大学英语教改： 基于组织释义论的思考 Making sense of college English teaching reform 刘绍忠 哲学博士（美国北卡大学/高等教育与教师发展，2011 ） 文学博士（广东外语外贸大学/语用学，1997 ） 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

一、问题的提出 “什么是大学英语教改？”“为什么要开展教改？” “我们怎么知道我们的教改是对的？比如：我们今天在这里讨论的‘以输出为驱动’的教改，我们怎么知道它是对的呢？” 对这些问题，已经有了很多探讨。可是，也正像这次会议的许多发言一样，很少有“跳出教学看教学，走出教改谈教改”的尝试。 我的专业背景先是 语言学和应用语言学，专攻语用学，然后是教育研究，专攻高等教育管理和教师发展。我想从组织管理学的角度，尤其是想借助组织释义论，对“大学英语教改”做一思考，目的是增进我们对这个问题的认识，把教改搞得更有成效。 由于时间关系，只谈两个问题：一是什么是组织释义论，二是它对“大学英语教改”有哪些启示？ 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

二、什么是组织释义论？ 释义论的英文是“the Sensemaking Theory”。 所谓释义，是指人们对经验赋予意义的行为和过程。（Sensemaking is the process by which people give meaning to experience.） 按照这个说法，释义论似乎不是什么新鲜的理论，因为广义上的释义实践活动已有数百年来的历史，它在各种不同的学科被赋予不同的称谓或指称，受到不同程度的讨论。 然而，我们这里说的释义论，除了有它自己的学科依托，有自己的哲学信条，有描写讨论对象的元语言体系，还有一套系统的用以揭示组织行为意义的研究方法。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

在信息科学领域，释义论的英文术语通常被写成“sense-making”，而不是“sensemaking”。 20世纪70年代以来，释义论主要被广泛地引入到三个学科领域：１）在计算机——人机对话（ Human–computer interaction ）方面，1993年通过PARC复印研究中心D.M. Russell, M.J. Stefik, P. Pirolli and S.K. Card等的努力下，取得新进展；２）在信息科学（ information science ）领域，出现了Brenda Dervin为代表的研究者；３）在组织科学研究（ organizational studies ）领域，出现了以Karl Weick为代表的大学者。 在信息科学领域，释义论的英文术语通常被写成“sense-making”，而不是“sensemaking”。 但不管是写作“sense-making”还是写作“sensemaking”，释义论所研究的问题都被哲学、社会学、认知科学（尤其是社会心理学）等领域的学者们看好，他们从不同的学科背景和视野来讨论释义的本质，他们的参与使得释义论研究成为名副其实的跨面研究，使得释义论成为具有巨大解释力的跨学科理论。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

释义论的创始人是卡尔·维克，简介如下： Karl E. Weick (born October 31, 1936 in Warsaw, Indiana) is an American organizational theorist who is noted for introducing the notions of “loose coupling”, “mindfulness”, and “sensemaking” into organizational studies. He is the Rensis Likert Distinguished University Professor of organizational behavior and psychology at the Ross School of Business at the University of Michigan. He earned his bachelor's degree at Wittenberg College in Springfield, Ohio and his Ph.D. in organizational psychology from Ohio State University in 1962. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

卡尔·维克，在美国俄亥俄州立大学获得哲学博士学位。 他是美国密歇根大学罗斯商学院组织行为与心理系的心理学系教授，被评为伦西斯·利克特杰出教授。 Dr. Weick's research interests include collective sensemaking under pressure, medical errors, handoffs in extreme events, high-reliability performance, improvisation and continuous change. 卡尔·维克主要研究兴趣，包括：对压力、医疗误判、极端事件中失职、高信度下的举止表现、即兴创作和持续性的变化等组织事件的集体释义。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

他首次将“松散联结”、“释意”等概念引入组织研究。后来很多著名的管理大师，如彼得·圣吉（Peter M 他首次将“松散联结”、“释意”等概念引入组织研究。后来很多著名的管理大师，如彼得·圣吉（Peter M. Senge）、阿里·德赫斯（Arie de Geus）的管理理念都脱胎于卡尔·维克的组织理论。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Phone: (734) 763-1339 Fax: (734) 615-4323 karlw@umich.edu Homepage: http://www.bus.umich.edu/Academics/Departments/MO/FacultyBio.asp?id=000119782 ； cyrusliu.blog.163.com/blog/static/71353871201292504156939 Karl E. Weick Stephen M. Ross School of Business University of Michigan 701 Tappan St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1234 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

１）提出了“组织作为松散联结”（Organization / organizing as “loose coupling”）的观点 卡尔·威克的主要学术观点和贡献： １）提出了“组织作为松散联结”（Organization / organizing as “loose coupling”）的观点 简言之，所谓“组织松散联结”，就是指组织过程中人们对世界的认识抽象与世界现实脱节，理论与实践脱节，使得组织过程中松散联结有了存在空间。组织决策一方面要认识到松散联结的现实，另一方面要利用松散联结开展工作。 Karl Weick's major contribution to the topic of loose coupling in an organizational context comes from his 1976 paper on "Educational Organizations as Loosely Coupled Systems"(published in the Administrative Science Quarterly), revisited in his review of subsequent uses of the concept, with JD Orton, in 1990's Loosely Coupled Systems: A Reconceptualization. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

