How are the idealistic concepts related to the routine practices in education?

The ceremonial use of slogans and catchwords in educational discussions raises the suspicion of a tenuous linkage between thought and action. As stock phrases multiply and the talk begins to take on an idealistic ring, the wary listener might well begin to wonder whether the lip service paid to these concepts is connected with what actually goes on in classrooms. It is difficult in this day and age to be opposed to democracy, creativity and innovation in education, but how are these attractive words related to the more mundane business of teaching practice? The answer, of course, is that the two are often not related, a fact that accounts for one of the most frequently recurring complaints among today's educators, namely the all-too-obvious gap between theory, that is, educational talk, on the one hand and practice on the other. The dissonance between what teachers say, or at least what their leaders say, and what they do takes many forms and has several important consequences. For some, it lays the groundwork for the development of a cynical outlook towards the admonitions of idealists and the advocates of new and supposedly revolutionary practices. This cynicism, which grows out of a prior sense of disillusionment, strikes many young teachers as they begin to appreciate the unrealistic quality of several of the expectations aroused during the period of their professional training. Teaching as actually experienced, and as described in textbooks and college courses, often turns out to be two quite different states of affairs. The result is that college instructors of education and other outsiders begin to be looked upon with suspicion by many practitioners. Even the testimony of fellow teachers may be viewed suspiciously when it conflicts with the listener's own experience in the classroom.