Presentation for TTPRG, March 2014
Overview
 About the study
 Application of Activity Theory
 Analysis using Activity Theory
About the study
 Issue
 Use and non-use of ICTs by primary education pre-service
teachers while on professional placement.
 Research has identified a range of influencing factors
 not clear which are the most influential
 detail of pedagogical decisions not known
 nature and detail of practice largely unreported
 ongoing change a significant issue
About the study
 Aims
 identify and describe ICT use
 investigate reasons for choices about when, why and how
ICTs are used
 gain a more holistic understanding of the situation
 Research questions
 When and how are ICTs being used for learning and
teaching?
 What are the contextual reasons and personal influences
behind use and non-use of ICTs for learning and
teaching?
About the study
 The importance of context
 “use of ICT for teaching and learning depends on the
inter-locking cultural, social and organisational contexts
in which they live and work”. (Somekh, 2008, p. 450)
About the study
 Major influences
 Preparation to use ICTs for learning and teaching







Policies, standards, regulations
Preparation program design
Professional placements
Lecturer teaching and modelling
Knowledge and skill with ICTs
Attitudes, beliefs and confidence
Resources
Application of Activity Theory
 AT frequently used as a theoretical lens for analysis
 no generally accepted or consistent method or approach
for this to be undertaken (Barab et al., 2004; YamagataLynch, 2010).
 understandable given that AT is not domain specific,
and that it is cross-disciplinary and general in the nature
of its approach (Engeström, 1993).
 No specific requirements in terms of procedure
 requires tailoring and a realisation of its “conceptual
tools and methodological principles” in accordance with
the needs and focus of each investigation (Engeström,
1993, p. 97).
Application of Activity Theory
 AT used for research into:
 PD of pre-service teachers (Junor Clarke & Fournillier, 2012),
practising teachers (Yamagata-Lynch & Haudenschild, 2009)
 understanding teacher approaches to ICT (Karasavvidis, 2009)
 developing professional practice in pre-service teacher
education (Ellis, 2011; Edwards & Mutton, 2007),
 pre-service teacher identity formation on professional
placement (Dang, 2013), and
 school and university partnership for teacher education
(Tsui & Law, 2007).
Application of Activity Theory
 Studies used
 Second generation activity system - Engeström (1987)
and later iterations, or
 Third generation activity system - Engeström (2001) and
later refined in Engeström (2008b)

Developed in response to a need for the system to better cater
for cultural diversity, “multiple perspectives, and networks of
interacting activity systems” (Engeström, 2001, p. 135).
Third Generation of AT
Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning. (n.d.). Two interacting activity
systems as minimal model for the third generation of activity theory.
Application of Activity Theory
 Third generation model suited to this study
 Enables clearer depiction of the activity and influence of
both schools and university as separate but related
systems,
 Highlights the concept of teacher preparation potentially
being a shared object.
Analysis using Activity Theory
The Unit of Analysis
Analysis using Activity Theory
 Unit of analysis and alignment with Engestrom’s (2001)
principles of AT
 presents school and university activity as collective and
related networks – meets first principle requirements.
 multiple members of each community, including the
participating pre-service teachers will have voices in this
project - addresses second principle.
 historical perspective of the contexts will be established
through examination of teacher preparation program
designs, institute, departmental, and school policies, and
interview responses to questions that relate to the past –
achieves third principle.
Analysis using Activity Theory
 Contradictions or tensions within each activity system
will be identified through analysis of the data as they
relate to each of the components – achieves intent of
fourth principle.
 While primary focus of the study is on gaining an
understanding of practice and the influence of context
within the system, also enables consideration and
potential commendation of reconceptualisations of
elements of the system for its enhancement and perhaps
transformation - in keeping with fifth principle
Analysis using Activity Theory
 Data collection
 Semi structured interviews

complexity and individuality can be expressed
 Classroom observation

further understanding of practice, and creates space and
context for further conversations
 Document analysis

valuable insight from pre-service teacher preparation program
design, school policies, and lesson plans.
Analysis using Activity Theory
Sources of data for each component of the activity system
Activity System
Components
Data collection methods
Interview
University
lecturer
Tools
Student
*
Subject
Observation
Supervising
teacher
*
*
Object
*
Rules
*
Community
*
Division of labour
*
Classroom
*
Policies,
standards,
preparation
program design
Lesson
planning
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Document analysis
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
*
Analysis using Activity Theory
 Historical analysis
 History of the activity system needs to be established



“key task in historical analysis is periodization” Engeström
(1999, p. 32).
identification and meaningful grouping of past events from
the stream of historical activity.
divide the historical stream into four segments, covering and
focussing upon the respective placements in each year of
degree program.
Analysis using Activity Theory
 Contradictions
 Identification of contradictions or tensions between the
components within the activity system is of critical
importance - strong influence within an activity system
 Expected to help identify and explain reasons for ICT
non-use by examining both the school and university
activity systems e.g. might be dis-coordination between:



supervising teacher expectations and/or practice and the
national teacher standards for the use of ICTs for learning and
teaching in classrooms
pre-service teacher practice and national standards
ICT resourcing and expectations for ICT use
Analysis using Activity Theory
Contradictions within the
activity system of a school
(Demiraslan & Usluel,
2008, p. 470)
Questions
References
Barab, S., Evans, M. & Baek, E. (2004). Activity theory as a lens for characterizing the participatory unit. In D. Jonassen
(Ed.). Handbook of educational research on educational communications and technology (2nd ed.). (pp. 199-214). New
Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning. (n.d.). Figure 3: Two interacting activity systems as minimal
model for the third generation of activity theory. University of Helsinki, retrieved February 2014 from
http://www.helsinki.fi/cradle/chat.htm
Demiraslan, Y., & Usluel, Y. (2008). ICT integration processes in Turkish schools: Using activity theory to study issues and
contradictions. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 458-474.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: OrientaKonsultit.
Engeström, Y. (1993). Developmental studies of work as a test bench of activity theory: The case of primary care medical
practice. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 64-103).
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen & R.
Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19-38). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education
and Work, 14(1), 133-156.
Engeström, Y. (2008b). The future of activity theory: A rough draft. Keynote lecture presented at the ISCAR Conference in
San Diego, Sept. 8-13. Keynote retrieved from:
http://lchc.ucsd.edu/mca/Mail/xmcamail.2009_01.dir/pdftx2SyzoolF.pdf
Somekh, B. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT. In J. M. Voogt & G.A. Knezek (Eds.),
International Handbook of Information Technology in Primary and Secondary Education (pp. 449-460). Retrieved from
http://CSUAU.eblib.com/patron/FullRecord.aspx?p=364220
Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2010). Activity systems analysis methods: Understanding complex learning environments. New York:
Springer.