following up on the IRE

BPenuel who-is-at aol.com
Sat, 30 Dec 1995 10:32:34 -0500

Jay writes:

"Her message renews some of my skepticism that people really have (or need)
consistent, definite and articulable philosophies or principles for their
practice. Of course, once asked, we can come up with something to say, but
there is a large literature both on the instability of these views and their
relative autonomy from practice."

For me, Jay here articulates some of my own discomfort with the notion of a
"philosophy of practice/guidance," insofar as there is always a tacit
dimension to philosophy as well as I think a distinction, brought out by
researchers like Schon in _The Reflective Practitioner_ and Chris Argrys in
_Knowledge for Action_ (1993, SF: Jossey-Bass) between "espoused theories"
and "theories-in-use."

At the same time, I think Eugene's proposal is a very important move for a
unit of analysis. I see this a lot in extra-curricular programs and in youth
organizations like Girl Scouts, the Y, etc. that I work with. One of the
basic distinctions among youth workers is their actual "theory-in-use" about
what they are doing. In my own analysis, I use Bakhtin's notion of a social
language, though, rather than "philosophy of guidance" to concretize the
differences I observe.

In youth work, moreover, the issue of how these different languages position
the _identities_ of youth, moreover, is foregrounded (as opposed to knowledge
construction). I think some of the more recent messages on the IRE/IRF have
pointed to the social/interactional aspects of the IRE, but in youth work,
these are often foregrounded even more, so that the differences between
languages of youth work has to do with differences between how the languages
position youth. For example, does the way youth workers speak characterize
youth more as "resources to the community" and "collaborators" or as
"problems" and "drains on the community's resources". (Milbrey McLaughlin
and others have made this point as well in _Urban Sanctuaries_, 1994, SF:
Jossey-Bass).

I think the issue of identity is no less salient in examining the IRE/IRF, as
I think Susan Philips' work really brings out. Keeping these issues to the
fore, moreover, can help to sort out and distinguish between the different
philosophies of guidance-in-use.

Bill Penuel
_____________________
PreventionInventions
PO Box 40692
Nashville, TN 37204