This paper examines the increasing interest in practice-based theorising in the new social learning theory. It argues that this body of work does not pay sufficient attention to ethnomethodology's understanding of practical action. The paper then illustrates ethnomethodology's approach to understanding practical action, highlighting the concepts of ‘inquiry’ and ‘work’, and drawing upon examples from two phases in Garfinkel's work. Potential implications are then discussed for the new practice-based social learning theory and conclusions are drawn.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AugoustinosM. and WalkerI., (1995), Social Cognition: An Integrated Introduction, London: Sage.
2.
BaccusM.D., (1986), ‘Multipiece truck wheel accidents and their regulations’, in GarfinkelH. (ed.), Ethnomethodological Studies of Work, 1986, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
3.
BlumerH., (1969), Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method, Berkeley: University of California Press.
4.
BrownJ.S. and DuguidP., (1991), ‘Organizational learning and communities of practice: toward a unified view of working, learning, and innovation’, Organization Science, 2 (1): 40–57.
5.
BruceS. and WallisR., (1983), ‘Rescuing motives’, The British Journal of Sociology, 34 (1): 61–71.
6.
CookS. and YanowD., (1993), ‘Culture and organisational learning’, Journal of Management Inquiry, 2 (4): 373–390.
7.
CoulterJ., (1987), Mind in Action, Oxford: Polity.
8.
CoulterJ., (1991b), ‘Cognition: cognition in an ethnmethodological mode’, in ButtonG. (ed.), Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
9.
DenzinN.K., (1971), ‘Symbolic interactionism and ethnomethodology’, in DouglasJ.D. (ed.), Understanding Everyday Life: Toward The Reconstruction of Sociological Knowledge, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
10.
EglinT., (1986), ‘Introduction to a hermeneutics of the occult’, in GarfinkelH., (ed.), Ethnomethodological Studies of Work, 1986, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
11.
EngestromY., (1993), ‘Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory: the case of primary care medical practice’, in ChaiklinS. and LaveJ. (eds), Understanding Practice: Perspectives on Activity and Context, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
12.
EngestromY., (1999), ‘Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation’, in EngestromY.Miettinen and PunamakiR.L. (eds), Perspectives on Activity Theory, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
13.
GarfinkelH., (1984 orig. 1967), Studies in Ethnomethodology, Cambridge: Polity Press.
14.
GarfinkelH.LynchM. and LivingstonE., (1981), ‘The work of a discovering science construed with materials from the optically discovered pulsar’, Philosophy of the Social Sciences, 11: 131–158.
15.
GarfinkelH., (1987), ‘A reflection’, Discourse Analysis Research Group Newsletter, 5 (2): 5–9.
16.
GarfinkelH., (1988), ‘Evidence from locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order, logic, reason, meaning, method, etc. in and as of the essential quiddity of immortal ordinary society, (I of IV): an announcement of studies’, Sociological Theory, 6: 103–109.
17.
GarfinkelH., (1991), ‘Respecification: evidence for locally produced, naturally accountable phenomena of order, logic, reason, meaning, method, etc. in and as of the essential haecceity of immortal ordinary society (I) – an announcement of studies’, in ButtonG. (ed.), Ethnomethodology and the Human Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
18.
GarfinkelH., (ed.), (1986), Ethnomethodological Studies of Work, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
19.
GarfinkelH. and WiederD.L., (1992), ‘Two incommensurable, asymmetrically alternate technologies of social analysis’, in WatsonG. and SeilerR.M. (eds), Text in Context: Contributions to Ethnomethodology, Newbury Park: Sage.
20.
GherardiS., (2000), ‘Practice-based theorizing on learning and knowing in organizations’, Organization, 7 (2): 211–223.
21.
GirtonG.D., (1986), ‘Kung Fu: towards a praxiological hermeneutic of the martial arts’, in GarfinkelH. (ed.), Ethnomethodological Studies of Work, 1986, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
22.
HeritageJ., (1984), Garfinkel and Ethnomethodology, Cambridge: Polity Press.
23.
HutchinsE., (1995), Cognition in the Wild, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
24.
HutchinsE., (1996), ‘Organizing work by adaptation’, in CohenM.D. and SproullL.S. (eds), Organizational Learning, Thousand Oaks: Sage.
25.
KellerC. and KellerJ.D., (1993), ‘Thinking and acting with iron’, in ChaiklinS. and LaveJ. (eds), Understanding Practice: Perspectives on Activity and Context, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
26.
LaveJ. and WengerE., (1991), Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
27.
LynchM., (1985), Art and Artefact in Laboratory Science: A Study of Shop Work and Shop Talk in a Laboratory, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
28.
LynchM., (1993), Scientific Practice and Ordinary Action, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
29.
LivingstonE., (1986), The Ethnomethodological Foundations of Mathematics, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
30.
MehanH., (1993), ‘Beneath the skin and between the ears: a case study in the politics of representation’, in ChaiklinS. and LaveJ., Understanding Practice: Perspectives on Activity and Context (241–268), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31.
MoscoviciS., (1984), ‘The phenomenon of social representations’, in FarrR.M. and MoscoviciS. (eds), Social Representations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
32.
OrrJ.E., (1990), ‘Sharing knowledge, celebrating identity: community memory in a service culture’, in MiddletonD.S. and EdwardsD. (eds), Collective Remembering: Memory in Society, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
33.
PackC., (1986), ‘Features of signs encountered in designing a notational system for transcribing lectures’, in GarfinkelH. (ed.), Ethnomethodological Studies of Work, 1986, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
34.
ParkerI., (1990), ‘Discourse: definitions and contradictions’, Philosophical Psychology, 3: 189–204.
35.
ParkerI., (1991), Discourse Dynamics: Critical Analyses for Social and Individual Psychology, London: Routledge.
36.
SacksH., (1984), ‘On doing being ordinary’, in AtkinsonM. and HeritageJ., (1984), Structures of Social Action, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
SchegloffE.A., (1991), ‘Conversation analysis and socially shared cognition’, in ResnickL.B.LevineJ.M. and TeasleyS.D. (eds), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition, (150–71). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
38.
SharrockW. and AndersonB., (1984), ‘What's the point of “rescuing motives”?’The British Journal of Sociology, 35 (3): 435–451.
39.
SharrockW. and AndersonB., (1986), The Ethnomethodologists, London: Tavistock Publications.
40.
SudnowD., (2002), Ways of the Hand, MIT Press.
41.
TajfelH. and TurnerJ.C., (1986), ‘The social identity theory of intergroup relations’, in WorchelS. and AustinW.G., (eds), Psychology of Intergroup Relations, Monterey, CA, Brooks/Cole.
42.
VygotskyL.S., (1978), Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Mental Processes, in ColeM.John-SteinerV.ScribnerS. and SoubermanE., (eds), Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
43.
WengerE., (1998), Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
44.
WertschJ.V., (1991), ‘A sociocultural approach to socially shared cognition’, in ResnickL.B.LevineJ.M. and TeasleyS.D., (eds), Perspectives on Socially Shared Cognition (85–100). Washington: American Psychological Association.
45.
WertschJ.V.Del RioP., and AlvarezA., (eds), (1995), Sociocultural Studies of Mind, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
46.
ZimmermanD.H. and WiederD.L., (1971), ‘Ethnomethodology and the problem of order: comment on Denzin’, in DouglasJ.D. (ed.), Understanding Everyday Life: Toward The Reconstruction of Sociological Knowledge, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.
