Praxis: Bridging Theory and Practice in Education and Beyond

Praxis, derived from the Ancient Greek word πρᾶξις, signifies the dynamic interplay between theory and practice. More than just applying knowledge, it embodies a cyclical process of reflection and action, leading to transformative change. This concept, explored by philosophers from Aristotle to Paulo Freire, holds profound implications for various fields, particularly education. Praxis is the process by which a theory, lesson, or skill is enacted, embodied, realized, applied, or put into practice. "Praxis" may also refer to the act of engaging, applying, exercising, realizing, or practising ideas.

Historical and Philosophical Roots

The concept of praxis has been a recurrent topic in the field of philosophy. In Ancient Greek, the word praxis (πρᾶξις) referred to activity engaged in by free people. The philosopher Aristotle held that there were three basic activities of humans: theoria (thinking), poiesis (making), and praxis (doing). Corresponding to these activities were three types of knowledge: theoretical, the end goal being truth; poietical, the end goal being production; and practical, the end goal being action. Aristotle further divided the knowledge derived from praxis into ethics, economics, and politics.

Karl Marx, in his "Theses on Feuerbach," criticized earlier materialist philosophy for its contemplative approach to objects. He argued that perception is integral to humanity's practical relationship with the world, emphasizing that understanding the world necessitates actively changing it, not merely observing it. Marx posited that society can only be transformed through the revolutionary praxis of the proletariat, whose interests align with society as a whole. The coincidence of the changing of circumstances and of human activity or self-change [Selbstveränderung] can be conceived and rationally understood only as revolutionary practice. All social life is essentially practical. All the mysteries which lead theory towards mysticism find their rational solution in human praxis and in the comprehension of this praxis. Philosophers have hitherto only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it. Marx here criticizes the materialist philosophy of Ludwig Feuerbach for envisaging objects in a contemplative way. Marx argues that perception is itself a component of man's practical relationship to the world. To understand the world does not mean considering it from the outside, judging it morally or explaining it scientifically. Society cannot be changed by reformers who understand its needs, only by the revolutionary praxis of the mass whose interest coincides with that of society as a whole-the proletariat.

Jean-Paul Sartre, in Critique of Dialectical Reason, viewed individual praxis as the foundation of human history, driven by the attempt to negate human need in conditions of scarcity. Sartre argues that the fundamental relation of human history is scarcity. Conditions of scarcity generate competition for resources, exploitation of one over another and division of labor, which in its turn creates struggle between classes. Hannah Arendt, in The Human Condition, argued that Western philosophy has overemphasized contemplation, neglecting the active life.

Praxis in Education: A Cyclical Process

Praxis is used by educators to describe a recurring passage through a cyclical process of experiential learning, such as the cycle described and popularised by David A. Praxis may be described as a form of critical thinking and comprises the combination of reflection and action. In education, praxis is a critical thinking approach involving reflection and action. Scott and Marshall (2009) refer to praxis as "a philosophical term referring to human action on the natural and social world".

The Praxis Model in Teacher Education

A model for teacher education has been developed by the College of Education. It is a distinctive model which draws on 8 signature pedagogies to initiate animated and dynamic conversations between preservice teachers and lecturer. These conversations are rightfully shaped by experiences of practice and centre on many ‘real’ concerns, issues and interests and demand highly relevant responses and deep reflection by academics and preservice teachers. This paper although part of a broader theoretical discussion, provides a more pragmatic / practical view of a praxis model of pedagogy in teacher education and has developed at a time when there is a need to review ideas and some broad agenda that currently exist in Australian teacher education policy and processes. This study responds to the considerations of the Australian context in teacher education and to provide a voice for an informed and rigorous teaching pedagogy in teacher education.

The current Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL) proposal is to shape and reform initial teacher education (ITE) through such strategies as standards and selection processes, partnerships and high quality courses. A Teacher Education Ministerial Advisory Group (TEMAG) identified imperatives for ITE courses and was the basis of a response by the Australian Government in 2015. The Victorian State minister also addressed the issue in a publication titled ‘Working together to shape teacher education in Victoria: a discussion paper’ (Merlino, 2016). These documents have since confirmed and paved the way for reforms in teacher education for Victorian education providers. This research highlights the need for teacher education providers to provide evidence and commitment to models and impact of innovative pedagogy for preservice teachers.

