical theories – interviews began informally, looking at metaphors

c) Critical incidents – analysis of critical incidents has been an important part of

to behaviour management and pedagogy that occurred during their cumulative

d) Views on coping with the theory–practice divide – participants were asked to

Table 1: Summary of philosophical orientations

Table 2: Summary of indices of the MBTI

Validity and reliability

Results and Discussion

Bridging the theory–practice divide

In preparation for behaviour management, Renee conducted an external behaviour

As a result, Renee preferred a consequence-based system and the use of positive

Relationship between practical theories and the theory–practice divide

Table 3: Renee’s philosophical and personality profiles

Such an approach is also reflected in this dialogue on difficult students:

Renee: It depends on my mood. I would get students back on task or I may do

Case study 2: Heidi

Attributes of a good teacher, according to Heidi, include flexibility, honesty, openness,

Bridging the theory–practice divide

often failed in their attempts to make work relevant to students.

Relationship between practical theories and the theory–practice divide

Table 4: Heidi’s philosophical and personality profiles

Examining this relationship is more complex in the area of behaviour management,

Case study 3: Sharyn

This experience also influenced Sharyn’s goal of teaching, which is one of

Bridging the theory–practice divide

Pedagogical approaches studied at university were seen as useful, particularly in their

There were, however, some areas of conflict. Pedagogical approaches portrayed by

Relationship between practical theories and the theory–practice divide

Table 5: Sharyn’s philosophical and personality profiles

As indicated in her practical theories, social justice education is a core philosophical

In bridging the theory–practice divide in the area of behaviour management, Sharyn

Findings and Implications

Figure 1: Construction of filters for the filtration system

CONSTRUCTION OF FILTERS FOR FILTRATION SYSTEM

Filters for filtration system

Figure 2: Filtration system model for integrating theory into practice

Simplification filter: Metaphors and

Test for potential usefulness filter

Discard that which is

Congruence with beliefs and values

Developmental constraints Discard that which

Experience filter: Trial, error and

supported by Yero (2001).

Sharyn, in particular, noted constraints imposed by supervising teachers in limiting

In contrast to a master–student apprenticeship, a cognitive apprenticeship involves a

The sophisticated thinking of beginning student teachers. Journal of Education

Johnston, S. (1992). Images: A way of understanding the practical knowledge of

Church. Teaching in Higher Education, 5(4), 501-521.

Russell, T. (1993). Teachers’ professional knowledge and the future of teacher

Wiersma, W. (2000). Research methods in education: An introduction (7th ed.).

Appendix: Framework for Teachers’ Practical Theories