Teaching style of a teacher as a way to make more effective learning process of the pupil's Currently, the requirements for the teacher's competences, the improvement of his qualifications and his professional career are increasingly emphasized and brought to the fore. The teacher's professional "self" has other forms and its role is not only in passing on knowledge, but above all in trying to see the perspectives of each student's personality development. His role in making the learning of students more effective and ensuring their full development is influenced by several factors. We consider the teacher's teaching style to be one of them. In the article, we focus on the role of the teacher and his teaching style with regard to the effective learning of students. If a student has a problem with acquiring knowledge and using it, it can have an impact not only on his learning process and the related school success, but also on many other aspects of his personality.

Although in schools we are faced with the demand to teach students an ever-increasing volume of knowledge, this effort causes not only the game, but above all the joy of learning and of students' life to disappear more and more (Fenyvesiová, L., 2013). Here, the personality of the teacher and the related teaching style come to the fore, the definition of which is described by several domestic and foreign authors. It can be understood as a certain method or teaching procedure, which the teacher teaches. According to the aforementioned author, teaching style includes the way in which the teacher approaches the planning of teaching, its implementation and also its evaluation. J. Mareš (2013, p. 467) gives the definition of this term as follows: "teaching styles are procedures typical for a given teacher - procedures that the teacher prefers in a given period and uses them in education, in managing student learning, in managing class work. These procedures are influenced by the peculiarities of the teacher's personality, his preparation for the profession and further education, his pedagogical experiences, but above all his concept of teaching".

In a very close connection with the previous definition, J. Průch, E. Walterová, J. Mareš, (2009, p. 356) perceive the teaching style as a "peculiar procedure by which the teacher teaches." It is inherent in the goal, structure and sequence of activities we use, our promptness and flexibility". L. Rovňanová (2015) states that the teacher's teaching style is also the teacher's understanding of teaching, which can be understood as a set of opinions, attitudes, arguments and beliefs with which the teacher justifies these opinions, attitudes and beliefs.

Some authors mention that the term teaching style is synonymous with the term teachers' approach to teaching, e.g. R. Brostrom (1975). K. Trigwell and M. Prosser (2004) assume that the teacher's approach to teaching is a pedagogical approach to teaching in which the teacher takes into account the learning styles of the students and leads to good learning outcomes. Thus, the teacher chooses a certain approach based on how he perceives and then evaluates the situations that occurred during the lesson. However, there are also opinions when it is possible to talk about two partially overlapping concepts, which are differentiated based on the degree of the investigated phenomena (Zhang, L.F., 2001).

V. Švec (1999) describes the teaching style as a procedure that is specific to the teacher when solving pedagogical situations. He points out and emphasizes that, for most authors, teaching style is understood as a well-thought-out strategy created on the basis of a decision, and not as an action following the situations that arise during teaching.

In connection with the mentioned definitions of teaching style, the aim of the article is to point out the importance and role of the teacher's teaching style with regard to the effective learning of students. We therefore pay attention to a discipline such as psychodidactics, which emphasizes the student's knowledge and, last but not least, emphasizes the creation of conditions for learning processes, so that the teacher's actions lead to effective student learning.

Educational practice requires the teacher's ability to modify his teaching style in various pedagogical situations so that it is not only the basis of effective teaching, but that it is suitable for all students. "Step out of yourself." With this sentence, the author J. Mareš (2013) figuratively points out that the teacher perceives and looks at himself differently than he is used to. Thus, he would be forced to think more deeply and to guided self-reflection by various targeted questions asked by others. This was summarized by V. Hrabal Jr. and I. Pavelková (2010) with two questions: What kind of teacher am I? How well do I know my students?

Psychodidactics emphasizes precisely the knowledge hidden in the mentioned questions. The role of the teacher, as a mediator of the student's knowledge, should be to respect the needs of each student in teaching, thereby creating optimal conditions for learning processes. In order for the teacher to increase the effectiveness of the teaching process and create conditions for the learning of all students in the classroom, it is necessary, as mentioned above, to know each student, which is the basis of the relationship between him and the teacher. According to E. Petlák and L. Fenyvesiová (2009), the level of these interactional relationships consists of areas such as:

  • knowledge of the pupil's state of health;
  • knowledge of the family and its family background;
  • knowing the student's interests;
  • knowledge of learning styles;
  • knowledge of the student's status in the class and knowledge of the student's speech in other lessons.