Immersing preservice teachers in schools combined with a praxis inquiry model of learning enables preservice teachers to make explicit links between practice and theory. By definition praxis pedagogy is derived from context and ‘concrete structures’ (Freire, 1972, p. 36). This research explores pragmatic and reflective processes. Researching the impact of models to evidence best practice for students, preservice teachers, teachers and university educators is essential if we are to respond to the challenges we face as global learning for citizens in the twenty-first century.

The praxis model relies heavily on linking theory and practice. It is a complex process that captures the unique experience of the preservice teacher (Burridge, Carpenter, Cherednichenko, & Kruger, 2010) which is often underrepresented in ITE experience for those studying to become a teacher (Biggs & Tang, 2007; Tang, 2003). Praxis by nature involves deep exploration of pedagogical experiences and theory to critique practice (Arnold, Edwards, Hooley, & Williams, 2012). A praxis model has been developed and supported by 8 signature pedagogies that make up an approach and focuses on praxis pedagogy which includes a portfolio dialogue connecting professional practice, repertoires of practice, teachers as researchers, participatory action research, case conferencing, community partnerships and praxis learning (Arnold et al., 2014; Arnold, Edwards, Hooley, & Williams, 2013). When inquiry stems from practice then preservice teachers begin questioning - ‘The class I took didn’t go well today. Was it something I did?’ These types of conversations and indeed a praxis pedagogy are powerful modes for transformative (Kalantzis, 2006) learning in teacher education. In this paper there is an attempt to dig deeper to explore what the pedagogies look like in terms of the practical experiences for preservice teachers. Many protocols and pedagogies are implemented and identified in the institution and Table 1 (Hooley, 2015, p. Table 1 Signature PedagogiesFull size tableThe Signature Pedagogies are based on a balanced repertoire of Praxis Pedagogies and were developed through examination of the types of pedagogies implemented in undergraduate and postgraduate learning in the College of Education. Not only does this table map the characteristics of practice that account for thinking critically about preservice teacher education, it also supports teaching, learning and research for lecturers and preservice teachers through practice. Centred on practice, these pedagogies act as tools for interrogating their work. Table 1 above developed by Hooley (2014) identifies elements of common pedagogies which have been adopted and frequently implemented within the College of Education. Characteristics of praxis pedagogy while nested in the Signature Pedagogies are elaborated on in Fig. 1. Fig. 1Characteristics of Praxis PedagogyFull size imageThese characteristics are process focussed and utilised by both students and lecturers. They help to connect practice to theory and theory to practice. Experiences of practice provide a platform in teacher education for preservice teachers to begin to examine and develop practice that is rigorous, ethical and critical. This research has developed through a reflexive and collaborative process through ongoing dialogue and conversations regarding accounts of practice and theorising with colleagues at Victoria University, and also colleagues concerned with similar ideas and views on teacher education from national and international settings. Critical to these signature pedagogies is the role of dialogue and this occurs through the implementation of learning circles. Fig. 2The Value of Learning CirclesFull size imageLiterature reviewThe underlying shift to the model of signature pedagogies indicated has relied on a dialogic approach to learning and knowledge (Freire, 1989) and experiences from classrooms of preservice teachers (Dewey, 1938). The opportunity of envisaging ‘transformative’ curriculum, approaches and outcomes for students (Arnold et al., 2012; Arnold et al., 2014; Hooley, 2013; Kalantzis, 2006) underpins the conversations when presenting cases and the portfolio. It is during conversations that practice is described, explained, theorised and re-imagined. Portfolios based on signature pedagogies are developed by the preservice teachers as a basis for the praxis to encompass ideas of pedagogical perspectives in terms of current and future professional engagement. Collegiate conversations often include perspectives of the preservice teacher, mentor teachers and lecturer and can be enhanced through ‘Learning Circles’ (Fitzgerald, Farstad, & Deemer, 2005, p. 212; Peters & Le Cornu, 2005), case writing and commentary (Cherednichenko, Hooley, Kruger, & Mulraney, 1997) processes as ways of enabling this type of dialogue. When preservice teachers are able to articulate their own inquiry (Loughran, 2006; Shulman, 1992) and position, there is an opportunity for critical dialogue (Freire, 1989) which is based on real issues from teaching and learning experience to become highly focused, thoughtful and critical (Arnold et al., 2012; Green, 2009). Preservice teachers bring highly developed ideas and ways of knowing that reflect habitus (Bourdieu, 1977), Frames of Reference (Burridge et al., 2016), Funds of knowledge (Moll, Amanti, Neff, & Gonzales, 1992) and experiences (Dewey, 1938).