２）提出了“组织是一项集体用心的活动”（Organization / organizing as “mindfulness”）的观点 所谓集体用心，就是有集体意识，尊重集体智慧的作用，尊重民意，关注民生，营造让集体安全的氛围和环境。 Karl Weick introduced the term mindfulness into the organizational and safety literatures in the article Organizing for high reliability: Processes of collective mindfulness (1999). Weick develops the term “mindfulness” from Langer's (1989) work, who uses it to describe individual cognition. Weick's innovation was transferring this concept into the organizational literature as “collective mindfulness.” The effective adoption of collective mindfulness characteristics by an organization appears to cultivate safer cultures that exhibit improved system outcomes. The term high reliability organization (HRO) is an emergent property described by Weick (and Karlene Roberts at UC-Berkeley). 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

高度用心的组织体现在：1）勇于正视失败；2）不折不扣地执行计划方案；3）关注运作；4）不屈不挠，永不放弃；5）不迷信经验，不盲从权威。 Highly mindful organizations characteristically exhibit: a) Preoccupation with failure, b) Reluctance to simplify c) Sensitivity to operations, d) Commitment to Resilience, and e) Deference to Expertise. 高度用心的组织体现在：1）勇于正视失败；2）不折不扣地执行计划方案；3）关注运作；4）不屈不挠，永不放弃；5）不迷信经验，不盲从权威。 Karl Weick explained that mindfulness is when we realize our current expectations, continuously improve those expectations based on new experiences, and implement those expectations to improve the current situation into a better one. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

３）提出了“组织是一种释义的努力过程”（Organization / organizing as “sensemaking”）的观点 人们总是对他们的组织进行释义性认识；而他们的组织则要对其所处的环境（生态环境）进行释义性认识。期间，信息资源的收集和利用，起着积极的作用。 People try to make sense of organizations, and organizations themselves try to make sense of their environment. Weick pays attention to questions of ambiguity and uncertainty in this sense-making, which is known as equivocality （不确定性）in organizational research that adopts information processing theory. His contributions to the theory of sensemaking include research papers such as his detailed analysis of the breakdown of sensemaking in the case of the Mann Gulch disaster, in which he defines the notion of a 'cosmology episode' - a challenge to assumptions that causes participants to question their own capacity to act. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Hence, managing (life) is about making sense. In dealing with organizational issues, sensemaking requires us to look for explanations and answers in terms of how people see things rather than structures or systems. Sensemaking suggests that organizational issues - 'strategies', 'breakdowns', 'change', 'goals', 'plans', 'tasks', 'teams', and so on are not things that one can find out in the world or that exist in the organization. Rather, their source is people's way of thinking. Hence, managing (life) is about making sense. 释义不是要对组织结构、组织系统作出合理解释，而是对组织结构和系统里面的人如何看待（甚至期待）现实世界作出解释，寻找答案。 人类的生活需要管理；管理生活，亦是一种释义表现。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4）提出了“释义是一种可资使用的资源”（Sensemaking as resources）的观点 释义视角和方法，是人们可以用来规划生活和工作，管理和引领事业的资源！ In the article entitled “Leadership when events don’t play by the rules,” Weick argues that sensemaking is resources: “And what resources can help? Crucial resources for sensemaking are summarized by the acronym, SIR COPE: Social, Identity, Retrospect, Cues, Ongoing, Plausible, Enactment. Those seven words point to ways in which one can lead when events don't play by the rules and people face the inexplicable.” http://www.bus.umich.edu/FacultyResearch/Research/TryingTimes/Rules.htm   4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

