Learning in the Workplace: The Case for Reflectivity and Critical Reflectivity

Abstract

Learning in the workplace has traditionally been understood primarily in terms of behaviorism, a perspective compatible with the machine-like design of organizations when training and development emerged as a field of practice. Adult educators have not challenged the desirability of that perspective directly, although various theorists suggest its modification through greater learner participation, problem-centeredness, experience basing, and concern for different learning styles. This article raises questions about the universal valuing of behaviorism in workplace learning based on a review of trends in organizations in the post-industrial era and analysis of theorists within and outside the field who emphasize the importance of reflectivity and critical reflectivity in learning. The author then describes emerging characteristics of a new paradigm for understanding workplace learning and concludes with a discussion of its limits.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Argyris, C. & Schon, D. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Argyris, C. & Schon, D. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

American Society for Training & Development. (1981). Models and concepts for T & DIHRD academic programs (Paper No. 6, ASTD Research Series). Washington, D.C.: Author.

American Society for Training & Development. (1986). Serving the new corporation. Alexandria, VA: Author.

Carnevale, A. P. & Goldstein, H. (1983). Employee training: Its changing role and an analysis of new data. Washington, D.C.: ASTD Press.

Carr, W. and Kemmis, S. (1983). Becoming cntical: Knowing through action research. Victoria, Australia: Deakin University Press.

Goldstein, I. L. (1980). Training in work organizations. Annual Review of Psychology, 31, 229-272.

Habermas, J. (1971). Knowledge and human interests. Boston: Beacon Press.

Kanter, R. M. (1983). The changemasters: Innovation for productivity in the American corporation. New York: Simon & Schuster.

10.

Kaplan, R. E. , Drath, W. H. & Kofodimos, J. R. (1985). High hurdles: The challenge of executive self-development (Technical Report No. 25). Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

11.

Knowles, M. The modern practice of adult education (rev. ed.). (1980). Cambridge, NY.

12.

Kolb, D. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

13.

Lincoln, Y. S. (1985). Organizational theory and inquiry: The paradigm revolution. Beverly Hills: Sage.

14.

Marsick, V.J. (Ed.). (1987). Learning in the workplace. Beckenham, Kent, U.K.: Croom Helm.

15.

McCauley, C. D. (1986). Developmental experiences in managerial work: A literature review (Technical Report No. 26). Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

16.

Mezirow, J. (1981). A critical theory of adult learning and education. Adult Education, 32, 3-24.

17.

Mezirow, J. (1985). A critical theory of self-directed learning. In S. Brookfield (Ed.), Self-directed learning: From theory to practice (pp. 17-30). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

18.

Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Beverly Hills: Sage.

19.

Naisbitt, J. & Aburdene, P. (1985). Re-inventing the corporation. New York: Warner.

20.

Peters, T. J. & Waterman, R. H. (1982). In search of excellence: Lessons from America's best-run companies. New York: Warner.

21.

Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.

22.

Schwarz, P. & Ogilvy, J. (1979). The emergent paradigm: Changing patterns of thought and belief. Menlo Park, CA: Stanford Research Institute.

23.

Toffler, A. (1985). The adaptive corporation. New York: Bantam.

24.

Zemke, R. (1985). The Honeywell studies: How managers learn to manage. Training, 22(8), 46-51.