However, such a view of the student is not enough. From the psychological aspect, it is desirable to know the student's personality traits, which are defined by authors such as K. Kačáni, J. Hvozdík and J. Daniel (In Petlák, E. - Fenyvesiová, L., 2009) as follows:

  1. activation-motivational properties that have an impact on the level of interaction relationships, but above all on the results of the students' learning activities and include e.g. interests, aspirations, goals, plans,
  2. relational and attitudinal characteristics such as character, attitudes, worldview, which can have a positive but also a negative impact; it is about students' attitudes towards learning, towards the subjects but also towards the teacher,
  3. performance characteristics; their knowledge allows the teacher to adequately load the student, gradually increase the level of difficulty and entrust him with adequate requirements,
  4. dynamic properties represent the strength and intensity of behavior and also of experience,
  5. self-regulatory properties affect the student's behavior and are the "carrier" of the image that the student creates about himself.

V. Kosíková (2011) considers the psychodidactic aspects of education as a mediator of student knowledge. In knowledge, emphasis is placed not only on the student's personality and the associated development of personality, cognitive and learning characteristics, but especially on the mediation of the subject matter, which is related to the teacher's teaching style. We agree with the opinion of E. Petlák (2014), who notes that the field of psychodidactics deserves more attention than is given to it in our schools. He also expresses the belief that by appreciating it, students would achieve better learning results, their learning would be more effective and students would know how to learn.

Although didactics still today takes knowledge from psychology, we can find areas in the didactic literature that have a basis in psychology, and as E. Petlák (2014) states, the following belong to them:

  • it is necessary to teach in such a way that the pupils have a feeling of joy and satisfaction, because learning something new is closely connected with expectations and interest in the unknown,
  • respect the individual characteristics of pupils (e.g. learning styles, conditions and influences acting on the pupil, maturation of cognitive functions),
  • success is inherently associated with experiencing it, which subsequently stimulates the brain to engage in further activities, and such enabling the experience of success is a support for retaining the subject matter in memory,
  • give students the opportunity to learn through various activities, which help them remember the subject matter more easily,
  • use as many senses as possible when learning,
  • to exclude from teaching such situations that would induce stress in pupils,
  • take into account the ideas, experiences, experiences and opinions of students acquired in the process of ontogenetic development and manage teaching in such a way that there is an association between the new and the old,
  • support socialization by creating opportunities for mutual cooperation among pupils.

In connection with the mentioned areas, we consider it important to get to know the student's concept of the subject matter. Based on this knowledge, the teacher can influence the student's understanding of the subject, thereby creating opportunities for effective learning. In the next parts of the article, we will therefore focus on what the student's concept of the subject matter includes and how the student receives, or does not accept new knowledge. Last but not least, we try to point out the ways that the teacher can apply in terms of influencing the student's concept of the subject matter, which we have already pointed out in the given areas according to E. Petlák.

Student's concept of the subject matter

The issue of children's concepts is ambiguous in terminological definition, and authors such as J. Mareš and M. Ouhrabka (1992), P. Doulík, Marmaroti, S. and Galanopoulou, D., Schneider, I. and Ohadi, M., M. participate in the terminological analysis (In Duchovičová, J., 2010).

In foreign literature, as stated by J. Mareš and M. Ouhrabka (1992), the term student΄s conception (or concept) is used, and the term student΄s understanding (a term more related to individual cognitive and thought processes) is also widespread. In Slovak and Czech literature, the term student's concept of the subject matter, student's interpretations and preconceptions is used. A student learns, understands and interprets the world in many aspects differently from an adult (Duchovičová, J., 2013) and to specify a child's knowledge of the world there are specific labels such as spontaneous ideas, children's understanding, naive theories of the child, misconceptions (used in the sense of a wrong idea) or mental representations. Due to the issue of children's concepts and their ambiguous definition, we introduce and describe in more detail the concept of the pupil's concept of the subject matter.

J. Mareš and M. Ouhrabka (1992) state that the student's concept of the subject matter is a summary of the student's knowledge, ideas, beliefs, emotions and expectations related to the school subject matter. According to J. Škoda and P. Doulík (2011), the structural characteristics of children's concepts are made up of a cognitive, affective and structural component.

The cognitive component of children's concepts is formed either intentionally or arises spontaneously. Spontaneous creation of the cognitive component is based on situational learning that results from everyday life or experiential learning. We can talk about the deliberate creation of a cognitive structure if it involves targeted teaching, interest-oriented activities or independent active search and acquisition of relevant information.

