Article,
Activity theory as a lens for characterizing the participatory unit
Handbook of research on educational communications and technology, (2004)
Abstract
Since the cognitive revolution of the sixties, representation has
served as the central concept of cognitive theory and representational
theories of mind have provided the establishment view
in cognitive science (Fodor, 1980; Gardner, 1985; Vera & Simon,
1993). Central to this line of thinking is the belief that knowledge
exists solely in the head, and instruction involves finding
the most efficient means for facilitating the “acquisition” of this
knowledge (Gagne, Briggs, & Wager, 1993). Over the last two
decades, however, numerous educational psychologists and instructional
designers have begun abandoning cognitive theories
that emphasize individual thinkers and their isolated minds. Instead,
these researchers have adopted theories that emphasize
the social and contextualized nature of cognition and meaning
(Brown, Collins, & Duguid, 1989; Greeno, 1989, 1997; Hollan,
Hutchins, & Kirsch, 2000; Lave & Wenger, 1991; Resnick,
1987; Salomon, 1993). Central to these reconceptualizations is
an emphasis on contextualized activity and ongoing participation
as the core units of analysis (Barab & Kirshner, 2001; Barab
& Plucker, 2002; Brown & Duguid, 1991; Cook & Yanow, 1993;
Gherardi, Nicolini, & Odella, 1998; Henricksson, 2000; Yanow,
2000). Sfard (1998) characterized the current shift in cognitive
science and educational theory as a move away from the “acquisition”
metaphor towards a “participation” metaphor in which
knowledge, reconceived as “knowing about,” is considered a
fundamentally situated activity.
In spite of the wealth of theoretical contributions in terms of
conceptualizing learning as participation, there have been less
empirical and methodological contributions to aid researchers
attempting to characterize a participatory unit of activity. This
reconceptualization of knowledge as a contextualized act, while
attractive in theory, becomes problematic when attempting to
describe one’s functioning in a particular context. Of core consequence
is the question: What is the ontological unit of analysis
for characterizing activity?1 Defining the participatory unit is a
core challenge facing educators who wish to translate these theoretical
conjectures into applied models. In this chapter we describe
Activity Theory (Engestr¨om, 1987, 1993, 1999a; Leont’ev,
1974, 1981, 1989) and demonstrate its usefulness as a theoretical
and methodological lens for characterizing, analyzing, and
designing for the participatory unit. Activity Theory is a psychological
and multidisciplinary theory with a naturalistic emphasis that offers a framework for describing activity and provides a set
of perspectives on practice that interlink individual and social
levels (Engestr¨om, 1987, 1993; Leont’ev, 1974; Nardi, 1996). Although
relatively new to Western researchers, Activity Theory
has a long tradition as a theoretical perspective in the former Soviet
Union (Leont’ev, 1974, 1981, 1989; Vygotsky, 1978, 1987;
Wertsch, 1985) and over the last decade has become more accepted
in the United States.
