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; Yamagata- Lynch, 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 Activity System Components Data collection methods InterviewObservationDocument analysis University lecturer Student Supervising teacher Classroom Policies, standards, preparation program design Lesson planning Tools *** * Subject ** * Object ***** * Rules *** Community ***** Division of labour *** Sources of data for each component of the activity system

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 (2 nd ed.). (pp ). 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 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), Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta- Konsultit. 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 ). 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 ). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), Engeström, Y. (2008b). The future of activity theory: A rough draft. Keynote lecture presented at the ISCAR Conference in San Diego, Sept Keynote retrieved from: 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 ). Retrieved from Yamagata-Lynch, L. (2010). Activity systems analysis methods: Understanding complex learning environments. New York: Springer.