The affective component represents the second structural component of children's concepts, which is connected with the fact that the spontaneous emergence of children's concepts takes place on the basis of the individual experiences of the student with the present emotional coloring decisive in the formation of memory traces and also the formation of associative bonds.

The last but at the same time significant component of children's concepts is the structural component. The mentioned component is based on associative links between preconceptions, that is, from concepts representing a child's world view. A concept representing a certain phenomenon from the surrounding world (e.g. a feature, event) is integrated with the concepts that the student has internalized and thus the concept is incorporated into the conceptual structures of the student's knowledge. Associative structures are unique for each student, they are formed individually by different influences and experiences.

For a closer look at what the student's concept of the subject includes, we present the definition of J. Čáp and J. Mareš (2001, p. 419). According to them, it includes:

  • "cognitive area (student's understanding of the content of individual concepts, phenomena, principles, student's understanding of the relationships between them, his entire subjective structure of knowledge about a certain topic),
  • affective area (pupil attitudes, values, beliefs, emotional coloring of certain knowledge typical for the given pupil)
  • and the conactive area (the student's effort to behave in a certain way when working with the given subject matter)".

The student's concept of the subject matter develops over time, which means that it is not completely stable and depends on many determinants. J. Mareš (2013) describes the theory of J. Bruner and J. Piaget, by which they describe in more detail the method of mastering the subject matter, respectively. development of cognitive abilities.

Already in the 60s, the American psychologist J. Bruner pointed out how important it is to distinguish the nature of the subject matter, namely its internal structure. His claim was that each topic in teaching has its own certain specific structure, which consists of partial facts, concepts and finally generalizations. He approximates the explanation using the metaphor of a tree, where the leaves represent concrete facts, the branches of the tree are the concepts organizing the topic, and the trunk is the generalization from which everything branches and therefore grows. All three are essential for the student's learning, although the key is the understanding of generalization. Understanding the structure of a topic leads to a better understanding of the whole. Such an understanding will ensure the student's inclusion of new knowledge with the previous ones.

J. Piaget (1970) also describes the development of cognitive abilities in his theory. We consider the explanation of the concepts of assimilation and accommodation in its understanding to be essential from the point of view of applying a teaching style aimed at understanding the student's concept of the subject matter. His theory offers the teacher a closer look at how the student accepts or does not accept new knowledge. In the first case of assimilation, he talks about the fact that new knowledge seems to "harmonize" with previous, i.e. already existing, knowledge schemes. The pupil's existing structure is growing and enriching. In the second case of accommodation, the new knowledge "doesn't fit" with the existing schemas and a conflict occurs. In order for assimilation to occur, the previous structures must be rebuilt. The problem is that the student is not able to process the new curriculum at the given moment and connect it with the previous one. So he either rejects the new knowledge or takes the path of rebuilding his knowledge structure. With the addition of subjects and also the curriculum, it happens that the teacher tries to save time and He conveys the subject matter to the students without explanation. This is where the distance between the subject matter and life begins. The following statements of the students describe it: Why do I have to study this? What will it be for me?

The knowledge that students acquire at school is often understood as too theoretical, and students do not see the possibility of their application in practical life and for their personal life. In a traditional school, one can observe a tendency to rely on the idea of ​​a child as a blank or unwritten piece of paper, when teaching is understood as "describing" this "clean piece of paper", the so-called "school science". In this context, the authors J. Škoda and P. Doulík (2011) emphasize the traditional school's lack of interest in children's internal knowledge systems and children's concepts, with which they do not work systematically and purposefully in teaching. It therefore depends on the teacher, not only in what way, but also how intensively he can present the meaning of the subject matter to the students and relate it to the use of acquired knowledge in practical life.

In connection with the mentioned theories, we consider it essential to mention, as above, the concept of school misconceptions of the curriculum. This is a faulty concept of the curriculum caused by the school. These misconceptions are deeply rooted in students and it is very difficult to change them. The subject matter, as J. Piaget describes in his theory, becomes alien and remote for the student. In this context, the teacher should not emphasize rote learning, but his effort should be to find out whether the student has understood the subject matter, whether he can retell it and, last but not least, use it. Such an effort should be part of the teaching style of every teacher. According to J. Mareš (2013, p. 398), the student's ideas about the subject do not have to be wrong or inaccurate, on the contrary, they can be "surprisingly revealing, they can signal an unconventional direction of the student's thinking". Incorrect or incomplete ideas of the student about the subject matter can arise even with a high-quality interpretation of the subject matter. M. Hejný (1989) describes their emergence when a student associates a wrong idea with signs or words, is unable to assign an idea to words or signs, or is unable to express his ideas and thoughts verbally.