对卡尔·威克的评价 More than 25 years ago, a young organizational psychologist named Karl Weick published a highly original and nearly impenetrable book called The Social Psychology of Organizing. Alone in the wilderness, Weick promoted the adaptive advantages of chaotic systems, distributed authority, and "sensemaking." "Stamp out utility!" and "Complicate yourself!" were among his battle cries. Weick's approach to his own work has been novel: while most social scientists massage colorless statistical data, Weick hangs out with the Utrecht Jazz Orchestra to study how organizations function. The Rensis Likert Collegiate Professor of Organizational Behavior and Psychology at the University of Michigan, he has written on topics as diverse as labor strikes in outer space (the Skylab crew) and the Naskapi Indians of Labrador. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.04/weick_pr.html 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4本书: Making sense of the organization 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Sensemaking in Organizations (Foundations for Organizational Science) (Karl E. Weick) Book Description Publication Date: May 1, 1995 | ISBN-10: 080397177X | ISBN-13: 978-0803971776 Paperback: 235 pages | Publisher: Sage Publications, Inc The teaching of organization theory and the conduct of organizational research have been dominated by a focus on decision-making and the concept of strategic rationality. However, the rational model ignores the inherent complexity and ambiguity of real-world organizations and their environments. In this landmark volume, Karl E Weick highlights how the `sensemaking' process shapes organizational structure and behavior. The process is seen as the creation of reality as an ongoing accomplishment that takes form when people make retrospective sense of the situations in which they find themselves. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell Making Sense of the Organization (Keyworks in Cultural Studies) (Karl E. Weick) Book Description Publication Date: November 16, 2000 | ISBN-10: 0631223193 | ISBN-13: 978-0631223191 | Edition: Paperback: 496 pages Publisher: Wiley-Blackwell This volume brings together the best-known and most influential articles on sensemaking in organizations by one of its most distinguished exponents, Karl Weick; Brings together the best most influential articles written by one of the gurus of sensemaking - Karl Weick. Helps readers develop a thorough understanding of the sensemaking process - essential for effective management. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Editorial Reviews (From the Back Cover) This volume brings together the best-known and most influential articles on sensemaking by one of its most distinguished exponents, Karl Weick. Weick explores the process of how organizations discover that they face important decisions. Often organizations have discussions in order to see what they think, or act in order to see what they want - before they are even aware that a decision has to be made. The effective organization is one that understands this process of sensemaking and learns to manage it with wisdom. The ways in which people do that are demonstrated in chapters of this book. This important collection provides a valuable addition to the international literature on organization theory and will be welcomed by students and researchers alike. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Making Sense of the Organization (Vol Making Sense of the Organization (Vol. 2): The Impermanent Organization (Karl E. Weick) Book Description: Published September 1, 2009 | ISBN-10: 0470742208 | ISBN-13: 978-0470742204 | Paperback: 310 pages I Publisher: Wiley Making Sense of the Organization elaborates on the influential idea that organizations are interpretation systems that scan, interpret, and learn.  These selected essays represent a new approach to the way managers learn and act in response to their environment and the way organizational change evolves.  Readers of this volume will find a wealth of examples and insights which go well beyond thinking and cognition to explain action.  The author's ideas are at the forefront of our thinking on leadership, teams, and the management of change. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

“This book engages the puzzle of impermanence in organizing “This book engages the puzzle of impermanence in organizing. Through rich examples, evocative language, artful literature citing, and imaginative connecting, Weick re-introduces core ideas and themes around attending, interpreting, acting and learning to unlock new insights about impermanent organizing.  The wisdom in this book is timeless and timely. It prods scholars and managers of organizations to complicate their views of organizing in ways that enrich thought and action.” - Jane E. Dutton, Robert L. Kahn Distinguished University Professor, University of Michigan 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Editorial Reviews (From the Back Cover) The seeming permanence of organizations conceals an endless cycle of interruptions, recoveries, and re-organizing. This fundamental cycle is explored in a series of essays that focus on ways in which people organize their attention, interpretations, actions, and learning in order to cope with impermanence. Coping is explored in settings such as the spread of a puzzling virus, a foam strike on the space shuttle, excess deaths following pediatric surgery, wildland fires that suddenly explode, and the misidentification of fingerprints in a crime lab. Recovery from events such as these tends to be rough. The fixes made in the name of recovery tend to be transient and eventually give way to new interruptions, new challenges for sensemaking, and renewed efforts to reorganize. The purpose of these essays is to render the challenges less mysterious.  4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Sensemaking in organizations (Volume 3 of Foundations for organizational science) Author Karl E. Weick; Publisher SAGE, 1995; ISBN 080397177X, 9780803971776; Length 231 pages Finalist for the George Terry Award sponsored by the Academy of Management "This lovely and important book is the clearest, most complete, and interesting statement of sensemaking in organizations available. . . . It will have an impact on both new and experienced scholars." --Bob Sutton, Stanford University "Weick is artful. He masterfully constructs the sensemaking theoretical framework so that it can be better understood by the general scholar and in the process provides the reader with the sensemaking experience." --Kathleen Sutcliffe, University of Minnesota 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

The teaching of organization theory and the conduct of organizational research have been dominated by a focus on decision making and the conception of strategic rationality. The rational model, however, ignores the inherent complexity and ambiguity of real-world organizations and their environments. Karl E. Weick's new landmark volume, Sensemaking in Organizations, highlights how the "sensemaking" process--the creation of reality as an ongoing accomplishment that takes form when people make retrospective sense of the situations in which they find themselves--shapes organizational structure and behavior. Some of the topics Weick thoroughly covers are the concept, uniqueness, historical roots, varieties and occasions, general properties, and the future of sensemaking research and practice. Expertly written, Sensemaking in Organizations is the volume that students, scholars, and professors of organization and management studies must have. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

卡尔.维克在中国 《组织社会心理学：如何理解和鉴赏组织 [平装]》书籍定价：49.80 元　书籍编号：B002NWZT90 书籍作者：卡尔.维克（Karl E. Weick）出版社：中国人民大学出版社,1999. www.03wx.com/taobao/baobei-13420542299.html   4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

