Conducting research is often linked with having a practical experience concerning the subject matter and, therefore, supporting a study based on the speculations made solely on theoretic premises with certain proofs. However, one might argue that the construction of knowledge and meaning, which is essential for researching a certain problem, does not need experience in the field studied. Even though Jenlink’s article on the topic of theory and practice and their relation to research may be considered somewhat harsh, as the author nearly dismisses the significance of experience in conducting a study, the idea of drawing a line between researchers and practitioners seems quite legitimate, as it allows for further reconciliation of the two and the creation of educational leadership.
Experience is often considered to be the essential constituent of expertise, i.e., the element that is required for gaining a certain amount of credibility in a certain area. Moreover, the importance of experience is often emphasized in the academic realm, though it is frequently debated that theory should prevail over experience and define the key decisions made in the course of a study. Jenlink, also supporting the assumption that experience and theory are linked, insists that the former should always be intertwined with the latter: “theory and practice, researcher and practitioner all share an equally important and inseparable relationship” (Jenlink, 2009, p. 74). The process of distinguishing between the two is crucial to the redefinition of the notions and their further integration into an entirely new approach, Jenlink explains (Jenlink, 2009). Indeed, according to the author, the incorporation of the basic theoretical principles and the information gained in the course of a certain experiment or a test with the key premises of a specific theory is likely to finally lead to fruitful and meaningful results.
To research the business setting, though, one needs to apply the key theoretical tenets for creating a research framework. In fact, theory supplies the key basis for the accomplishment of practical assignments, as Jenlink explains: “The memory of practice I bring to the classroom is reflected in the mirror of a theory that I introduce” (Jenlink, 2009, p. 74). Therefore, much to his credit, the author understands that theory and practice are linked very closely together and stresses it regularly throughout the paper.
Therefore, denying that business research can be conducted based on practice solely would be wrong; however, one must also bear in mind that the limitations of the study with the above-mentioned design are going to be quite numerous, whereas its outcomes are most likely to have little to no universal applicability. In other words, the study that is grounded fully in practice is expected to be linked directly to the theoretical premises, which the practice refers to. It is only when blending experience and theory that one is able to assume the role of a leader, who inspires the subordinates for further knowledge acquisition and promotes lifelong learning (Meyer & Logan, 2012). Defined as educational leadership, the approach in question can be viewed as the ultimate goal of any leader, as it helps learners locate the ways of acquiring essential information and skills on their own. The concept of educational leadership, in its turn, is also a very strong argument that supports the idea of linking theory and practice together. The fact that the author ties in work and learning are another obvious strength of the article, which helps get the message sent by the author across to the audience in a very efficient manner.
While Jenlink’s statement regarding the possibility of detaching theory from practice entirely may be taken with a grain of salt, the author’s suggestion of identifying researchers and practitioners among scholars does seem rather reasonable. Theory must develop further and that practice should only supply evidence for theoretical studies. The above-mentioned suggestion does not presuppose that practice should be viewed as invalid on its own merits; instead, it allows one to view the process of theoretical knowledge application as an independent area that, though intersecting with theoretical premises, does not need to be linked to them. Research, in its turn, does not have practical examples to be validated, Jenlink argues. Despite being very arguable, the ideas that the author suggests are clearly worth discussing and thinking through. In other words, the author suggests that theory and practice should be reevaluated separately so that they could be integrated into a single approach and a new kind of a scholar, presupposing a blend of a theorist and a practitioner: “I believe the ‘leader as a scholar’ and his or her leadership practice are inseparable from scholarly and critically oriented inquiry” (Jenlink, 2009, p. 75). Therefore, by incorporating theory and its practical application, one enables learners to acquire further knowledge on their own. The fact that Jenlink’s article enhances self-directed learning is solid proof for its being a very significant study in not only business management but also knowledge acquisition in general.
Reference
Jenlink, P. M. (2009) The memory of practice and the mirror of theory. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(2), 74-78.
Meyer, A. N. D. & Logan, J. M. (2012). Taking the testing effect beyond the college freshman: Benefits for Lifelong learning. Psychology and Aging, 28(1), 142–147.