The task of the teacher is to find out not only the current form of the student's concept of the subject, but also its transformation in certain periods of time. Therefore, it is most appropriate for diagnostics to be a direct part of teaching in all phases (explanation, practice, repetition, testing). Finding out the student's understanding of the subject matter is both methodologically and conceptually challenging, and it is necessary to combine the forces of experienced teachers and psychologists (Mareš, J., 2013).

Children's concepts predetermine the educational procedures themselves from the point of view of the management of the learning activity and determine the effectiveness of the educational process itself. J. Škoda and P. Doulík (2011) state that children's concepts can be revealed by teachers with many years of experience who have an idea of ​​how these children's concepts, or naive theories look. However, the validity of revealing children's concepts based on intuition is undermined by 2 aspects:

  1. The first is the fact that children's concepts are an individual characteristic of the student, and the teacher's universal ideas deviate from the original thoughts of the students.
  2. Children's concepts are determined by extracurricular influences, most often the media, which can be described as lay science.

Several methods are used to diagnose children's concepts, such as analysis of student performances and creations, questionnaire, clinical interview, conceptual mapping, didactic tests. Diagnostics and subsequent knowledge of the student's concept of the subject matter should lead the teacher to apply procedures on the basis of which students would not only remember new knowledge, but be able to connect it with previous knowledge. We can talk about influencing through which students can really understand what they are learning.

Influencing the pupil's concept of the subject matter

"All pedagogical strategies are successful to the extent that the teacher knows his children, pupils, students" (Rosenberg, M. In Krejčová, V., Kargerová, J., 2003).

The teaching process consists in the implementation of activities and activities through which the student acquires new knowledge. However, the student may not always understand this knowledge. Therefore, as psychodidactics emphasizes, it is essential to know the student's personality, his cognitive and learning characteristics and personality traits. On the basis of such knowledge, the teacher can influence the pupil's misdirected concept of the subject matter. Within the given issue, it is important for the teacher and his teaching style to pay attention to the already mentioned diagnosis of children's concepts. Its justification in the teaching process should be considered by every teacher who wants to gradually reveal the concept of the student's subject matter through his pedagogic work and, by gradually getting to know it, to make students aware of the possibility of effective learning.

In most cases, due to the amount of subject matter and often the lack of time, a radical change is necessary so that uncorrected errors do not cause them to accumulate and thus prevent the continuation of learning at all (Mareš, J., 2013). J. Čáp (1997) emphasizes that a mistake is a natural phenomenon at the beginning of learning, which must be used to improve the further course of learning. If a student makes a mistake, according to J. Piaget (1999), it is not caused by his incompetence, but by the fact that the child reacts based on his achieved level of thinking. With his attitude, the teacher should not develop a sense of guilt and failure in the students. The correct view of a mistake means perceiving it as a natural part of the learning process (Kosíková, V., 2011).

At the same time, influencing the student's concept of the subject matter by the teacher includes developing metacognition when working with mistakes, on the basis of which, as stated by V. Kosíková (2011), the student realizes his wrong steps and procedures, thinks about the mistake, looks for the right solution or confronts his opinions with others. Teaching a student to work with a mistake represents an analysis of three processes (Kulič, V., 1971):

  • error identification, which means revealing the incorrectness of the answer and detecting faulty performance,
  • interpretation of faulty performance as a reflection on one's own performance, i.e. j. finding the conditions and causes of faulty performance, which results in revealing the place of understanding,
  • error correction that requires feedback information; the correction makes sense only after justification.

According to V. Kosíková (2011), the possibility of meta-reflection on one's own performance is the right way to teach a student to work with a mistake. It also lists authors who deal with questions and issues of metacognition, such as R. J. Sternberg, H. Krykorková, K. Vyrosteková, J. Duchovičová and many others.

