The Change Laboratory
A means to overcome the crisis of collective learning
in educational settings?
Jaakko Virkkunen
Prof.emer.
Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning
CRADLE
University of Helsinki
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
0
The outline of the presentation
1 The crisis of collective learning in educational settings
2 The two basic principles of the Change Laboratory
method
The principle of ascending from the abstract to the
concrete: development through re-mediation
The principle of double stimulation
3 The Change Laboratory as an instrument for remediating instructional practices at school
4 Change Laboratory as a platform of collaboration
between researchers and practitioners
Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning (CRADLE)
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
1
The crisis of collective learning in
educational settings
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
2
A failure of collective learning
Hubbard, Mehan and Stein’s (2006) conclusion about the
school reform in SanDiego:
"(…) a reform that began as conceptually driven was
proceduralized; an approach to learning that began as
student-centered
became
teacher-centered;
a
framework with many openings for the application of
professional judgement became understood as
scripted."
The outcomes of the reform were not only unintended
but represent the very opposite of its objectives. Instead
of stimulating collective learning about a possible new
way of working, the reform seems to have led to its
stagnation.
Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning (CRADLE)
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
3
Incremental vs. transformational change
and learning
In most institutions work practices are continuously
developed through incremental improvements based on
accumulated experience and learning. The crisis of
collective learning manifests itself when this kind of
learning is not good enough for meeting current
challenges, in situations that call for a transformation of
the concept and logic of the activity.
In educational settings, the crisis manifests itself in the
failed attempts for concept-level change such as the
SanDiego example.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
4
The need for concept-level change and
expansive learning
Experience is always tied to a specific, historically
evolved understanding of an activity that is embedded
in its structure. A need for concept-level change
arises when the actual situation changes and does
not any more correspond to the presumptions of the
understanding on which the structure is based.
Breaking out of the prevailing conceptions and
practices in such a situation calls for expansive
learning, in which the practitioners’ rise their eyes
from their individual tasks to the purpose and
structure of their joint activity and start to analyze and
develop it collaboratively.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
5
The Change Laboratory is a method and set of
instruments for a work community to carry out
expansive learning that is needed for concept-level
change of their joint activity.
The method was developed by Prof. Engeström in the
early 1990s on the basis of the Developmental Work
Research methodology. It is based on two fundamental
principles:
The principle of ascending from the abstract to the
concrete that is related to the idea of development
through remediation (Ilyenkov,1982; Davydov, 1990)
The principle of double stimulation (Vygotsky, 1987)
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
6
The principle of ascending from the
abstract to the concrete
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
7
Two forms of abstraction
All thinking and learning takes place by abstracting
meaning from immediate sensory experience. This can
take place in two different ways.
Empirical abstractions are based on comparison and
classification of objects on the basis on their external
features and on generalizations concerning repeating
relationships between objects.
Theoretical abstractions are based on practical
transformations, experimentation, and change of
relationships in systems of interdependent elements.
Theoretical abstraction captures a basic functional
relationship and principle in the reality under scrutiny.
(Davydov, 1990)
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
8
The two meanings of ‘ascending from
the abstract to the concrete’
In knowledge creation: a process of breaking out of a
one sided understanding based on an empirical
abstraction to an understanding of the phenomenon as
a moment in a developing system of interactions.
In historical development: a process, in which an
initially unique and isolated instance of a new functional
relationship and form of interaction spreads and
generalizes into an integral part of reality. This is how
inventions become innovations that change societal
practices.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
9
The developmental dynamics of living systems
cannot be captured by empirical abstraction alone
H. Maturana: “A basic conceptual difficulty in understanding
living, self regenerating and self developing systems arises
from our habit to think in terms of ”causes” that blinds us from
the spontaneous nature of life processes. Explanations
should instead be based on the description of the generative
mechanisms that produce and change the structure of the
system.”
Maturana’s critique concerns the use of empirical abstractions
about linear causal relationships in biology but it applies also
to the understanding of cultural systems of human activity.
