Interpolating Concepts and Inductive Action
Theory-in-use vs espoused theory (Argyris and Schon)
| Espoused theory | Theory-in-use | |
|---|---|---|
| Where it lives | What we say we believe | What our actions actually show |
| Function | Describe and justify behaviour | Drive behaviour |
| Visibility | Visible | Mostly hidden |
| Risk | None to the speaker | Keeps teachers blind to their own ineffectiveness |
How to make a theory-in-use visible
- Reconstruct the espoused theory and the action strategy
- Run the chain of whys on the assumptions
- Look for relations among the assumptions
- Identify the governing variables
- Build the theory-in-use from the pieces
Inductive action planning
- Pick a specific target (e.g. classroom routines, ICT use)
- Plan discussion, observation, and training over a fixed period
- Evaluate effectiveness
- Reflect and pick the next target
A teacher says, “I believe in giving every student a chance to speak.” A visitor sits in the class for forty minutes and notices that three students do most of the talking, the teacher calls on the same five hands every day, and quiet students are never invited in. The teacher’s stated belief and the teacher’s actual practice are running on different theories. Argyris and Schon called this gap the gap between espoused theory and theory-in-use.
Reflective practice does not get far until the theory-in-use becomes visible.
What a theory of action is
A theory of action is a set of connected propositions about how to act in a situation. Theories are vehicles for explanation, prediction, and control. The basic shape is, “if you want consequence C, under assumptions A1, A2, A3, do action A.”
Every professional carries dozens of these theories. Some are stated openly. Most are not.
Espoused theories vs theories-in-use
Argyris and Schon drew a sharp line between two kinds of theory.
Espoused theories
These are the theories people use to describe and justify their behaviour. Teachers state them in interviews, write them in lesson plans, and use them in staff meetings. “I believe in inclusive teaching.” “My approach is constructivist.” “I use a student-centred method.”
Espoused theories are the theories the teacher knows they hold.
Theories-in-use
These are the operational theories that already determine practice. The teacher acts in line with them but rarely states them. They are usually invisible to the teacher who holds them.
The painful insight from Argyris and Schon is that theories-in-use often help teachers stay blind to how ineffective they actually are. The espoused theory says one thing. The action confirms a different theory. The teacher sees their own intentions and judges themselves by the espoused theory. The students experience the theory-in-use.
Where theories-in-use live in other professions
The same gap exists in other fields.
- An architect has a theory-in-use of building design that shapes their work even when they could not state it.
- A physician has a theory-in-use for diagnosis and treatment that runs faster than any rule book.
Theories-in-use are the means by which professionals get what they want. The job is not to delete them but to make them visible enough to examine.
How to make a theory-in-use visible
A theory-in-use can be reconstructed from observations of behaviour. The work has five steps.
Reconstruct the espoused theory and the action strategy
Write down what the teacher says they believe, and what they actually do. The gap between the two is the doorway.
Look for assumptions through the chain of whys
For every action, ask why. Why this method? Why this question first? Why this seating arrangement? Each “why” surfaces an assumption that the action depended on.
Look for relations among the assumptions
Single assumptions are useful. Patterns among them are more useful. A teacher whose assumptions all centre on student compliance has a different theory-in-use from one whose assumptions centre on student curiosity.
Identify the governing variables
A governing variable is what the theory-in-use is trying to keep stable. For one teacher it is order. For another it is engagement. For a third it is finishing the syllabus. The governing variable explains why the teacher does what they do, even when their words say something else.
Construct the theory-in-use
Put the pieces together. The reconstructed theory should explain the actual behaviour, not the words. A teacher’s theory-in-use might read, “as long as the room is quiet and the syllabus is on schedule, the lesson is fine, regardless of student understanding.”
This is uncomfortable to read about your own teaching. It is also where change becomes possible.
What it takes to discover a theory-in-use
Five conditions help.
- Internal commitment to discovery. A teacher who does not want to find their theory-in-use will not find it. The desire has to be real.
- Public testing of theory, assumptions, and data. Doing the work alone produces softer answers. Sharing the analysis with a colleague exposes blind spots.
- A clear distinction between self and assumption. The teacher needs to be able to look at an assumption without feeling that the assumption is the teacher. Non-defensiveness, in other words.
- A search for valid information. Honest data, not data picked to confirm.
- The aptitude for reframing. Willingness to change the frame once the theory-in-use has been seen.
Inductive action planning
Once a theory-in-use is visible, a teacher needs a way to develop new practice systematically. Inductive action planning gives that structure.
The basic idea: a teacher learns every day, but planning what to learn turns drifting growth into deliberate growth.
The four-step shape
- Select a specific target. Not “be a better teacher”, but something concrete: effective rules and routines, widening the range of teaching strategies, effective use of ICT.
- Plan discussion, observation, and training over a fixed period. Three to six weeks works for many targets. Shorter is too rushed; longer fades.
- Evaluate your effectiveness. Did the practice change? Did students notice?
- Reflect on your own development and select the next target.
What an inductive action plan answers
A useful plan answers five questions:
- What is my priority and what do I want to achieve?
- What am I going to do, and when?
- Who or what will help me?
- How will I know whether what I have done has been worthwhile?
- How will I collect information?
A worked example
Priority: I want to motivate students in my Class 9 morning section. Action and timeline: discuss school policy with the principal in week one; attend a course on motivation in week two; observe two colleagues in weeks three and four. Support: head of department; one colleague who teaches the same class. Evidence of success: my planning shows three new motivation strategies; my lessons include at least one of them per week; students report higher interest in the class survey at the end of the term. Information: appraisal report, my new lesson plans, copies of resources I have started using, my own journal entries.
The plan is responsive to day-to-day teaching, and it is directed by the teacher, not by an external authority.
How concepts get interpolated
Interpolating a concept means inserting it into your practice in a way that connects new ideas with what you already do. The connections in our brains are related to the concepts we use. When we change concepts, we create new areas of relations.
Concepts are abstractions of situations: the patterns that emerge when we have seen many situations. Without concepts we cannot perceive complex realities. With concepts we can think more deeply about them.
For a teacher, this means that learning a new concept (scaffolding, formative assessment, retrieval practice, frame, theory-in-use) is not just adding a label. The concept changes what the teacher can see in the next class. Inductive action planning is the channel through which the new concept becomes part of practice.
Espoused theory is what we say. Theory-in-use is what our actions actually do.
Both belong to the same teacher. The espoused theory is visible. The theory-in-use is mostly hidden. The gap between the two keeps the teacher blind to their actual effectiveness, until reflection surfaces both and compares them.