- Activity
Activity Theory and expansive learning argue that new knowledge can be constructed from an existing contradiction within an activity system, a position which, as Engestrom notes, poses the question of, ‘how can a structure generate another structure more complex than itself?’
One way to approach the question is to recognise that systems, including education systems, are never wholly stable but, instead, are relevant (and hence useful) within specific, limited historical contexts and, as those contexts evolve and contradictions within them become manifest, the possibility for change, and hence a new activity system, emerges.
For Engestrom, the core phenomenon is activity itself. Human practice lies behind the most complex of systems. Meanings are constructed, and ‘The construction of meaning is the specifically human type of activity.’
A further feature of Engestrom’s thinking is that activity is not only primary, but also collective. Activities can be undertaken by individuals, but the individual is always implicated in a range of historical and social discourses: ‘Human labor [sic], the mother form of all human activity, is co-operative from the very beginning.’
Engestrom is influenced by Vygotsky, in the sense that he argues human activity is mediated through tools, physical (eg, a hammer to put a nail into a wall) or symbolic (eg, an acronym to remember a series of facts for a test). Engestrom is also influenced by Leont’ev in recognising the importance of the object (in the sense of ‘purpose’): ‘According to Leont’ev, … the concept of activity is necessarily connected with the concept of motive.’ Hence, the focus of interest is purposeful human activity.
Engestrom argues there are ‘three dominant aspects of human activity – production, distribution and exchange (or communication).’ Moreover, while there may be three aspects of activity, ‘the essential task is always to grasp the systemic whole, not just separate connections.’ In this sense, Engestrom is indebted to Marx: production creates, distribution divides the products, and exchange further divides, based on human need and desire. Thereafter, consumption becomes a direct object/purpose in response to the human want or need. Thus production is the departure, and consumption the conclusion.
However, argues Engestrom, ‘Marx goes on to show that things are not so simple as this. Production is always also consumption of the individual’s abilities and of the means of production,’ and hence ‘all form the members of a totality, distinctions within a unity.’
2. Contradiction
Engestrom is interested in contradiction as the catalyst for change, and identifies the primary contradiction in Capitalism as being between the use value of the thing, and its exchange value. For example, designer goods are exchanged for sums that do not reflect their use value (generic goods are cheaper). Engestrom gives the example of a doctor: ‘For example, instruments of this work activity include a tremendous variety of medicaments and drugs. But they are not just useful preparations – they are above all commodities with prices, manufactured for a market, advertised and sold for profit. Every doctor faces this contradiction in his daily decision making.’
An example of a secondary contradiction in Capitalism is between technologies (tools) that can ease the burden of labour, and a division of labour that lags behind technological capability.
A tertiary contradiction, according to Engestrom, ‘appears when representatives of culture (e.g., teachers) introduce the object and motive of a culturally more advanced form of the central activity into the dominant form of the central activity. For example, the primary school pupil goes to school in order to play with his mates (the dominant motive), but the parents and the teacher try to make him study seriously (the culturally more advanced motive).’ The contradiction is present when a primary purpose has a secondary, more complex purpose superimposed on it.
Engestrom argues, ‘… qualitative stages and forms of activity emerge as solutions to the contradictions of the preceding stage of form. This in turn takes place in the form of “invisible breakthroughs.”’ In terms of how breakthroughs, or innovations, happen, ‘In reality it always happens that a phenomenon which later becomes universal originally emerges as an individual, particular, specific phenomenon, as an exception from the rule. It cannot actually emerge in any other way.’ Hence the innovation appears irregular at first, but becomes, over time, mainstream, as its suitability and usefulness to its context is recognised.
Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: an activity-theoretical approach to developmental research, Helsinki, Orienta-Konsultit Oy. http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/Engestrom/expanding/toc.htm (accessed 18 December 2012).
Disruptive Technology Enhanced Learning 