Theory and Practice

July 6, 2008
Notes for EMWP transformed for this project

This book will have a dual approach: theory and practice; however, I view these as interrelated. In this next section, theory and practice will be defined, but also you are invited to reflect on how you see theory and practice of reading, interpreting and responding to texts working in your classroom. From my perspective, theory informs practice and practice informs theory. Toulmin (197x) provided a systematic way of stating claims and providing evidence for the claims, including making visible what he calls the warrants of an argument, or the often invisible assumptions we bring to an event or understanding of phenomena. In an article in English Journal, Tchudi and xxxx (200x) show teachers how to incorporate Toulmin's logic with everyday classroom assessments. Therefore, Toulmin provides a guiding theory that others can use and Tchudi and xxxx demonstrate how that theory can apply in practices of assessing students.

Theory
What is theory, particularly in terms of teaching English language arts, and for teaching students how to read, interpret and respond to texts in our classrooms? Oxford English Dictionary (http://dictionary.oed.com) defines theory as “(4a) A scheme or system of ideas or statements held as an explanation or account of a group of facts or phenomena; a hypothesis that has been confirmed or established by observation or experiment, and is propounded or accepted as accounting for the known facts; a statement of what are held to be the general laws, principles, or causes of something known or observed. (4b): That department of an art or technical subject which consists in the knowledge or statement of the facts on which it depends, or of its principles or methods, as distinguished from the practice of it.”

This definition is closely linked to what many people often refer to as scientific theory, i.e., the way scientists might define theory and its connection to the “scientific method.” From this perspective, a theory may be supported by experimental (and replicable) research, i.e., through multiple laboratory experiments a scientist establishes an evidentiary-based claim about some phenomenon. For example, research (laboratory based) has shown that drinking alcohol can be harmful to children enutero. (Truth is beyond the scope of this conversation.) Some social scientists borrow and reshape language of science, particularly language that seeks to denote an established fact, or principle.

In general terms, the word theory may be used as a proposition, e.g., in theory you might think health care would be available to everyone. Of course, what this proposition is based on is not always explicit (e.g., is it that all people need and should have health care, and how is availability defined)? Or, someone might say, “I have a theory (a hunch) about” something, and his or her theory might be based on past experiences and personal musings. In fact, we must generate personal theories through experiences and musings to function daily, even if we know we lack information--there is too much information for us to understand and negotiate all of it.

The definition of theory I am addressing is based on claims supported by evidence that guides how we view or understand a particular phenomenon. For example, as teachers we have theories of reading, i.e., we make claims, presumably supported by research, about how reading happens, how teachers should teach children to read, or how to instruct them to develop strategies of reading in order to become more skilled as readers. However, for some teachers, theory is viewed as something that happens outside of classrooms, i.e., scholars discuss and examine theory; teachers put into practice theories, or engage in classroom actions that constitute “practice,” as in the practical. This raises a key question about the relationship between theory and practice and how we negotiate these in our classroom instruction.

Can teachers “practice” without theory? Yes and no. Yes, teachers may not understand or be aware of theories that others may observe in teachers’ practice; yet, this doesn’t mean that teachers’ practice is void of theory, particularly if they are using supporting text materials. No, teachers do not practice without theory in the sense that teachers cannot engage in actions that have no underlying theory, i.e., practice is related to theory.

What is the difference between theory and principle?
Theory:
Principles:

Examples of Theories
How do children learn in classrooms?

EXAMPLES USED FOR EMWP
Topic: Theory and Practice
Purpose: To engage in discussions about the link between theory and practice.

Opening
Quickwrite: How do you define theory? Practice? Do you do theory or practice?

Activity
In groups, respond to the topic on handout.

Theories of Learning
Transmission Perspective
By sitting orderly in neat rows and listening to a teacher, one trained in education principles and subject matter areas, students learn general and formal knowledge, e.g., they learn about writing through direct instruction.

Progressive Education Perspective
Students learn by doing, e.g., they learn to write by writing.

Information Process Perspective
By eliciting background knowledge on a selected topic, e.g., writing an essay, students make links with new information about the topic and process it to understand more about that topic.

Social Constructivist Perspective
Through talk and action students construct knowledge based on their background knowledge and the curriculum available to them, e.g., through writing activities.

Social Constructionist Perspective
Through classroom talk and action over time, students and teachers construct particular ways of working and learning, and there are consequences for what students have available to them for learning, e.g., writing in a range of genres vs. writing only literary essays or letters.

Critical Perspective
Through discussion of power and institutional expectations, students and teachers make visible social and political contexts that inform curricular choices and actions.


Questions – Which one is more productive?
What do you believe about learning?
How do theorize learning in classrooms?

EXAMPLE
Phase One: Students wrote five essays a semester based on literature we read, although periodically they had a choice of topics for “creative” assignments. Decisions based largely on upper division experiences in university English department. Reading was also a focus, mainly giving students strategies to become more skilled readers.

Phase Two. As a Writing Project fellow and graduate student (Composition), I began to position students as writers. The classroom was a community of writers. So students chose topics, genres, and audiences. Decisions based largely on composition theories, e.g., Graves, and experiences in the Writing Project.

Phase Three. More conscious of particular theories, position students as x (writers, teachers, etc.) and engage in particular language for particular purposes, and assess over time through multiple sources. Decisions based on theory that what students learn is a consequence for what they have access to, under certain conditions, for particular purposes and desired outcomes.

Theory: What teachers say makes a difference in how and what students learn.
Classrooms as Cultures: theory that classrooms can be viewed as cultures, suggesting that students must learn the language of and for the classroom and the actions that count in order to be viewed as a knowledgeable member of the community (Collins & Green, 1990; 1992; SBCDG, 1992; Frank et al, 1999; Yeager, 2003)
Example: see Primary Voices K-6, Volume 7, Number 3, January 1999