An activity system model (see Figure 4.1) operates as various elements and each of the elements contributes to the activity in their own particular way. The activity system is normally located in particular settings. The settings and the contribution that each element makes to the system influences the outcome in any activity. In the discussions that follow, I examine the elements in the activity system by assessing what each of the elements contributes to the study. The other part of the discussion is an examination of inherent
contradictions, clashes or dissonance that may surface in an activity system. The elements
which I discuss here formed the guiding lens for exploring teaching practice and the analysis of the data in the study.
4.2.1 Subject, object, and outcome
According to Figure 4.1 below, the subjects are described as the identified individuals in an activity system whose activities are being examined. The object is looked at as the immediate goals or motives that subjects aim to achieve in an activity system with the help of the mediational role of the social environment. The outcome is described as the purposes of the actions as well as the purposes of the community (Waite, 2003) in an activity system. In a secondary school setting during teaching practice, the subjects could be the student teachers, the object or a motive could be learning-to-teach, and the outcome could be becoming effective teachers after completing teacher education programme. Waite (2003: 3) has argued that:
The perceived difference between the current state of the object and the desired outcome provides the motivation for the subject to develop goals and actions to transform the object into the desired outcome (Waite, 2003: 3).
The activity is the general term that describes what the subject (s) is trying to accomplish and typically indicates what outcome they are working towards (Waite, 2003). The concept of
object can also be considered in relation to goals which individuals want to achieve as a
result of joining teacher education/teaching. Student teachers may join a professional programme for a variety of idealistic goals which they want to achieve. Figure 4.1 below is an illustration of an activity system’s model as conceptualized by Engeström (1987). An activity theory framework derives from this model.
Figure 4.1: Activity system’s model
Subject
Tools/artifacts
Rules/norms and
conventions Community Division of tasks
Object Outcome
Setting
Source: Engeström (1987)
Whatever the specific goal or expectation that leads someone to teacher education/teaching, it is likely to mediate what prospective teachers expect from their professional development. According to Grossman et al., (1999) prospective teachers may focus primarily on the relationship between teachers and pupils, thereby overlooking the academic dimension of the job or may see teaching as a way to continue involvement with the love of for the subject matter. However, there may be other objects which prospective teachers may use for joining teacher education/teaching. The objects for joining teacher education/teaching in this study are covered in Chapter Seven of research findings.
Activities comprise actions that are performed in order to accomplish specific goals that would lead to the individual or group achieving desired outcomes. Waite (2003) stressed that after each action is performed the situation is assessed to determine the level to which the object of an activity system has been achieved. This calls for a look at the concept of
appropriation in relation to activity theory. Appropriation refers to the process through
which an individual adopts conceptual and pedagogical tools and ways of thinking for use in particular social environments (Grossman et al., 1999). The significant thing about appropriation is that appropriation is dependent on a number of factors such as the congruence of subjects’ values, prior experiences, and goals with those of more experienced members of the community (Wertsch, 1981). Cazden’s (1988) idea of performance before
competence is also useful in understanding the concept of appropriation due to its emphasis
on active participation as a means of becoming competent in social practices. The concept of appropriation provided an understanding of findings on pedagogical activities of student teachers during teaching practice as addressed in Chapter Eight and Chapter Nine.
4.2.2 Tools/artifacts
According to activity theory there are mediating tools or artifacts in an activity system.
Tools mediate the interactions between the subject and the object. Tools are those directly
identified by the researcher, through observations and interviews as being used to meet the object of the activity. Bannon (1997) suggested that tools are shaped and altered during the development of the activity and are either tangible or psychological in nature. In a school, the subject could have a range of tools such as textbooks, boards, markers, notebooks, pens, computers, and other teaching materials. Other tools related to the work of teaching could include the teachers’ academic courses, school curriculum, and dispositions such as a sense of humor, flexibility, and patience (Bannon, 1997).
