The two parts of practitioner tutors’ professional lives were considered to be similar but different by several interviewees suggesting that it is a valid exercise to construct these experiences as two activity systems. There was a sense of inhabiting or operating within two different arenas, even though a tutor’s skills, interests and
abilities were what linked these activities. One tutor summed up this awareness of the difference by referring to different worlds she was aware of within art practice.
T: Well they are different…I mean also, being a teacher brings you into an…academic framework around, around art making in the art world. It’s
another very distinct…subsection…of what art is possibly…very
different…values…pertain to it as opposed to what you might come across
in a commercial gallery, so that’s quite interesting, in a kind of, another section of the world, um…I think it’s probably quite…good…to have insights into the different…framings…it’s difficult, you know.
I: Mmm, maybe you could kind of label or, summarise…you say its part of the same world but different bits of the world?
T: Well, I mean art is a, art is a lot of things and there are different art worlds within the art world, you think um, and think teaching and academia is, almost has it’s own sub, its own sub-aesthetic to it, which has been generated through imperatives through research funding and what it is to be a successful say, artist/teacher within the academic system, so…and there are different things in play when you look at the, the art scene in terms of…galleries which may be, like small galleries, they may be contemporary, lively small galleries, but if they’re trying to sell work, then
you know that they’re already, um referring to different, different systems, so er, I think it has consequences for aesthetic value, I think it has
consequences for kind of…political questions, but I think fashions change, you know, it really moves. The fashion within the, the art school, for certain type of work shifts and there are ways in which it is responsive and…and reflect bigger social changes, but I think, I do think they are different cultures, you know. (Tr12: 7)
This description of cultural contexts within the overarching world associated with fine art practice explains clearly that there are differences and includes the reference to changing values or kinds of work that are deemed appropriate at the time. This is indicative of the changes that are characteristics of activity systems, they are not static, but evolve and their historical persistence is important, they are not constituted through ephemeral actions, but are long standing, constantly changing social
structures (Engeström 1999).
There is also a sense of the practitioner tutor having to enter into a world that predates his or her participation in the activity of learning and teaching; you have to learn to work within the activity system that you enter into when you start to teach. For example a tutor who has been brought in to run a course in HE, which he has not worked in before, identifies that his previous teaching experience, across a broad range of FE and vocational workshops has been very different.
I have to take a much more serious approach to the management side of things and a much more…um...not controlling, controlling’s the wrong word, but much more…just leadership role. Umm…and I’m coming into that…more now, that’s becoming more natural to me now. Whereas I really had to fight that the first year as a new member of staff with very little
experience of working in an HE context, coming into an established course, full of politics, full of conflicts, under pressure in terms of resources, timing, course philosophies, um going into a merger with another institution, possibility of staffing cuts. All these things coming in and…conflicts with the technicians and …umm…you know, you’re kind of in this kind of mess of people, all fighting with each other all the time. (Tr5: 9)
This sense of entering into a new and slightly different world to that of ones own practice or of your previous experience is indicative of the activity systems being a localised, possibly course based experience within a broader institution that
influences and controls some aspects of the activity. There are at least two worlds, or two activity systems that have some similarities and some differences for the
practitioner tutor, their practice and their teaching.
By comparing all the tutors’ accounts it is possible to draw some generalisations between the activity systems of practice and teaching the practice in higher education. These can be illustrated by classic activity theory diagrams (figure 2).
mediating artefacts mediating artefacts
of practice e.g. computers, materials, language of practice and education e.g. tutorials, concepts one to one, projects etc
subject object outcome subject object outcome designer practice products teacher .. learning practice artist
rules community division rules community division of practice of practice of labour of practice students & tutors of labour
& education administrators etc PRACTICE ART AND DESIGN TEACHING
There are strong overlaps between the two activity systems in that learning to practice requires using the mediating artefacts or tools and also some of the rules of the practice. However, these are subsumed into the rules and mediating artefacts of education and sit alongside them. There is no clear link between the communities and the division of labour between the two activity systems. There are generally differences between the object of the activities, where practice is the object the outcome is a product, and in teaching it is students learning with the outcome as practice. The other common factor is the tutor themselves who is acting as subject in two different, but partially related systems.
Through a more detailed analysis of the categories of experience, using the concept of the activity system and illustrated by case studies from the transcripts, it is possible to see how the two systems are related and where tensions exist, for individuals. This is seen through the eyes of the practitioner tutor, as subject in both activity systems and is not an external or objective viewpoint. Activity theory becomes a heuristic device to view the two working contexts, practice and teaching, and how practitioner tutors experience relations within and between them.