Model I and Model II
Argyris and Schön (1974) present two models that describe different theories-in-use. Model I describes the behaviour of a group of professionals that they studied. It is based on the values of unilateral control of the situation, âwinningâ (proving oneself right), and suppression of any data that does not fit the actorâs assumptions. Such control can produce defensiveness that inhibits communication. Argyris and Schön believe that Model I describes features of a theory-in-use commonly employed by people in difficult situations. They go on to present Model II, âa model of theories-in-use that is free of the dysfunctionalities of model Iâ (page 85). The following summary draws on a presentation by Absolum (2006), based on the original models proposed by Argyris and Schön.
| Model I â what we do | Model II â what we want to do |
| Guiding principles [governing variables]
| Guiding principles [governing variables]
|
| Action strategies
| Action strategies
|
| Consequences
| Consequences
|
In Case 3, an ISTE uses role play to analyse an unsuccessful conversation with a teacher and explore ways of interacting that are more in keeping with a Model II approach to communication. See video Clip 7.
Model II represents a consultative approach in which the participants in learning have âbilateralâ control of the process, where winning is not being ârightâ but rather making better sense of the evidence, and where no dialogue is suppressed, even if it is painful. It requires people to pay close attention to their own behaviour and to the way they interact with others. Argyris and Schön suggest that âIn general, Model-II learning tends to facilitate othersâ learning, which in turn facilitates oneâs own learningâ (page 92). They say that in a Model II world, âresearch activities and learning activities would reinforce each otherâ (page 93).
Smith, 2001, page 9
Fullan (2001b) says that a shift to Model II helps to generate the internal commitment that is essential to change.
Every significant Model II action is evaluated in terms of the degree to which it helps the individuals generate valid and useful information (including relevant feelings), share a problem in ways that lead to productive inquiry, solve the problem such that it remains solved, and do so without reducing the present level of problem-solving effectiveness. (p. 76)
Argyris, 2000, cited in Fullan, 2001b, page 194
- Previous item
Models and theories > - Next item
More haste, less speed >