《组织社会心理学:如何理解和鉴赏组织》（美国）卡尔·维克(Karl E. Weick) 译者：贾柠瑞 高隽；中国人民大学出版社，1999年。 本书是美国著名组织理论家、心理学家卡尔·维克的经典之作，没有《组织社会心理学》，就没有《第五项修炼》，就没有《基业长青》，就没有《长寿公司》。 初读稍显晦涩，细品妙趣横生。这是你必须珍藏的书。 如果你推崇《第五项修炼》、《基业长青》、《长寿公司》，那么你就不能错失 。 卡尔·维克指出，人们真正想从职场获得的是“消除无力感”企业活力来自员工在工作中的成就感，而员工的成就感来自企业的宽容。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Basic tenets of the Sensemaking Theory 释义论要义 Basic tenets of the Sensemaking Theory 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Core Assumptions and Statements Already under development since 1972, sensemaking is an approach to thinking about and implementing communication research and practice and the design of communication-based systems and activities. It consists of a set of philosophical assumptions, substantive propositions, methodological framings and methods. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Life is neither meaningful nor meaningless Life is neither meaningful nor meaningless. Meaning and its absence are given to life by language and imagination. We are linguistic beings who inhabit a reality in which it makes sense to make sense. (Batchelor, 1997, p.39) 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Making sense of sensemaking Sensemaking refers to justifications we make about our improvisation of the changing reality (such as situations, conversational topics, and policy) in which live organizations with loosely coupled relationships and irrevocable public choices. The key words here are “improvised justifications,” “changing reality,” “organizations,” and “irrevocable public choices.” Simply put, sensemaking is about assigning meanings or values to changes and our reaction to such changes in our lives in convincing ways or terms. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

In essence, sensemaking is about how we make sense of our experience about things and events or signs and symbols that stand for such things and events. While the former is usefully envisaged as socio-psychological, the latter can be philosophical linguistic, semantic and pragmatic, to be more exact. Sensemaking does not make sense by itself; it is us (linguistic beings who reside in a world of organizational reality) who make sense of sensemaking. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

“Organizational sensemaking is first and foremost about the question: How does something come to be an event for organizational members? Second, sensemaking is about the question: What does an event mean? In the context of everyday life, when people confront something unintelligible and ask “what’s the story here?” their question has the force of bringing an event into existence. When people then ask “now what should I do?” this added question has the force of bringing meaning into existence, meaning what they hope is stable enough for them to act into the future, continue to act, and to have the sense that they remain in touch with the continuing flow of experience. (Weick, 2009, p.133) 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

In the course of his theorization, Weick (1979; 1995) first clearly articulated the existence of the sensemaking process, then identifies and expounds the operation of the process over two decades. Useful understanding of the sensemaking process may evolve from discussions of interdependence, interlocked behaviors, natural selection, enactment, and retention in Weick’s earlier works (for instance, Weick, 1979), to more salient elaborations on the kinship of such concepts with other related concepts or variables such as enacting sensible environment, focusing on extracted cues, social, retrospective, ongoing, driven by plausibility, and grounded in identity enhancement, in Weick’s later works (such as Weick, 1995). Most recently, the sensemaking process is conceived and consolidated more as a cognitive effort that consists of five components: ecological change, enactment, selection, retention, and remembering (Weick, 2001a; 2009). 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

5 cognitive stages of sensemaking Ecological change  Enactment  Selection  Retention  Remembering Ecological change … 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Ecological change. Mentioned as discontinuities (Steinbeck, 1941), differences (Bateson, 1972), or variations (Slack, 1955) in Weick’s earlier discussions such as Weick (1979), ecological change refers to surprises, interruptions, and discrepancies so and so forth everyday occurrences that are “mainstays of organizational experience” (Weick, 2001a, p.97). Identifying such ecological changes “intensifies the activity of sensemaking” (Weick, 2001a, p.99) or causes organizations to respond or act on. Nevertheless, sensemaking theorists, mainly Weick, cautioned against conceiving such ecological changes as external or stimuli, for the two words connote different things. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Enactment. It means learning about the organization by asking questions, by talking about it, and observing (Whitbred, 2009) or interacting with people (Putnam, 1983; Weick, 1995). In Weick’s viewpoint: “Enactment is intimately bound up with ecological change. When differences occur in the stream of experience, the actor may take some action to isolate those changes for closer attention. That action of bracketing is one form of enactment. The other form occurs when the actor does something that produces an ecological change, which change then constrains what he does next, which in turn produces a further ecological change, and so on.” (Weick, 1979, p.130) 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

When do we do sensemaking? As an example, Weick describes, “I move items on my desk, which then makes it necessary for me to readjust my writing position, which further rearranges the items in my working area, which then further rearranges me” (p.130). That is why Weick says, “Whenever organizations act – the university gave tenure, the government negotiated, the bakery searched its memory, the orchestra enacted chaos – people act” (p.34). 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Selection. Organizations select what to do and what not to do at a certain time and place. Nevertheless, selection is not simple. In order to determine what to do and what not to do, organizations face a series of decision makings. As Weick observes, “Selection involves the imposition of various structures on enacted equivocal displays in an attempt to reduce their equivocality. These imposed structures are often in the form of cause maps that contain interconnected variables, these maps being built up out of past experience. When these maps, which have proven sensible on previous occasions, are superimposed on current puzzling displays, they may provide a reasonable interpretation of what had occurred or they may confuse things even more. These maps are like templates that reveal configurations that may make sense or may not.” (Weick, 1979, p.131) 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

