Theories-in-Use and Reflection-in-Action: Core Principles for LIS Education

This article examines the extent to which two concepts from research on organizational learning-theories-in-use and reflection-in-action-could align with typical learning outcomes associated with LIS education. Two illustrative case studies are considered: one from an undergraduate-level course on search strategies and one from a graduate-level course in collection development. Based on the kinds of classroom experiences that are reported to be most valuable to students, these concepts appear to be useful for designing and assessing the effectiveness of activities, exercises, and assignments. Student feedback from these two cases, while not universally positive, is suggestive of the utility of these concepts as guiding principles for instructional design and evaluation in the context of LIS education. Keywords: theories-in-use, reflection-in-action, collection development, search techniques, questionnaires, small group instructional diagnosis For decades, organizational learning theorists have engaged in critical analyses of professionals' work practices. Through this work, they have attempted to uncover (1) how individuals develop theories to guide their practices, and (2) how individuals adapt these theories to deal with more complex professional situations. Argyris and Schon ( 1 974/1 992), for example, explore how professionals apply theories-in-use during their work, and they characterize conditions (dilemmas) under which these theories-in-use could be challenged. Schon (1983) expands upon these notions to consider reflection-in-action, a process through which professionals engage in inquiry and "reflective conversation" with a complex situation in order to address dilemmas. This article examines the extent to which these two concepts - theories-in-use and reflection-in-action - could align with typical learning outcomes associated with LIS education, using two illustrative case studies: one from an undergraduate-level course on search strategies, and one from a graduate-level course in collection development. Background and Purpose Published work on the professions and the nature of professional education is rich and varied. Several touchstone publications (Schein, 1972; Schon, 1987; see also, with a sharper focus on librarianship and the information professions, Abbott, 1988) have contributed to and shaped the contemporary discourse around education for the professions. More recent and overarching shifts in higher education toward learner- or learning-centered teaching have offered an expanded range of approaches for characterizing the roles of teachers and students (e.g., Brookfield, 1995; hooks, 1994; Weimer, 2002). Beyond the teacher-student relationship, the recent conceptualization of "authentic professional learning" by Webster-Wright (2009) is suggestive of promising new directions for the design of continuing education programs for the professions, implicitly reflected in recent proposals by Ball (2008) and Mehra and Robinson (2009). Teaching professional skills and values to diverse sets of students in a manner that respects their prior experiences while reflecting authentic tensions that emerge across a variety of work settings is an on-going challenge within LIS education. Application of two concepts from the literature on organizational learning-theories-in-use and reflection-in-action - to the LIS classroom may effectively facilitate the alignment of course content, instructors' expectations, and students' needs. In the following discussion of these concepts, preference has been given to two "classic" works. This choice, while sacrificing breadth, permits a deeper exploration of each of the associated models as conceived by the original authors. The current application of these models to LIS practice, as evidenced through literature searches, is relatively sparse; the specific application of these models to LIS education has yet to be fully articulated. Theories-in-Use The theories-in-use concept arises from the work of Chris Argyris and Donald A. …