However, tools may at times not be available in some cases to mediate the interactions between the subject and the object. This may conceptually be viewed as a source of contradiction since the absence of a tool may be a source of inconvenience in the performance of tasks. In other cases, even though the tool (s) may be available, the subject (student teacher in this case) may fail to use it all together. The subject may want to alter the use of the tool for the sake of making the tool more effective or because of failing to master its appropriate use during teacher education. In some cases, pupils on whom the tool is used may resist its use for their own reasons. In this study, tools/artifacts related to teaching and learning resources as well as the pedagogical and conceptual knowledge which student teachers relied on to carry out teaching practice (see Chapter Eight and Chapter Nine). 4.2.3 Community, rules/norms, and division of tasks
According to activity theory the identified subjects engage in an activity that is embedded in a range of relations with other aspects in an activity triangle, such as the communities,
norms/rules, and the divisions of tasks. An activity theory considers the community as
those ‘multiple individuals or subgroups who share the same general object’ or identify with the object (Roth and Tobin, 2002: 114). In a secondary school, the relevant community may include multiple teachers, administrators, support staff, pupils, supervisors, etc. in the learning community. The issue however is how each member of the relevant community contributes to the object of the activity system. The research findings in the study have provided some insight on how schools and the college relate during teaching practice as well as how student teachers and other teachers in the school related both socially and professionally (see Chapter Eight and Chapter Nine).
Rules/norms in activity system refer to explicit and implicit regulations and norms that
govern actions and interactions within an activity system (Roth and Tobin, 2002). In the case of student teachers on teaching practice, these norms/rules might relate to the general and specific school rules, regulations, and guidelines of the secondary school where they are attached to as well as rules and regulations from their teacher college which govern the conduct of teaching practice. Any clash of rules in activity system may potentially be perceived as a source of tension which may affect the subjects in the manner they carry out actions or relate with other members of the community. The concept of rules/norms was not very relevant in the study even though I related to it in some areas of presenting and discussing research findings in Chapter Seven, Chapter Eight and Chapter Nine.
As regards the division of tasks, it refers to the role that each individual in an activity system plays in the pursuit of achieving the object of a particular activity. The other consideration within the division of tasks is the ‘division of authority and status’ (Roth and Tobin, 2002: 114). In a secondary school setting, the power relations between student teachers, other experienced teachers, and administrators could be a very good example. Student teachers may experience tensions with regard to division of tasks, including the division of authority and status. The research findings in Chapter Eight and Chapter Nine have provided some insight around division of tasks among student teachers and how that may have affected their experiences of teaching practice. The issue of role ambiguity is also considered as important for student teacher (see Cole and Knowles, 1993).
4.2.4 Activity setting
The activity setting refers to the contexts in which all the other elements in the activity system take place. The setting may encourage particular social practices that participants may come to see as worthwhile tools to a better future. At the same time, activity settings may
provide constraints that may limit subjects' efforts to adopt the prevailing social practices (Grossman et al., 1999). An activity setting may have a cultural history through which community members have established specific outcomes that guide action within that setting. Grossman et al., (1999) noted that competing outcomes often coexist within an activity setting. The activity settings provide channels that encourage and discourage particular ways of thinking and acting. According to Grossman et al., (1999):
Teacher education comprises a number of distinct activity settings, including course work, and the specific classes that make up the curriculum; field experiences, including initial observations, teaching practice, supervisions, etc. Each of these activity settings has its own specific motive, structural features, sets of relationships, and resources for learning to teach. It would appear that the more activity settings that are available, the greater the prospects for incompatible goals to exist, each competing for primacy (Grossman et al., 1999, no page).
With the existence of various activity settings in mind, an activity theory framework can help illustrate the two-world pitfall (Feiman-Nemser and Buchmann, 1984) because it draws attention to the ways individuals develop goals within settings that themselves suggest particular goals, expectations and activities. In addition, Lave (1988) noted that sometimes subjects may perceive the setting in particular ways through their internal representations. Lave (1988) makes a distinction between an arena, which has visible structural features, and a setting, which represents the individual's construction of that arena. In this case, while subjects may be placed at the same setting for teaching practice, they may have different understandings of the school setting based on their own goals, histories and activities within an arena (Grossman et al., 1999). Both Chapter Eight and Chapter Nine of research findings address the views of student teachers regarding the secondary school settings where they conducted teaching practice.