That “organizations are vast, fragmented, and multidimensional” (Weick, 2001a, p.142) in a way dictates the nature of selection in sensemaking. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Retention. It refers to “a storage of the products of successful sensemaking” (Weick, 1979, p.131). By products it is meant as an enacted environment or cause map, which is “a punctuated and connected summary of a previously equivocal display” (Weick, 1979, p.131) or “a sensible version of what the equivocality was about, though other versions could have been constructed” (Weick, 1979, p.131). Though slightly different, an enacted environment refers to “a meaningful environment or output of an enactment process” (Weick, 1979, p.131) and a cause map stands for the “organized feature of the stored content” (Weick, 1979, p.132). To put another way, retention stands for the “organizational memory” (Weick, 2001a, p.305) of “meanings of enactment, selected for their fit with previous interpretations” (Weick, 2001a, p.305). As a further footnote to retention, organizational culture and organizational strategies are important sources of retention (Weick, 2001a). 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Remembering. Basically, it means both an ability to recall on what has happened and to use the happening for making or avoiding new happenings. The meaning of recalling of the word is showcased as follows: “I am grown old and my memory is not as active as it used to be. When I was younger I could remember anything, whether it had happened or not; but my faculties are decaying now and soon I shall be so I cannot remember any but the things that never happened. It is sad to go to pieces like this, but we all have to do it.” (Mark Twain, n.d.) Remembering is implicational, as Weick (2001a) put, “But retained knowledge is certainly not worthless. Events usually don’t change that much, that fast. Therein lies the tension. Retained knowledge is partly a useful guide to the future and partly a misleading guide” (p.356). 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Sensemaking as metaphors: Metaphors we make sense by (Liu, 2011) The elements of the sensemaking process were evidenced in hierarchical metaphors: (i) environment-screening: “environment as change (organizations as positioned, time-pacer, and wind-catcher);” (ii) enactment: “enactment as changer (the university as a plate of loose sand, professional, and mission-setter);” (iii) selection: “organization as relevance-maker (the university as teacher, researcher, server, strategist, and goal-hitter);” (iv) retention: “organization as retainer (the university as value-keeper and role-player (center, community, leader, and leader-preparer);” and (v) remembering: “organization as rememberer (the university as history-defender and principle-observer).” 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Together, they comprised metaphors we make sense by. In vividly framing forms, such metaphors enriched our knowledge about the organizational reality, mission statements, relationship between teaching, research and service, relationship between the sensemaking elements, and the heuristic and ongoing nature of sensemaking. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

(social, identity, retrospect, cues, ongoing, plausibility, enactive) 7 design properties of sensemaking Source: Example from Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. P. 61-62. SIR COPE (social, identity, retrospect, cues, ongoing, plausibility, enactive) 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

According to Weick, sensemaking is a process of 7 stages: S for Social According to Weick, sensemaking is a process of 7 stages: 1) Social: Sensemaking is a social process; human thinking and social functioning are essential aspects of another (Resnick, Levine & Teasly, 1991). What a person does depends on others, so the direct influence is not clear. To understand sensemaking is to pay more intention to sufficient cues for coordination such as generalized other, prototypes, stereotypes, and roles. Essentially, sensemaking is a socially shared. As Weick asserts: “People don't discover sense, they create it, which means they need conversations with others to move toward some shared idea of what meanings are possible. As a leader, encourage conversations, don't treat them as malingering.” 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

I for Identity 2) Grounded in identity construction: a sensemaker is needed otherwise there won’t be any sensemaking, sense is in the eye of the beholder. The sensemaker is singular and no individual ever acts like a single sensemaker, each individual has a lot of identities. “The first identities that surface in an inexplicable event, identities such as "victim" or "fighter," lock people in to overly limited options. As a leader, help people solidify other identities such as sounding board, witness, source of resilience, information hub, story-teller, companion, care-giver and historian, all of which are roles that help people build a context that aids explanation.”  4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

R for Retrospect 3) Retrospective: After a certain time the process is reflected. This is always done afterwards. This aspect, looking afterwards at a process, will depend on the success of the process. Furthermore, retrospection makes the past clearer than the present or future; it cannot make the past transparent (Starbuck & Milliken, 1988). “Faced with the inexplicable, people often act their way out of their puzzlement by talking and looking at what they have said in order to discover what they may be thinking. How can I know what I think until I see what I say? As a leader, make it possible for people to talk their way from the superficial, through the complex, on to the profound. Listen to the words people are saying, help them find other words that connect with human strengths rather than with darkness and evil. Help them talk their way into resilience.”  4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

C for Cues 4) Focused on and by extracted cues: In life people are confronted with a lot of cues, too much to notice anyway. A person will only notice a few cues, because of his own filter. Your own interest and your unconsciousness depend what cues you focus on. As said earlier, it is also impossible to notice all the cues, because there are too many. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