The teacher should perceive the issue of children's concepts as an important part of learning how his students learn (how they receive new knowledge, how they understand it and how they can use it in concrete examples or real life). As another possibility of influencing the student's concept of the subject matter, we present the structuring of the subject matter. The structuring of the curriculum is a strategy aimed not only at the meaningful learning of students, but above all at creating a basis for the construction of one's own knowledge. By structuring the curriculum, we mean planning the whole and optimizing learning methods. J. Duchovičová (2010) states that if the learning process is effectively and purposefully managed, the learner can solve new situations with the help of structured knowledge linked to skills and attitudes, thus updating, changing, enriching and refining his structures due to the influence of new experiences of various kinds. The structuring of the curriculum includes two basic levels, which are traditional and modern structuring. However, streamlining the teaching process does not mean the application of modern teaching methods, striving for student activity, testing elements of project-based and problem-based teaching.

The difference between traditional and modern structuring of the curriculum is that during the traditional mediation of the curriculum, the students' previous knowledge of the given curriculum is activated, so that the next curriculum can more easily follow on from new ones. Pupils are provided with knowledge that they did not know until now, but which is essential for understanding the following subject matter. In addition to understanding the concepts, the student is also required to understand their relationships between them. However, this is not part of the teacher's interpretation. Pupils often do not manage these activities, so this psychodidactic dimension of education is often underestimated by teachers. The skill of structuring the curriculum is at the level of learning only by trial and error. In terms of building the structure of thinking, the traditional structuring of the curriculum turns out to be insufficient.

A modern approach to curriculum structuring is being developed with the intention of improving learning strategies. It is based on graph theory, which includes deep processing, top-down/bottom-up processing, reorganization processing, and non-linear subject matter representation and its theories of networking, key concept structuring, schema creation, concept maps, reverse graphic organization. Individual modern approaches are described by J. Duchovičová (2010). We consider their knowledge from the point of view of developing cognitive abilities and also from the point of view of influencing the student's concept of the subject to be indisputably important in the daily work of a teacher.

In an effort to make the teaching process and students' learning more efficient, it is necessary to emphasize the role of the teacher. If it is in the teacher's interest to gradually get to know how his pupils learn, how they acquire new knowledge, collectively referred to as getting to know the pupil's concept of the subject matter, then he can further influence this concept, whether rightly or wrongly. The development of a set of principles proposed by G. J. Pozner and P. W. Hewson (In Mareš, J., 2013) serves to change the pupils' concept of the subject matter and subsequently make the pupils' learning more efficient:

  1. Inducing inconsistency, dissatisfaction or contradiction in the student with his original concept of the subject, which causes emotional reactions. The student begins to hesitate about his previous ideas and is thus open to change.
  2. The presentation of a new concept should be presented in a comprehensible way so that the student can understand it and gradually start thinking about it.
  3. The new concept should be compelling. Then the student is willing to try whether it would be acceptable for him and what changes would need to be made.
  4. From the student's point of view, the new submission should be useful and usable. The student must try whether this new concept is more advantageous in solving the problem.

Working with mistakes, understanding between traditional and modern structuring of the curriculum and its application in practice or a set of principles through which the teacher can change or to a certain extent necessary to influence the pupil's concept of the subject matter, are described in the article as possibilities, by using which the teacher's teaching style can become an effective means of pupils' learning.

Conclusion

The content of the article focused on the teacher's teaching style as a means of improving the students' learning, our intention was to point out not only the connections with the students' concept of the subject matter, but especially the ways in which the teacher can give his students the opportunity to really understand what they are learning. However, even this understanding appears to be one of the problems of the current school. The teacher's role in the sense of making the students' learning more effective is thus understood in the knowledge of their subject concepts and in their subsequent influence. However, we have not exhausted the topic with the mentioned possibilities of influencing the student's concept of the subject matter. We consider the initiative and tenacity of a teacher to be important, who, through his pedagogy, would not only be a teacher who imparts a lot of knowledge to students, but a teacher who "opens up" the possibilities of their further progress in learning and "offers" a kind of path to understanding something new, often unknown, or to connecting new knowledge with the previous one.