The qualitative method includes narrative data (Riessman, 2008) and provides dialogue (Clandinin & Connelly, 1990) from the preservice teachers’ perspectives that described understanding of the conditions of teaching and learning and the importance of making connections to theories and practice in the classroom. This research whilst acknowledging the progressive scholarly critiques and approaches also focuses on knowledge, expertise and prior learning that students bring to their chosen field of teaching as a 4th year student in teacher education. Accessing preservice teacher notions of cultural values, capabilities and ‘funds of knowledge’ which form and inform preservice teacher’s learning should not be overlooked in teacher education. Human and social experiences are bound by socio-political and cultural agency (Gonzales, Moll, & Amanti, 2005). For preservice teachers examining one’s own pedagogy may be one way of reflecting on the virtues of why and how we teach. The ability for preservice teachers to critique is crucial. Praxis pedagogy provides the opportunities for educational issues to be shared and explored deeply enabling preservice teachers to reflect on the practice of schools and the curriculum. It is important to not understate the personal funds of knowledge which preservice teachers bring that is deep and highly personalised (Bourdieu, 1976; Moll et al., 1992). To further validate the praxis model, a group of colleagues from the College of Education routinely met to provide educational perspectives to develop a strong theoretical foundation. The Signature Pedagogies are underpinned by many theorists and some examples of these authors are provided in the rubric. It is important to identify here the authors which underpin the Signature Pedagogies. Teacher education requires accounts of Professional Practice (Green, 2009; Kalantzis, 2006; Kemmis, 2012; Schatzki, 2001) which provides a foundation for teachers to engage in and consider behaviours to improve and think critically about practice. Building a culture of Teacher as Researcher (Stenhouse, 1985) is an expectation which embodies the manner in which teachers gather data about their students and respond to the data through practice. Stephen Brookfield (1995) considers development of portfolios by teachers as an effective reflective tool and a means to document processes for improving practice. Not only does Brookfield suggest a rationale for such a practice, but also presents a variety of ways in which portfolios may be documented. These practices might include reflective approaches such as Case writing (Shulman, 1992) accounts of experiences and inquiries into practice. Portfolios become useful ways of documenting learning in teacher education and have traditionally explored teachers’ work as well as a way of considering critical practice by presenting challenging dilemmas and issues from everyday teaching and learning experiences in the classroom. Kalantzis and Cope (2000) are introduced as a theoretical foundation for highlighting Repertoires of Practice and in particular those associated with new literacies and technological developments in the classrooms. They suggest cultural shifts and the increasing expectations of teacher and learner approaches are often confronting practices. Critical theory as indicated by Moll et al. (1992) suggest considering funds of knowledge as a way for teachers to critically examine perceptions of collective, communities and knowledge exchange. Freire (1989) emphasises dialogue and praxis as a form of exposing symbiotic processes and a way of moving towards thinking critically.

Read also: Ace the Praxis 5091 Exam

Signature Pedagogies: A Framework for Praxis in Teacher Education

Signature pedagogies - a discussionThis study utilises data from 4th year preservice teachers to consolidate and evaluate on the merits of the Signature Pedagogies. The reviews of the Signature Pedagogical approaches along with experiences and accounts of practice prompted lively discussions by preservice teachers and the response indicated a critical understanding. These connections continued increasingly recognised by preservice teacher and lecturers in effectively meeting the Australian Standards (VIT and AITSL) during classes and particularly during portfolio presentations. Analysis of these accounts is further explored in the method of this research. Signature Pedagogies have developed as a result of the theoretical foundations outlined and ideas have merged to distinguish approaches that reveal elements of ‘trustworthiness’ in the development of preservice teacher within the College of Education. The approaches implemented along with the focus of the data collection are outlined in the following commentary.

MethodologyThe methodology focuses on some of the commentary and personal accounts from preservice teachers which contributed to the data collection process. Small group forums were held to discuss the features of the Signature Pedagogies. Pedagogical tools and approaches are required when thinking about praxis. These praxis tools provide an approach and provide a mechanism for a critical approach to understanding. Preservice teachers from Victoria University in their 4th year of study of the Bachelor of Education (Prep - Year 12) were invited to participate in the research project. Data was gathered from a random selection of 25 year 4 preservice teachers. Preservice teachers were briefed on the research and if interested were invited to provide accounts and respond to the Signature Pedagogy rubric as a way of mapping their practice. This was completed by each individual preservice teacher in groups of 5. Data was collected and following this work conversations to debrief and revisit the purpose of the study were implemented. Data was analysed and themes drawn to exemplify connections from practice and praxis. Engaging 25 preservice teachers in early discussions on aspects of the Signature Pedagogies through the rubric listed as Table 1 (Hooley, 2014) provided a basis for identifying practices within their teaching and learning experiences. A combination of approaches is useful to enable the analysis of the development of preservice teacher professional practice and praxis. The Signature Pedagogies have been critical in determining the impact of professional experience and the process of linking theory and practice.

Many preservice teachers approached this mapping in a variety of ways. The instructions were clear and acted as a general guide by which they could begin to map their development. Identify your thinking in terms of considering the ideas from the rubricIndicate the use of the rubric as a way of monitoring practiceTell us what you think of this model at this early stageFind the appropriate pedagogy/ies which reflect/s the way in which you teach, learn and researchIndicate why you have made your choices and how is it located in your practiceAlthough this data required a mapping activity by preservice teachers, it was a qualitative methodology. This process was not to be a comprehensive audit or checklist, but to indicate and explain the appropriate pedagogies that were used when thinking about professional experience. Preservice teachers did not have difficulty indicating what worked for them and carefully considered their choice and were quickly able to identify examples of practice. For example, one preservice teacher wrote about the features of the rubric, ‘ … prompts deeper thinking and reflection on professional practice. An authentic look at the process as opposed to content driven.’ Sue (preservice teacher).A qualitative methodology enabled a close exploration of 4th year preservice teacher pedagogical praxis. To explore praxis, preservice teachers were in…

Key Components of Praxis in Education

Reflection: Critically examining one's beliefs, values, and actions in the context of teaching and learning.
Action: Implementing strategies and interventions based on reflection and theoretical understanding.
Evaluation: Assessing the impact of actions on student learning and making adjustments as needed.
Contextual Awareness: Recognizing that praxis is shaped by specific social, cultural, and political contexts.
Collaboration: Engaging with other educators and stakeholders to share insights and learn from diverse perspectives.

Praxis and the Integration of Theory and Practice

Praxis emphasizes the important of active engagement and reflection in the learning process, which helps educators adapt their teaching strategies to better meet students' needs. The concept encourages teachers to integrate their theoretical understanding of education with practical application in real classroom settings. Teachers who engage in praxis often collaborate with peers to share experiences and insights, fostering a community of learning and growth. Through praxis, educators can identify gaps between theory and practice, leading to innovations in teaching methods that enhance student engagement and achievement. Effective praxis requires a commitment to lifelong learning, as educators continually seek out new knowledge and experiences to inform their practice.

Praxis Beyond Education

While prominent in education, praxis extends to other fields. To reveal the inadequacies of religion, folklore, intellectualism and other such 'one-sided' forms of reasoning, Gramsci appeals directly in his later work to Marx's 'philosophy of praxis', describing it as a 'concrete' mode of reasoning. This principally involves the juxtaposition of a dialectical and scientific audit of reality; against all existing normative, ideological, and therefore counterfeit accounts. Praxis is also key in meditation and spirituality, where emphasis is placed on gaining first-hand experience of concepts and certain areas, such as union with the Divine, which can only be explored through praxis due to the inability of the finite mind (and its tool, language) to comprehend or express the infinite. In an interview for YES! Wisdom is always taste-in both Latin and Hebrew, the word for wisdom comes from the word for taste-so it's something to taste, not something to theorize about. "Taste and see that God is good", the psalm says; and that's wisdom: tasting life. No one can do it for us. The mystical tradition is very much a Sophia tradition. According to Strong's Concordance, the Hebrew word ta‛am is, properly, a taste. Praxis is the ability to perform voluntary skilled movements.

Praxis vs. Practice

It's important to distinguish praxis from mere "practice." While both terms originate from the Greek verb prassein ("to do" or "to practice"), praxis carries a deeper connotation of reflective action aimed at transformation. Practice refers to a habit or custom-that is, a usual way of doing something or of conducting oneself. Praxis, however, is more at home in formal, and often academic, writing; a sentence like “it is my praxis to eat breakfast cereal every morning” might make sense, but it’s not idiomatic.

Challenges and Considerations

One challenge lies in bridging the gap between academic theory and practical application. People, including academics and practitioners, often see a clear distinction between theory and practice with a perception that academics put theory on a pedestal and see it as “real” knowledge (see also Smith, 2011). While this separation is frequently challenged (e.g., Parton, 2000; Upton, 1999; Zuber-Skerritt, 2001), too often there is still a wide gulf between theory and practice.

tags: #praxis #definition #education