O for Ongoing 5) Ongoing: Sensemaking never starts or stops, it is an ongoing process. “Sensemaking is dynamic and requires continuous updating and reaccomplishment. As a leader, don't let people languish in the feeling, "Now we have it figured out." They don't have it figured out. Why? It's not that kind of an issue. Recovery is about workable, plausible stories of what we face and what we can do. But these are not final stories. They are stories that should be modified based on new inputs and new opportunities and new setbacks.” 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

释义是一种探索，“大概”是它的驱动力，“精确”是它的偶然旅伴。 懒汉会一知半解时歇下，释义者则应永不停蹄！ P for Plausibility 6) Driven by plausibility rather than accuracy: People are cognitively lazy, when they found an answer to the question, people stop searching. No alternatives are evaluated, while people might not even know the half of it. 释义是一种探索，“大概”是它的驱动力，“精确”是它的偶然旅伴。 懒汉会一知半解时歇下，释义者则应永不停蹄！ 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

E for Enactment 7) Enactive and sensible environments. In organizational life people often produce part of the environment they face (Pondy & Mitroff, 1979). Action is crucial for sensemaking; we can’t command and the environment will obey. Moreover, we can’t predict something that will happen exact, because everything is part of a larger truth. Entity and environment are factors which influence each other. You are neither a plaything in the environment or independent. Somewhere between is the meaning. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

An illustrative example of the 7 generic properties of sensemaking: “Strategic plans are a lot like maps. They animate and orient people. Once people begin to act (enactment), they generate tangible outcomes (cues) in some context (social), and this helps them discover (retrospect) what is occurring (ongoing), what need to be explained (plausibility), and what should be done next (identity enhancement)” (Weick, 1995, p.55). 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

三、大学英语教改：释义论启示 1。正名启示 “大学英语”是一个misnomer! “大学英语教学”指在大学里对所有大学生实施的英语教学。 “大学英语教学”既包括英语专业的教学，也包括非英语专业的教学。 “大学英语教学”既包括本科生层次的英语教学，也包括研究生层次的英语教学。 这种组织释义论的解释，打破了大学里英语专业和非英语专业长期以来存在的“两长皮”现象！为许多大学英语专业和非英语专业统属于外国语学院提供了组织学的依据。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

2。“大学英语教改”属于，而且首先是，一种组织行为和事件，可以也有必要纳入组织科学的范畴思考。 3。如何进行和开展“大学英语教改”不能凭知觉盲目地干，而需要有组织科学理论指引（其他理论辅之！其他理论绝对不能代替之！）。 4。组织（行为和活动）本身不会释义，是组织里的人在释义（Organization itself don’t make sense; it’s we who organize make sense）！ 5。跟任何组织行为一样，“大学英语教改”没有好与坏之别，对与错之分，只有哪个更加makes sense或者makes more sense的说法! 6。按照Weick的“SIR COPE”理论模型，如果要使得“大学英语教改”更加理性和有说服力，似乎有如下功课要做： 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

中国这么大，在一个大国谈教改，不应该也不可能只允许、只推崇一种模式。因为，教改是一种意义的社会构建！ S = Social“大学英语教改”是社会语境下的组织行为活动，是一种社会共同构建努力，既要保留过去经验性的做法，还需倾听业内外、院系内外、校内外、教育与非教育、家庭和社会、政府与学校、学生与校友、培养单位与用人单位等各类人员的意见。 中国这么大，在一个大国谈教改，不应该也不可能只允许、只推崇一种模式。因为，教改是一种意义的社会构建！ “大学英语教改”单位和个人，要时刻自问“Where are we?”的问题。明确了“在哪？”、“在什么时候，什么环境下办学？”的问题，就会明白“为谁办学？”问题，以及“如何办学？”的问题，确立定位，调整使命，锁定目标，彰显特色。而且，在强调办学特色的今天，对校本语境的突显和珍视，具体来说是根据各个学校的校园文化实际实施教改，比什么都重要！ 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

于是，当我们的毕业生就业不好，首先应该反思的也应该是“我们专业了吗？”的问题。 I = Identity“大学英语教改”，建设是手段，目的是要突显专业身份，真正实现英语“教学研”（教师的教学、学生的学习、师生的研究）“三化”：即：专业化、职业化、现代化。 总体而言，英语专业相对于各个综合性校园的别的专业，是弱势群体，是少数民族，他们的话语问题和话语权相对少，归根结底是标志性产品、标志性项目和成果少，而这个背后的致命弱点是长期以来大部分从事英语专业教学和研究的人学业不精所致。 于是，当我们的毕业生就业不好，首先应该反思的也应该是“我们专业了吗？”的问题。 过去和当前一种失策的做法或对策是，淡化专业，放弃自己，丧失领地，如办“跨专业”、“跨学位”等的做法要掌握“度”，否则跨得太出去，就走不回来了；走得太远，就走不动了！总之，要常问“我是谁？”“我姓什么？”“我能做什么？”等等问题。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

