ABSTRACT
Education and practice differ in significant ways. In educating for practice, failure to appreciate these differences while concentrating on similarities can lead to unrealistic expectations, mechanistic approaches to curriculum design and teaching methods, and confusion in sequencing educational programs. Practice means to “work at.” Professional education for practice is the supervision of instruction for work. When education becomes otherwise focused, it changes its nature. What practice and education share in common unites them. The practice science that supports the distinctive contribution of a profession is not formulated in terms of law-like generalizations. Instead, its truths are stated as principles that justify its programs and rules that justify its practices. Rules consist of two parts, directives for action and commands that authorize their use. Failure to appreciate the significance of analogic in practice and principles for practice contributes to dysfunctional packaging of educational content for storage.