Re-mediation of relationships of interaction within a system is
a central “generative mechanism” that changes their
structures.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
10
Development through mediation of
contradictions
Vygotsky’s great insights was that human action is
culturally mediated.
Each cultural mediator has been at a time an innovative
new way to resolve or manage a restrictive contradiction
within an existing form of human activity.
As Latour (1996) puts it, a mediator is not completely a
cause nor a consequence but ties two phenomena
together into a process of co-evolution.
A new mediator creates a new functional relationship of
interaction that can spread and eventually lead to the
transformation of the existing structure.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
11
Mediating a contradiction
An object or process that comprises in itself the polar
aspects of a contradiction can be used as a mediator
to resolve the contradiction or make it manageable by
uniting the opposites into a process of co-evolution.
C
a b
A
B
Legend:
A and B = the polar elements or forces of the contradiction
C = a mediator that comprises in itself the polar aspects of
the contradiction and unites the opposites
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
12
An example: re-mediating the interaction
between teachers and students at a Finnish
middle school
The final
project
Students as
apathetic at school
Academic criteria
of success
Students as energetic and
motivated at their hobbies
Criteria of success based
on individuals' interests
Based on Engeström, Engeström,
Suntio, 2002
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
13
The new form of interaction challenged
the prevailing structure of the activity
“The final project allowed the students and forced the
teachers to operate beyond and across encapsulated
school subjects and work on a long-term basis. The
final project introduced work motivated by the pride
of achieving something beyond the demands of the
curriculum, but offered the students also a change to
enhance their grades.”
Engeström, Engeström, Suntio, 2002
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
14
Ascending from the abstract to the concrete can
be understood as the process of identifying a
contradiction in a system, finding a mediator that
resolves it or allows to manage it better, and
generalizing the use of the new form of functional
interaction based on the new mediator.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
16
Ascending from the abstract to the concrete takes
place by taking expansive learning actions
7 Consolidating and
generalizing the
new practice
1 Questioning or rejecting some aspects
of the accepted practice and wisdom
6 Reflecting on and evaluating
the process
5 Implementing the new model
by means of practical applications,
enrichements and conceptual
extensions. Resolving contradictions
beween the new model and the
prevailing practice
4 Examining
and testing
the new model
2 Analysis (historical and actual
empirical) of the system in order
to reveal the inner contradictions
in it that create disturbances and
restrict its development
3 Modeling
a new functional
relationship
Davydov, 1990,
Engeström,1999
The Change Laboratory is a workshop in which the practitioners can
take jointly expansive learning actions initially in collaboration with an
external researcher-interventionist.
Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning (CRADLE)
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
17
The principle of double stimulation
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
18
Double stimulation: from an
experimental method into
a theoretical generalization
Vygotsky saw that the double stimulation method Sakharov
had used in studying concept formation demonstrated the
principle of how human beings can intentionally break out of a
contradictory situation, change their circumstances, or solve
difficult problems.
The first stimulus is a challenging problem.
The second stimulus is an external artefact which the
subject turns into a sign, a psychological tool, by filling it with
a meaning that is related to the problem situation.
With the help of the second stimulus the subject gains control
of his/her action and a new understanding of the problem
situation.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
19
The two phases in double stimulation
and the emergence of agentive action
First phase
Adopting or constructing
a second stimulus to be used as
a psychological tool in
a problem situation
Second phase
Actuation, determined,
agentive action
A chain of
double
stimulation
processes
Vygotsky 1997, Engeström, Sannino, 2011
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
20
Double stimulation creates a new layer of
causality in human action
1. Causal layer: Individuals base their actions on
generalizations concerning causal relationships.
2. Contradictory layer: In collective work activities,
individuals are often driven by contradictory motives and
pressures and can act in unpredictable ways when trying
to find a resolution.