How can I know what I think until I see what I say? R = Retrospection “大学英语教改”需要内省和反思。做了哪方面的改革？课程设置有利于人才培养吗？引进了哪些老师？新办了哪些新方向？等等都有必要反思。方法很多：下属调查、同行评估、家长和学生访谈、社会和用人单位反馈意见、自我评估、业内评估、教学评估、专业评估等等，时刻回答好这两个问题： How can I know what I think until I see what I say? How much do I see now that what I think and do but amount to make little sense, if not wrong? 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

做生活的有心人（Being mindful）！ C = Cues “People deal with the inexplicable by paying attention to a handful of cues that enable them to construct a larger story. They look for cues that confirm their analysis; and in doing so, they ignore a great deal. As a leader, help people expand the range and variety of cues they include in their stories. You know this will heighten confused complexity. But you also know that confusion can provide a transition between the superficial and the profound if people struggle with a wider range of issues and complexities before they settle for their ‘answer.’”  做生活的有心人（Being mindful）！ 心中装着“大学英语教改”不仅会从不经意的日常生活中敏锐地发现线索，获取灵感，更会形成深思熟虑的大学英语专业和学科的“建设”“路线图”(roadmap)！ 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

“大学英语教改”是一个走不完的进行时，永无止境，因为： 第一，我们的认知能力、认知水平、认知手段等受限于时间和空间，国家体制、校园文化等； O = Ongoing “大学英语教改”是一个走不完的进行时，永无止境，因为： 第一，我们的认知能力、认知水平、认知手段等受限于时间和空间，国家体制、校园文化等； 第二，因为环境（需求、期待、政策等）在变化，而我们准备好的方案总落后于形势：它成形于昨天，实施于今天，落后于明天！ 善于学习，勤于思考，勇于行动，是有效的对策；培养团队，不屈不折地探索，是明智的选择！所以，从这个意义讲，走内行发展，干务实事业，我们的大学英语教改才会取得实效，我们外语人的社会价值和社会身份才会真正突显！ 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

每一次探索，只代表一个视角，只认识了一个丁点，只靠近了真理的一小步。 P = Plausibility “What is unsettling when people face the inexplicable is that they tend to treat any old explanation as better than nothing. There's something healthy about that tendency because it provides a kernel around which people can organize a story. The initial story may be a stretch. But it makes some sense of the senseless. As a leader, don't let the first plausible account be the last possible story. The first plausible account is assembled to help people make meaning. It is not assembled in the interest of accuracy. We seek swift plausibility rather than slow accuracy in inexplicable times simply because we need "an" explanation, not "the" explanation. Help people get that first story. But then help them revise it, enrich it, replace it.” 每一次探索，只代表一个视角，只认识了一个丁点，只靠近了真理的一小步。 因此，“大学英语教改”没有答案，没有止境；我们外语人要不断探索，不断发现，积累知识，勇往直前！ 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

“大学英语教改”重在建设，贵在行动。不断探索，推进事业！ SIR, COPE! E = Enacting “Most of all, in inexplicable times, people have to keep moving. Recovery lies not in thinking then doing, but in thinking while doing and in thinking by doing. No one has the answers. Instead, all we have going for us is the tactic of stumbling into explanations that work and talking with others to see whether what we have stumbled into is in fact part of an answer. As a leader, help people keep moving and keep paying attention. When people are animated, their actions are small experiments that help make sense of perilous times. Wise leaders protect that process and that truth.” “大学英语教改”重在建设，贵在行动。不断探索，推进事业！ SIR, COPE! 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

四、结论 释义论是一种组织科学理论，其理论要义对“大学英语教改”有着诸多的启示，包括： “大学英语教改”的本质是一种组织行为和事件。 如何进行和开展“大学英语教改”不能凭知觉盲目地干，而需要有组织科学理论指引；释义论正好为“大学英语教改” 提供了某些新的视角。 “大学英语教改”的内涵有三： 一是再认、确认、突显和捍卫身份，回答“我是谁？”和“我能做什么？”的问题； 二是明确使命，调整使命，回答好“我在哪？”和“为谁服务？”的问题； 三是强调不足和距离，肯定建设的必要性，明确建设的目标、内容和手段，回答好“我先做什么？”、“依靠谁和什么资源和手段来做？”等问题。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

从根本上讲，大学英语教学是一种特殊的组织形式；大学英语教改是这种特殊组织形式遇到内外环境挑战所作出的反应或应对；大学英语教学和教改依赖区域语境和时代语境，牵涉面大，参与人多，决定了它是一种社会共同构建的行为和过程特征；大学英语教改的不断深入，验证了释义论的持续性和无止性，认识的复杂性和循序渐进性。因此，大学英语教改，归根结底，是一种释义的行为，要突显释义者身份，要鼓励和尊重个性化和多元化，最终回归大学英语教学的学科本位，走“专业化、职业化和现代化”内行发展之道，通过得体的输入，真正实现大学英语的高产输出，最大限度地惠及大学英语学习者。 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

重要语录： 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Have I (partially) addressed the questions raised at the start? Do I make sense? Have I (partially) addressed the questions raised at the start? 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

参考文献 Weick, K. E. (1969a). The social psychology of organizing. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley  Weick, K. E. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21 (1):1-19. Retrieved 6/8/2010 from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2391875  Weick, K. E. (1979). The social psychology of organizing (2nd ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.  Weick, K.E. (1982). Administering education in loosely coupled schools. Phi Delta Kappan, June, 673-676.  Weick, K.E. (1986). The concept of loose coupling: An assessment. Dialogue (American Educational Research Association), (December):8-11.  Weick, K.E. (1989a). Loose coupling: Beyond the metaphor. Current Contents (Citation Classic), 21(12), 14. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Weick, K.E. (1989c). On relevance. OBTS News and Commentary, 6(3):1-2. Weick, K.E. (1989b). Organized improvisation: 20 years of organizing. Communication Studies, 40(4):241-248.  Weick, K.E. (1989c). On relevance. OBTS News and Commentary, 6(3):1-2.  Weick, K.E. (1993). The collapse of sensemaking in organizations: The Mann Gulch disaster. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 628-652.  Weick, K. E. (1995). Sensemaking in organizations (Foundations for Organizational Science). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.  Weick, K.E. (1996c). Fighting fires in educational administration. Educational Administration Quarterly, 32, 565-578.  Weick, K.E. (1996d). Prepare your organization to fight fires. Harvard Business Review, 74 (3):143-148.  Weick, K.E.(1998a). Improvisation as a mindset for organizational analysis. Organization Science, 9(5):543-555.  Weick, K.E. (1999). Mindful moments in a mindless organization: Becoming a learning community. Reflections: The Journal of the Society of Organizational Learning, 1 (1):37-58. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Weick, K. E. (2001a). Making sense of the organization Weick, K. E. (2001a). Making sense of the organization. Oxford, UK: Blackwell. Weick, K. E. (2001b). Gapping the relevance bridge: Fashions meet fundamentals in management research. British Journal of Management, 12:S71-S75. Weick, K. E. (2009). Making sense of the organization, Volume 2: The impermanent organization. John Wiley & Sons Ltd. Weick, K.E., & Bougon, M. G. (1986). Organizations as cause maps. In H. P. Sims, Jr., & D. A. Gioia (Eds.), Social cognition in organizations (pp.102-135). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Weick, K.E., & Gilfillan, D.P. (1971). Fate of arbitrary traditions in a laboratory microculture. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 17, 179-191. Weick, K.E., & Klein, G. (2000). Making better decisions. Across the Board: The Conference Board Magazine, 37 (6):16-22. Weick, K.E., & Orton, J.D. (1990). Loosely coupled systems: A reconceptualization. Academy of Management Review, 16 (2):203-223. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Weick, K. E. , & Penner, D. D. (1966). Triads: A laboratory analogue Weick, K.E., & Penner, D.D. (1966).Triads: A laboratory analogue. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, 1, 191-211. Weick, K.E., & Penner, D.D. (1969). Discrepant membership as an occasion for effective cooperation. Sociometry, 32, 413-424. Weick, K.E., Penner, D.D., & Fitch, H.G. (1966). Dissonance and the revision of choice criteria. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 701-705. Weick, K.E., & Prestholdt, P. (1968). The realignment of discrepant reinforcement value. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 8, 180-187. Weick, K.E., & Putnam, T. (2006). Organizing for mindfulness: Eastern wisdom and Western knowledge. Journal of Management Inquiry, 15 (3):275-287. Weick, K.E., & Quinn, R.E. (1999). Organizational change and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 50, 361-386. Weick, K.E., & Roberts, K. H. (2001). Collective mind in organizations: Heedful interrelating on flight decks. In K.E. Weick (2001), Making sense of the organization (pp.241-258). Oxford: Blackwell. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Weick, K. E. , & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2006) Weick, K.E., & Sutcliffe, K. M. (2006). Mindfulness and the quality of organizational attention. Organization Science, 17 (4):514-524. Weick, K.E., Sutcliffe, K.M.,& Obstfeld, D. (2005). Organizing and the process of sensemaking. Organization Science, 16(4):409-421. Weick, K.E., & Swieringa, R. (1982). An assessment of laboratory experiments in accounting. Journal of Accounting Research, 20, (Supplement):56-101. Weick, K.E. Leadership when events don’t play by the rules. http://www.bus.umich.edu/FacultyResearch/Research/TryingTimes/Rules.htm Liu, S.Z. (2011). Evidencing sensemaking: A speech act theory analysis of metaphors in organizational mission statements. UNC Greensboro doctoral dissertation. Liu, S.Z. (2012). Evidencing sensemaking: A speech act theory analysis of metaphors in organizational mission statements. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest, UMI. 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会

Webpage: www.gxnu.edu.cn/Personal/szliu Blog: cyrusliu.blog.163.com 刘绍忠 通讯地址： 541004 桂林市金鸡路1号 桂林电子科技大学外国语学院 Email: shaozhong@hotmail.com Webpage: www.gxnu.edu.cn/Personal/szliu Blog: cyrusliu.blog.163.com 4/20-21/2013 （厦门） 全国高校大学英语教学发展学术研讨会