The article is the third publication in a series devoted to the examination of various aspects of teachers' thinking and the history of its study within different scientific paradigms. The first two articles were published in Cultural-Historical Psychology (No. 1, 2026) and Psychological Science and Education (No. 4, 2026). They addressed issues related to pedagogical decision-making and the structure of teachers’ professional knowledge. In the present article, the author considers teacher thinking as a form of practical thinking, drawing on the works of Kornilov, Teplov and Kulyutkin, and analyses the role and place of such thinking in pedagogical activity. Particular attention is paid to its distinction from scientific thinking and to its orientation not so much towards the study of objects as towards their transformation in accordance with the goals of professional activity. It is argued that the basic unit of pedagogical thinking is not a scientific concept but a practical generalisation. Such a generalisation is image-based and comprises an invariant core of essential characteristics shared by recurring situations, together with variable, non-essential features. The relationship between these images of situations and the corresponding schemes of action aimed at transforming them is also analysed. The author further examines the role of professional knowledge as a component of practical generalisations and its transformation from a set of fragmented elements into instruments for solving pedagogical problems through the processes of operationalisation, contextualisation and integration. In conclusion, the author formulates a number of proposals aimed at modernising the traditional approach to the design of teacher education programmes. In the author’s view, the principal outcome of such programmes should be the development of graduates’ pedagogical thinking. The role of professional cases as the primary units of the activity-based content of teacher education is also emphasised.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A.A. Margolis (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: