Activity Theory

So, whilst struggling once again with the broadness of my questions,  I've just discovered activity theory which starts to make sense in relation to this idea of having a conceptual framework.

I like the idea that it  is  a  meta-theory or framework rather  than being a  theory that sets out to predict what will happen and why. I also like the idea that it stems from Vygotsky whose theories relate very much to informal education: ideas of a cultural psychology. It enables the researcher to consider the entire work or activity system within the chosen context, from the micro to the macro (including teams, organizations, etc.) which is particularly important in my case, since the motivations of the youth workers that I am researching are inevitably impacted by the organisation, policy or instruction from management, of which I was once a part. The idea that the totality of what is accomplished is beyond just one person gives permission to the researcher to take account of the environment, personal histories, culture, role of the 'artifact', motivations, complexity of real life action, etc.

The  analysis is  directed towards the subject's motivation for performing an activity, which in turn is directed at an object or goal. Activities are defined as conscious actions directed at specific goals, but the elements that make up the activity  are not fixed and  can  change.

Engestrom (1991, 1990) is known for developing the activity triangle that looks at how individuals, artifacts and systems  engage in purposeful activities :

 Breaking down barriers, innovation, and participation in a youth work sense often involves practitioners in the creation of new rules, structures and roles, something that is evident in the practice of the 2 youth workers that I have interviewed, They were chosen because they are at the forefront of this work within their local context, often battling with attitudes and motivations from colleagues that have not moved towards the usage of digital media in the same way.

Somekh (2001) states that "activity theory  not only explains the link between radical societal changes and new technology tools, it also provides a model for how similar changes could occur in schools". Her discourse relates this to a need for radical curriculum change in schools to something that looks familiar! More of an emphasis on informal education, in fact, youth and community tutors are even mentioned as are the words 'groupwork' and 'ownership'!.

Engestrom gives me the possibility of analysing what I'm interested in as follows :

• a collective activity system can be taken as a unit of analysis, giving context and meaning to seemingly random individual events
• the activity system and its components can be understood historically
• inner contradictions of the activity system can be analysed as the source of disruption, innovation, change, and development of that system, including its individual participants (1996:65)

I'm reminded of one of the quotes that I used in a previous post about constuctionism:
“Truth or meaning comes into existence in and out of our engagement with the realities of the world. There is no meaning without a mind. Meaning is not discovered, but constructed.” (Crotty, 1998 ). 

Is it starting to come together?