3. Agentive layer: People can proceed from the
contradictory situation to taking transformative actions by
inventing and using artefacts to control their behaviour
from the outside. (Engeström, 2011)
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
21
The Change Laboratory as an
instrument for re-mediating instructional
practices at school
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
22
The layout and instruments of
the Change Laboratory
Representations of second stimuli
Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning (CRADLE)
Representations
of first stimuli
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
23
The model of the basic structure of
human activity as a second stimulus
INSTRUMENT
OBJECT > OUTCOME
SUBJECT
RULES
COMMUNITY
DIVISION OF
LABOR
The model can be used as an instrument for contextualizing the
problems that individuals encounter in their work in the historically
evolved structure of their joint activity and for finding the systemic
causes of the problems as inner contradictions within the system.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
24
The Change Laboratory Process in the Molefi Senior
Secondary school in Botswana
MODEL/VISION
F
U
T
U
R
E
P
R
E
S
E
N
T
P
A
S
T
7
6
5
IDEAS/TOOLS
Unarticulated vision
of a "community
developing school"
Unified teaching
methods vs.
heterogeneous
student groups
A secondary school
that used to select the
best students from
primary schools
MIRROR
8
A new "dialogical study
planning" method and practice
Co-teaching
A new system of policy
implementation
9
2
Problem areas:
- single science students' feeling of
being neglected, "the paradox of
clever single science students"
- under performing students and
student motivation,
- students' with social problems
- teachers' learning and policy
implementation
4 Identification of a turning point in
the development due to the
government's new policy of
"automatic advancement" from
primary to secondary school
Increased number of students with
severe social problems
1
3
Follow-up data about the feasibility
and need for further development
of the new tools and ways of
working.
Teachers' worries,
Video clips of interviews with
students
'Single-science' students' short
essays of their studying
experiences
Data about historical changes
in the activity system
Virkkunen, Newnham, Nleya, Engeström, 2012
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
26
Re-mediating the rehabilitation in a school
for neurologically ill and disabled children in
a Change Laboratory process
Due to a change in the division of labor between normal schools
and special schools the school received more severely ill and
disabled children than before and had to provide a greater variety
of special therapies.
Making
student's daily
activities
rehabilitative
Increasing
time needed
for various
therapy
sessions
Students'
limited time
for studies
and therapy
Virkkunen & Tenhunen, 2010
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
28
Summary of the three school cases
In all the three cases, the mirror of practice led the
practitioners to question their empirical abstractions
concerning the students as the object of their activity and
to a search for a more concrete way of constructing
students as objects of their work.
In all cases the Change Laboratory produced a view of
the systemic cause of the practitioners’ daily problems as
an inner contradiction in their activity system.
It also produced a principle of mediating the contradiction
and instrumental second stimuli for the transformation of
the activity system.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
30
Progress of the expansive learning process
in the three schools
The progress in ”ascending
to the concrete” from the
model of mediating the
contradiction varied and
was related to the
length of the
collaboration between
the researchers
the school.
The school for
neurologically
ill and disabled
7 Consolidating and
generalizing the
new practice
1 Questioning
6 Reflecting on
the
The
Finnish
Middle
school 5 Implementing
the new model
The
Molefi
school
2 Analysis
a) historical
b) actualempirical
3 Modeling
4 Examining
and testing
the new model
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
31
Change Laboratory as a platform of
collaboration between researchers
and practitioners
In their review of four major school reform projects Confrey, et
al. (2001) conclude, that
•building a fruitful collaboration between researchers and
school practitioners takes at least five years
•reform of school education should be viewed as a ‘stepwise’
process, in which advances alternate with periods of reflection
and consolidation
In a Change Laboratory process the practitioners carry out a
cycle of expansive learning with the support of researchers.
