Over the past decades there have been many research efforts on training teachers dedicated to developing a detailed characterization of the nature of teachers’ knowledge and of the mechanisms involved in its construction (eg Clandinin, 1986; Clarà & Mauri, 2010; Korthagen, 2010a; Perrenoud, 1996; Pozo, Scheuer, Mateos, & Perez Echevarria, 2006; Schön, 1983). The broad set of all this research seems to share the idea that teachers use a certain type of knowledge that presents different characteristics in relation to the academic knowledge that is usually taught and learned in universities.

There is consensus on the distinction between two kinds of knowledge, which in this project have been called situational knowledge and academic knowledge. Situational knowledge is specific, holistic, implicit (but able to be explicit). It is difficult to verbalize and full of emotions and moral elements. It is the kind of knowledge that mainly guides teachers’ practice and, from our point of view, it has a multidimensional and dilemmatic character. On the other hand, academic knowledge refers to general, explicit representations that have no moral and emotional components, and are easy to verbalize. Academic knowledge is the kind of knowledge produced and typically taught in university.

There is a large body of research on the relationship of academic knowledge generated by educational research and taught at universities, and the situational knowledge develop by teachers in training. That is, in a broader sense, on the complex relationships between theories and practices. We propose considering the issue from a Vygotskian point of view. From this perspective, both types of knowledge would be connected conceptually and would work together at the same level as mediators for teaching. Joint reflection on action would not consist of changing from one type of knowledge to the other one, but in the development and joint use of situational and academic representations, and in the conceptual link between both of them (Clarà & Mauri, 2009, 2010).

Studies have indicated the potential of joint reflection using written stories about situations experienced on teaching practices. It has been suggested that the fact of constructing a story about situations experienced in practice already helps students to reflect on action, since it allows them to represent their experience, consider the context, be aware of the dilemmas in the situation, and identify the challenges of teaching (Kuhn, Wang & Li, 2011). It has also been suggested that the fact that reflection on practice is shared in a process of interaction with the participation of students and teachers, also amplifies the reflection on action, as it facilitates the treatment of situations from multiple perspectives.

This study aims to contribute to the debate of how reflection is to be promoted with student teachers by advancing in the description and understanding of the educational assistance in joint reflection which fosters establishing theory-practice relationships. We aim to understand how tutor’s assistance in processes of joint reflection on practice among student teachers can promote progression of student teachers' reflection skills and develop teachers’ knowledge. Concretely, this research addresses the problem of the relations between theory and practice in teacher education, by means of the study of the processes of joint reflection among student teachers in classroom settings, reflections based on the discussion of written stories from their experiences in their training period in schools. 

Clandinin, D.J. (1986). Classroom practice: Teacher images in action. Philadelphia: The Palmer Press. Clarà, M., & Mauri, T. (2009). The development of teaching practice: A working hypothesis based on Cultural-Historical Psychology. The International Journal of Learning, 16(7), 275-286. Clarà, M., & Mauri, T. (2010). El conocimiento práctico: cuatro conceptualizaciones constructivistas de las relaciones entre conocimiento teórico y práctica educativa. Infancia y Aprendizaje, 33(2), 131-141. Cohen, J. (1960). "A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales". Educational and Psychological Measurement 20 (1): 37–46. Coll, C., Colomina, R., Onrubia, J., & Rochera, M.J. (1995). Actividad conjunta y habla: una aproximación a los mecanismos de influencia educativa. En P. Fernández Berrocal & M. A. Melero (Comps.), La interacción social en contextos educativos (pp. 193-326). Madrid: Siglo XXI. Coll, C., Onrubia, J., & Mauri, T. (2008). Ayudar a aprender en contextos educativos: El ejercicio de la influencia educativa y el análisis de la enseñanza. Revista de Educación, 346, 33–70. Cubero, R., & Ignacio, M.J. (2011). Accounts in the classroom. Discourse and the coconstruction of meaning. Journal of Constructivist Psychology, 24 (3), 234-267. Cubero, R., Cubero, M., Santamaría, A., de la Mata, M.L., Ignacio, M.J., & Prados, M. (2008). La educación a través de su discurso. Prácticas educativas y construcción discursiva del conocimiento en el aula. Revista de Educación, 346, 71-104. Korthagen, F. (2010). How teacher education can make a difference. Journal of Education for teaching: International research and pedagogy, 36(4), 407-423. Kuhn, D., Wang, Y., & Li, H. (2011). Why Argue? Developing Understanding of the Purposes and Values of Argumentive Discourse. Discourse Processes, 48, 26-49. Lewins, Ann & Silver, Christina (2007). Using software in qualitative research: A step-by-step guide. London: Sage. Mena, J., Sánchez, E., & Tillema, H. H. (2011). Promoting teacher reflection: what is said to be done. Journal of Education for Teaching: International Research and Pedagogy, 37(1), 21-36. Perrenoud, P. (2006). Desarrollar la práctica reflexiva en el oficio de enseñar. Barcelona: Graó. Pozo, J. I., Scheuer, N., Mateos, M., & Pérez Echevarría, M. P. (2006). Las teorías implícitas sobre el aprendizaje y la enseñanza. En J.I. Pozo, N. Scheuer, M.P. Pérez Echevarría, M. Mateos, E. Martín, & M. de la Cruz, (Eds.) Nuevas formas de pensar la enseñanza y el aprendizaje. Las concepciones de profesores y alumnos (pp.95-132). Barcelona: Graó. Schön, D. A. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.