in the research (1982 P204) and they indicate the low priority
accorded to theory and the limited nature of its potential contribution
Aims listed were to find out what was meant by being a professional;
to consider what schools were for; to discover where the power lay
in education; to discuss the merits and demerits of alternative
policy options. Theory courses were also felt to be valuable because
they enable subject specialisms to meet students from other disciplines
in mixed seminars". (1982 Р20Д)
Theory, Reading and Reflection
students were asked to list those books they
had found interesting
and stimulating and the research comments
the students responded best to books dealing
with
various aspects of behaviour problems,
remedial
and special education and disadvantage ..... Relatively
few students
to have had their interest caught
by books on subjects such as the history of education,
evaluation and assessment, reading, the curriculum
and race .
(1982 P121)
These indications
ially when seen
of areas of interest show severe limitations espec-
alongside the prevalence of practical concerns in
subject method courses. But they do perhaps suggest that students
themselves are prepared to illuminate problematic aspects of their
practice with educational writing. What is disturbing if this is
the
is the
limited definition
of
problems
that is
thereby
made available. Is this a consequence of strong boundaries between
theory
and practice which exist
for
most
students
and
some
staff
at the level of course structures and of pedagogy and it follows
at the level of assessment? Here generalisation was difficult but
