Education has always been awash with new ideas about learning and teaching.

Teachers and
administrators are regularly bombarded with suggestions for reform. They are asked to use
new curricula, new teaching strategies, and new assessments. They are directed to prepare
students for the new state standardized test or to document and assess students’ work through
portfolios and performance assessments. They are urged to use research-based methods to
teach reading and mathematics. Among educators, there is a certain cynicism that comes with
these waves of reformist exhortations. Veteran teachers often smile wryly when told to do
this or that, whispering asides about another faddish pendulum swing, closing their classroom
doors, quietly going about their business. How are educators to sort the proverbial wheat
from the chaff as they encounter these reform proposals?

Doing so requires a solid understanding of the foundational theories that drive teaching,
including ideas about how students learn, what they should learn, and how teachers can
enable student learning. This paper’s charge is to lay out the central ideas about learning and
teaching that run throughout contemporary educational discourse. A handful of significant
ideas underlie most reforms of the last 20 years. Our frame includes three contemporary ideas
about learning: that learning is a process of active construction; that learning is a social
phenomenon, as well as an individual experience; and that learner differences are resources,
not obstacles.. Theory of education and practical teaching are the key terms to be defined.

Ball(2004) defines theory of education as a study of wide range of different topics and
disciplines that are all centred on sociology, psychology and philosophy. It is a study area
that seeks to understand how people learn, how people apply what they have learnt and how
to improve efficiency of educational programs (Bale 2007 ) For the purposes of this writing
theory of education will be defined as theories that explain application, interpretation and
purpose of learning and education.Practical teaching is defined as teaching and learning
activity which involves at some point the students observing or manipulating real objects and
materials (Feiman-Nemser 2001). Practical teaching is the actual teaching that occurs in the
classroom with the teacher facilitating using various instructional approaches.

First, education is an intentional activity. The planning and implementation of education isn’t
arbitrary; it is purposeful and forward-looking. Being intentional and purposeful, education is
value driven. Educational ends are driven by and express what we value as individuals and as
a people. Human beings do not merely reproduce themselves biologically; we are cultural
beings, and we therefore engage in cultural reproduction. We attempt to reproduce what we
believe is most valuable about our way of life. Being intentional, purposeful, and value
driven, education involves, for individuals, families, and the society, choices about a way of
life. From a normative point of view, choice in turn requires both ethical and political
justification. Betty Reardon succinctly articulates this perspective: “Most . . . agree that there
is no neutral education. Education is a social enterprise conducted for the realization of social
values.”What values and in turn purposes should drive education, and why? Who should
decide what values and purposes should apply, and why? How should these values be
prioritized, and why? How should value conflict be adjudicated, and why?

From the above background one can not that to theory of education answers the above asked
questions as it give a pathway of teaching and learning. Theory of education can not be said
to be divorced from the practical teaching as it shapes both the teacher and the learner in the
classroom. The teacher has to know the purpose of teaching in the classroom and the learner
has to know the purpose of being in the classroom. Educational philosophy provides that.
Julius Nyerere came up with educational ideas in Tanzania that were to help an individual to
be useful in the society and that was possible because there were clear methods of
conducting that hence theory o education and the actual teaching can not be said to be
separated as teaching can not exist without the theory part as it clears the way for teaching.
Pierre Hadot demonstrated, ancient philosophy did not primarily concern the construction of
abstract theoretical systems; philosophy was conceived as vision and existential choice of a
way of life, a discourse and justification for a way chosen way of life, and the articulation of
the path or curriculum leading to the realization of the ideals of the way of life. This choice
was understood to be based upon the Socratic assertion that the “unexamined life is not worth
living.” The focus of philosophy was the transformation of one’s way of life, one’s mode of
being in the world through self-reflection and rational deliberation. Thus theory of education
and practical teaching are inseparable.

Furthermore, theory of education and practical teaching are inseparable as theory of

education helps the teacher in the teaching and learning process. The teacher has to cater for
individual differences to achieve his/her aims and objectives. According to Carroll, when the
appropriate time and learning opportunities are provided, all of the students can reach the
desired learning objectives. Learning level is the function of the ratio between elapsed time in
active learning and the time needed for learning. Time is the most important variable while
explaining the “School learning” model. The other components of the model are: ability,
ability of benefiting from teaching, patience/diligence, opportunity, and the quality of
teaching. Thus the aim of the teacher is to help each learner achieve the set objectives and
for him/her to be successful every child has to pass the task at hand thus using Bloom’s
taxonomy when asking question to cater for slow learners so that there will not be left out
also give remediation to those who are slow and probably extension work to those who are
better and this in a classroom can be done. However, maybe because of the high pupil
teacher ratio the teacher might find it difficult to hand such pressure to cater for each
learner’s difficulty but this can not be overlooked as it all comes back to proper planning and
the use of better instructional methods.

Probably for challenging concept one teacher can use the thematic approach as a method of
teaching thus integrating learning units of different subjects into one. Concepts in Science
and Technology and those in Agriculture can be integrated into one theme and taught in one
practical lesson. Thematic Approach, the child know many information from a single theme.
Initially the child know the information from the teacher (receptive communication). The
child will express to their peers about the theme. Which helps to them to know extra
vocabulary for better expressive communication. Then the child will express the theme
(sharing the information based on child’s cognitive level) to their parents and family
members. Which helps the child recognize and narrate the concept. (Narration and cognitive).
The child will able to have active listening. Active listening is a technique that helps the
young learners be more effective in the communication process (Reynolds, 2008). Thus such
teaching methods gives the teacher more time to teach and emphasis any concept no matter
how difficult it might be hence theory of education and practical teaching are inseparable.