The transformation of the activity calls, however, a chain of
several cycles of expansive learning.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
33
Stepwise expansion in the Finnish
middle school
In the first Change Laboratory in the Finnish middle school, the
teachers brake away from a generalized negative view of students
and created a new form of working with them in the last school year
A year later they initiated another Change Laboratory process, in
which they focused on instructional practices and use of computers as
students’ instruments in learning. The teachers planned new thematic
units, video recorded their realization, and evaluated them with the
students, and developed them further.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
34
A two dimensional model was used as an
instrument when evaluating experimental
units of instruction and the direction of
change in instruction
Socio-motivational
dimension
INSTRUCTION OPENS UP
OUTWARD
Cognitive dimension
PRINCIPLES
AND
QUESTIONS
TECHNIQUES
AND
RIGHT ANSWERS
ENCAPSULATED
CLASSROOM
AND SCHOOL
Engeström, Engeström & Suntio 2002b
Students were
involved in the
second Change
Laboratory as
active members
The natural next step
would be a Boundary
Crossing Change
Laboratory with
parents and members
of the community
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
35
Conclusions
The potential of the Change Laboratory in helping to
overcome the crisis of collective learning lies in the way it
supports practitioners’ collaborative, theoretically oriented
analysis of their activity, builds their joint transformative
agency in experimenting with new solutions and carrying
out concept-level change of their activity.
The Change Laboratory can function as a microcosm of
this new kind of collaborative learning over traditional
boundaries in schools and as a platform for developmental
collaboration between researchers and practitioners.
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
36
Thank you for your
attention!
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto
37
References
Confrey, J., Lemke, J.,L. , Marshall, J., & Sabelli, N., (2001). Conference on Models of Implementation Research in Science and
Mathematics Instruction in Urban Schools (Austin, TX, University of Texas).
Davydov, V.V. (1990). Types of generalization in instruction: Logical and psychological problems in the structuring of school
curricula. Reston VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics
Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y. Engeström, R.
Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory (pp. 377-406). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Suntio, A. (2002a) Can a School Community Learn to Master its Own Future? An ActivityTheoretical Study of Expansive Learning Among Middle School Teachers. In G. Wells and G. Claxton (Eds.), Learning for Life in
the 21st Century: Sociocultural Perspectives on the Future of Education (pp. 211–224). Oxford : Blackwell.
Engeström, Y., Engesröm, R., & Suntio, A. (2002b). From paralyzing myths to expansive action: Building computer-supported
knowledge work into the curriculum from below. In G. Stahl (Ed.), Computer support for collaborative learning: Foundations for a
CSCL community. (pp. 211-224). Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2011). Volition and agency in organizations: An activity-theoretical perspective. Paper presented
in the conference of Association International de management Stratégique AIMS) in Nantes, France, on June 9, 2011. Latour, B.
(1996). Social theory and the study of computerized work places. In W.J. Orlikowski, G. Walsham, & M.R. Jones (Eds.),
Information Technology and Changes in Organizational World (pp. 295-307). London: Chapman & Hall.
Hubbard, L., Mehan, H., & Stein, M. K. (2006). Reform as learning: School reform, organizational culture, and community politics
in San Diego. New York: Routledge.
Miettinen, R. (2013). Innovation, human capabilities, and democracy. Towards an enabling wellfare state. Oxford: Oxfprd
University Press.
Sahlberg, P. (2010). Finnish lessons. What can the world learn from educational change in Finland. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Tolman, C. (1981). The metaphysic of relations in Klaus Riegel’s “Dialectics” of Human development. Human Development 24,
33–51.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1986). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1997). The instrumental method in psychology. In The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky. Vol. 3. Problems of the
theory and history of psychology (pp. 85-90). New York: Plenum.
Virkkunen, J., Newnham, D. S., Nleya, P., & Engeström, R. ( 2012). Breaking the vicious circle of categorizing students in
school. Learning, Culture, and Social Interaction 1(3–4), pp. 153-258.
Virkkunen, J., & Tenhunen, E. (2010). Finding a Concept that Integrates Specialists’ Know-How – The Case of Special School
for Handicapped and Neurologically Ill Children. Actio - International Journal of Human Activity Theory 3, 1-23.
38
www.helsinki.fi/yliopisto