Author: Mgr. Zuzana Zajacová The contribution is an output of the project VEGA 1/0637/16 Development of a diagnostic tool for assessing the level of phonemic awareness in preschool children. List of bibliographic references

BROSTROM, R. 1975. Developing Effective Teaching Styles. Los Angeles: COMCOR, 1975. ČÁP, J. 1997. Psychology of education and teaching. Prague: Charles University, 1997. 415 p. ISBN 80-7066-534-3. ČÁP, J. – MAREŠ, J. 2001. Psychology for teachers. Prague: Portal, 2001, 655 p. ISBN 80-7178-463-X. DUCHOVIČOVÁ, J. 2010. Neurodidactic and psychodidactic context of education. Nitra: Konštantín Filozof University, 2010. 93 p. ISBN 978-80-8094-783-5. DUCHOVIČOVÁ, J. – ŠKODA, J. et al. 2013. Psychodidactic concept of the curricular and mediational context of education. Nitra: Konštantín Filozof University, 2013. 289 p. ISBN 978-80-7414-658-9. FENYVESIOVÁ, L. 2013. Teaching theory - selected chapters. Nitra: PF UKF in Nitra, 2013. 84 p. ISBN 978-80-558-0392-0. HEJNÝ, M. 1989. Theory of teaching mathematics 2. Bratislava: SPN, 1989, 554 p. ISBN 80-08-00014-7. HRABAL, VL. Jr. – PAVELKOVÁ, I. 2010. What kind of teacher am I? Prague: Portal, 2010. 239 p. ISBN 978-80-7367-755-8. KOSÍKOVÁ, V. 2011. Psychology in education and its psychodidactic aspects. Grada Publishing, a. pp., 2011. 272 ​​pp. ISBN 978-80-247-2433-1. KREJČOVÁ, V. – KARGEROVÁ, J. 2003. Educational program Start together. Prague: Portal, 2003. 232 p. ISBN 80-7178-695-0. KULIČ, V. 1971. Error and learning: Functions of erroneous performance in learning and its management. Prague: SPN, 1971. 244 p. MAREŠ, J. 2013. Pedagogical psychology. Prague: Portal, 2013. 702 p. ISBN 978-80-262-0174-8. MAREŠ, J. – OUHRABKA, M. 1992. Student's concept of the curriculum. Pedagogy, 1992, Vol. 42, no. 1, p. 83-93. ISSN 3330-3815. PETLÁK, E. 2014. Current issues of education in questions and answers. IRIS Publishing House, 2014. 84 p. ISBN 978-80-8153-021-0. PETLÁK., E. – FENYVESIOVÁ, L. 2009. Interaction in teaching. IRIS Publishing House, 2009. 137 p. ISBN 978-80-89256-31-0. PIAGET, J. 1970. Psychology of intelligence. Prague: SPN, 1970, 148 p. PIAGET, J. 1999. Psychology of intelligence. Prague: Portal, 1999. 164 p. ISBN 80-7178-309-9. PRŮCHA, J. - WALTEROVÁ, E. - MAREŠ, J. 2009. Pedagogical dictionary. Prague: Portal, 2009. 395 p. ISBN 978-80-7367-647-6. ROVŇANOVÁ, L. 2015. Learning styles of pupils and teaching styles of teachers. Bratislava: Methodological and pedagogical center, 2015. 70 p. 978-80-565-0953-1. ŠKODA, J. - DOULÍK, P. 2011. Psychodidactics – Methods of effective and meaningful learning and teaching. Grada Publishing, a. pp., 2011. 208 pp. ISBN 978-80-247-3341-8. ŠVEC, V. 1999. Pedagogical preparation of future teachers: Problems and inspiration. Brno: Paido, 1999. 163 p. ISBN 80-85931-70-2. TRIGWELL, K. – PROSSER, M. 2004. Development and Use of the Approaches to Teaching Inventory. Educational Psychology Review, 2004, vol. 16, no. 4, p. 409-424. ISSN 1040-726X. TRNA, J. – ŠVEC, V. 1999. Pedagogical skill of diagnosing pupils' preconception of the subject matter. In Pedagogical diagnostics 99. Ostrava: Pedagogical Faculty of Ostrava University, 1999. p. 172-174. ISBN 80-7042-160-6. ZHANG, L.F. 2001. Approaches and Thinking Styles in Teaching. The Journal of Psychology [online]. 135(5) [cit. 2017-04-05]. Available online: < https://www.google.sk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwi238-lhqbQAhXrDsAKHaF1Bc4QFghGMAU&url=http%3A%2F%2F202.116.45.198%2Fkcyjxl%2Fjxtj%2Fpdf%2F26%2F3.Teachers%27%2520Styles%2520of%2520Thinking-%2520An%2520Exploratory%2520Study.pdf&usg=AFQjCNECBrGlrqjq7vnIX9QU9-uW-kneAw>.