OU blog

Personal Blogs

H810: Week 16: Activity 35: Seale Chap. 12

Visible to anyone in the world

H810: Week 16: Activity 35.1: Seale Chapter 12

Seale identifies six potential areas for conflict or contradiction within an organisation or activity system. What potential contradictions exist in your organisation and why?

I have had problems with this chapter at first as H800 introduced me to third generation activity theory which examines contradictions between systems rather than examining contradictions within one system as in the second generation activity theory described by Seale in chapter 12. For example, In H800 I looked at how Engeström's (2001) third generation activity theory could apply to the Geology department at Keele University with whom I work closely. The reduction in government funding to universities and the need for increased diversity has led to the development of modules delivered completely on-line. I drew the following diagram where two interacting systems produce contradictions which Engeström (2001:137) predicts are the 'sources of change and development'.

Engestroms Third generation activity theory showing contradictions between two systems

 

I found it useful as a starting point to identify where the contradictions lie and then to proceed to examine them before I went on to design an e-learning module.

I believe that third generation activity theory would be a useful technique to look at institutional response to accessibility (chap 11) but the way Seale has used second generation theory in chapter 12 concerns me as activity theory is designed to illustrate a situated activity and looking at interactions between just two aspects of the activity results in the study of isolated concepts and reduces the effectiveness of a holistic image.

Subject: lecturer
Tools: guidelines, evaluation and repair tools
Rules: institutional and departmental policies and strategies
Community: students, lecturers, technologists, support services developers, managers etc.
Division of labour: planning and funding, designing and developing, implementing and evaluating, using, supporting, advocating
Object: to make e-learning accessible

  • Contradiction between the object and the tools
    Confusion over guidelines - which ones to use
    lack of training / guidance on tools
  • Contradiction between the object and division of labour
    Always someone else's job - affected by workload and belief in complexity of the task.
    For example, rules might dictate that accessible learning activities are designed by technicians who have no idea how to adapt materials to achieve the learning objectives.
  • Contradiction between the community and the division of labour
    'Who does what' arguments similar to above. For example, departments may have different ideas on who has the responsibility to produce accessible learning materials.
  • Contradiction between the community and the rules
    Often the institutional rules and departmental rules conflict. Universities have so much infighting between departments that it makes it difficult to get co-operation and accessibility issues need co-operation!
  • Contradiction between the rules and the subject
    Lecturers having weak or inconsistent guidelines
  • Contradiction between the tools and the subject
    Lecturers having difficulties using tools

According to Searle, "any or all of the contradictions will prevent accessible e-learning practice from developing" (page 153 on my printed version but just before the conclusion to chap.12 anyway!!). This is really not the way I, or any of my H800 tutor group, read activity theory. From reading Engeström I thought that contradictions were a necessary part of expansive learning and that they should be recognised and accepted in contrast to being contained, diverting the energy and losing the impetus for expansive learning.

I commented in the H800 forum that expansive learning presupposes that specific contradictions will give learners the impetus to solve them but that Engeström does not address the fact that the subject may decide to avoid any conflict or stress by remaining with the current situation. In order to retain the impetus for expansive learning, the lecturers should be supported to work through contradictions. They may benefit from support in learning new technologies and policy changes that recognise the extra work involved in creating, developing and running accessible e-modules.

 

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

E801: Action 1.6: Socio cultural and new literacy perspectives

Visible to anyone in the world

Action 1.6: Literacy difficulties: socio-cultural and new literacy perspectives

  • Ways in which issues raised by these authors highlight barriers to literacy acquisition which you encounter in your own professional contexts

I have encountered quite a lot of work based on Vygotsky's ideas. I am especially interested in Engeström's work on contradictions and how these stimulate major advances in learning. After reading this paper I was in total agreement with Green & Kosogriz's ideas but I am having problems trying to work out how to apply them in practice. I home educated my three children and it was relatively easy to personalise approaches to learning, treat them as individuals and value their previous experiences. I encouraged their learning to extend their zone of proximal development and this was so easy with the knowledge I had of their lives and learning. My daughter was deaf and I knew her experiences intimately so I knew when I had to explain words when she had not encountered the concept before. I cannot work out how this is possible with a group of 35-40 in my colleague's reception class.

Regarding LD as deviations from a norm - this struck a chord with me - models are useful to formulate generalised teaching plans but surely we should be moving away from 'one size fits all' teaching to inclusive teaching. It reminded me of Sfard's comments on using metaphors for learning:

'A metaphor that has been given hegemony serves as an exclusive basis for deciding what should count as "normal" and what is "anomolous"...'

Sfard, A. (1998) 'On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one', Educational Researcher, vol.27, no.2, pp.4-13.

I have been doing some notetaking for a student who has been studying how language sustains attitude to gender and I could see many similarities. Our language sets a standard for what we believe and how we act and we need to be aware of this when designing course material.

  • What the implications are of a socio-cultural view of literacy difficulties for the ways we think about pedagogy and practice

Regarding literacy as a practice that is embedded in social and cultural life, results in a complete change of ideas as how to approach teaching and learning. As social and cultural practices vary, so do literacies. We cannot discuss a single literacy and so we have to abandon the idea of a 'norm' with which to compare learners and also abandon the idea of a single strategy for teaching reading. Each learner requires strategies that fit with their social and cultural situation and these strategies should be implemented within their community or social network.

The community provides the scaffolding needed to site the literacy skills. People require different skills depending on their social life and culture. The skills are much easier to achieve when motivation is high and this motivation can be achieved when the literacy tasks are relevant to a person's life.

 

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 302675