In addition, n. It is no longer enough that students quietly master only the facts and rules of a
discipline. Contemporary educational reform demands that students have a more flexible
understanding of mathematics and language arts, biology and physics, and geography and
history. They must know the basics, but they must also know how to use those basics to
identify and solve non-traditional problems. Alternatively described as critical thinking,
teaching for understanding, mathematical power, and so on, this theory has the underlying
assumption that to know a field one must master its central ideas, concepts, and facts and its
processes of inquiry and argument.
Moreso, theory of education provides teaching methods that helps learners understand the
content and concepts the they are to learn at school. They also help the teacher with a variety
of teaching methods that involves the learners which helps the learners to understand the
concepts better. Thus active engagement of learners helps them understand better hence it
cannot be concluded that learning theories are divorced with practical teaching. Perhaps the
most critical shift in education in the past 20 years has been a move away from a conception
of “learner as sponge” toward an image of “learner as active constructor of meaning.”
Although Plato and Socrates were of the idea that learners were not empty vessels, blank
slates, or passive observers, much of U.S. schooling has been based on this premise. Teachers
have talked; students have been directed to listen (Cuban 1993). The assumption has been
that if teachers speak clearly and students are motivated, learning will occur. If students do
not learn, the logic goes, it is because they are not paying attention or they do not care. These
ideas were grounded in a theory of learning that focused on behavior. One behavior leads to
another, behavioral-learning theorists argued, and so if teachers act in a certain way, students
will likewise act in a certain way. Central to behaviorism was the idea of conditioning that is,
training the individual to respond to stimuli. The mind was a “black box” of little concern.
But behavioral theorists had to make way for the “cognitive revolution” in psychology, which
involved putting the mind back into the learning equation. As Lesh and Lamon (1992, p. 18)
put it, “Behavioral psychology (based on factual and procedural rules) has given way to
cognitive psychology (based on models for making sense of real life experiences.” In this
shift, several fields of learning theory emerged. Thus theory of education and practical
teaching are inseparable.

Perhaps the most significant implication of these ideas about learning and knowledge is that
they imply that thoughtful teachers are intellectuals who think both about subject matter and
students, constructing bridges between the two. Reformers long ago learned that curricula
cannot be teacher-proof—for teachers inevitably shape the materials they use based on their
own knowledge, beliefs, and assumptions .Yet widespread belief persists that teaching is a
straightforward enterprise. Using textbooks, teachers follow each page, directing students in
what they should read and do. If the materials are good, and everyone behaves himself or
herself, so the logic goes, students will learn. That is simply not true. Resources are mediated
by teachers and students, and they are situated within contexts that matter (Cohen,
Raudenbush, and Ball 2003). Good teachers must think hard about what they want their
students to learn, contemplating myriad questions: What is interesting about this subject for
my students? What ideas and concepts are particularly difficult? Why? What are the different
means I can use to help students grapple with these ideas? What do my students already know
that might help? What do they believe that might get in the way? What time of the day is it?
The year? How can I use my students’ diverse backgrounds to enhance the curriculum? How
can I create a community of learners who can support the individual and social construction
of knowledge? The educational theories help the teacher answer these questions.. Thus theory
of educational and practical teaching can not be separated nor divorced.

However, it can be argued that some of the theories are deeply rooted in theory as the may
not be used practically. The main issue usually being the work load on the part of the teacher
against the number of the learners he/she has to look after or help that is a problem as the
teacher may fail to address the problem of each learner. Also the need to cover more content
per term as the expected by the school leadership hence the time also a factor thus it can be
noted that practical lessons of Agriculture and Science are usually sacrificed and only theory
is done instead thus visual learners are excluded from the learning process. The other thing
might be lack of motivation from the teachers thus they may fail to motivate the learners to
feel the need of learning thus it will seem like the theory of education and practical teaching
are divorced yet not. Thus these negatives can not be overlooked as theory of education and
practical teaching are inseparable.

In summation, from the above evidence it can be noted that educational theories and practical
teaching work together as theories offers the foundation of the practical activity in the
classroom with out the other educational objectives, aims and goals can not be achieved
hence they are inseparable.
REFERENCES
Bransford, J. D., A. L. Brown, and R. R. Cocking, eds. 2000. How People Learn: Brain,
Mind,

Experience, and School (Expanded edition). Washington, DC: National

Academy Press.

Bruner. J. S.(1966). Toward a theory of instruction. New York: Norton.

Brown, A. L. 2004. “The Advancement of Learning.” Educational Researcher 23(8): 4–12.

Brown, A. L., and J. C. Campione. 1990. “Communities of Learning and Thinking, or a

Context

by Any Other Name.” In Developmental Perspectives on Teaching and

Learning

Thinking Skills, ed. D. Kuhn, 108–26. Basel: Karger.

Cohen, D. K., S. W. Raudenbush, and D. L. Ball. 2003.“Resources, Instruction, and

Research.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 25(2): 1–24

Dewey, J. 1902/1956. The Child and the Curriculum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Dewey, J. 1988. “How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective Thinking to the

Educative Process.” In John Dewey: The Later Works, 1925–1953, vol. 4,

The Quest for Certainty, ed. J. A. Boyston, 105–342. Carbondale: Southern

Illinois University Press