explaining call through activity theory and vice-versa
DESCRIPTION
Explaining CALL through Activity Theory and vice-versa. Vilson J. Leffa, UCPel Brazil [email protected] http://www.leffa.pro.br. Main points. Need for a unifying theory in CALL Introduction to Activity Theory (AT) Structure Principles Hierarchical levels Merging AT with CALL - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Explaining CALL through Activity Theory and vice-versa
Vilson J. Leffa, [email protected]://www.leffa.pro.br
Main points
Need for a unifying theory in CALL Introduction to Activity Theory (AT)
– Structure– Principles– Hierarchical levels
Merging AT with CALL A new paradigm in CALL research?
Need for a unifying theory in CALL
Many “no’s”– No “reliable conceptual framework” (Levy, 1997, p. 3);– No recognition as an area of research (Keegan, 1990, p. 51);– No unifying theory (Holmberg, 1982; Kelly, 1990; Smith, 1980)
The tutor/tool dichotomy
Challenge: How to incorporate opposites and
fragments into a unified theory
Activity Theory (AT)
AT is a philosophical and cross-disciplinary framework for studying different forms of human practices as developmental processes (Kuutti 1996)– Historical materialism– HCI Hospitals Schools– Social practices– Development
Structure
Segmentation for explanatory purposes
How does the subject appropriate the object?
Mediation
A tool– empowers the subject– materializes an object– imposes limitations– modifies the subject– cannot be discarded
Object - Outcome
Object– Content to be internalized
Outcome– Content actually internalized
Possible conflicts– Phases of the Moon– Teacher’s expectation Versus students’ realizations
Contextualization
The immersion process Vulnerability Inside / outside Distributed cognition Part of a whole
The whole picture
Principles
object-orientedness mediation development internalization/externalization unity of consciousness and activity contextualization hierarchical structure
Object-orientedness
The object may be– physical, chemical, biological, social, cultural
may involve– feelings, ideas
colonialism, brotherhood
but always treated as objective reality
Principle of mediation
Tools as extension of our organs Tool + organ = “functional organ” Transmission of knowledge Accumulation of knowledge
– We need more than our hands and our mind to learn and change; we also need the tools we have created (Bacon)
Principle of development
AT develops continuously Supports fast methodological updates Requires a view of historical development Does not allow re-inventing the wheel
Internalization/externalization
No boundary between what is inside and what is outside
Activities are externalized on objects Objects may be indispensable
– No piano sonata without a piano
Simulation hypothesis Internalization and ZPD
Hierarchical levels
(Harris)
A CALL activity
If AT did not exist we would have to invent it to explain CALL
AT can account for the diversified nature of CALL– Any component in the structure can be replaced
AT can account for the historical development of CALL– Any theory is seen as part of an evolutionary process
Freezing a moment
Structure
The tool issue
Beyond computer Screen is not a sheet of paper Undue emphasis on technology? Demands on the user The tutor/tool dichotomy
Object-oriented
A beater in a primeval collective hunt, …[frightens] a herd of animals and [sends] them toward other hunters, hiding in ambush. (Leontyev, 1981: 209-210).
Sometimes a student’s action does not coincide with the final objective
Importance of consciousness
Tool mediation
Any piece of courseware [...] carries with it a ‘teacher in the machine’, a projection of the personalities of the designers, programmers, materials developers (Hubard, 1996 : 21)
People anthropomorphize computers, treating the machine as if it were a person (Schaumburg, 2001; Reeves & Nass, 1996)
Externalization/ Internalization cycle
We externalize what is inside us through words and gestures
Words and gestures can be saved and reproduced
Images, movement, and interactivity can be added to amplify our gestures
Under certain conditions (ZPD etc.) what is externalized can be internalized
CALL is dynamic
Computers change continuously, requiring activities to be developed and re-developed
Computers facilitate change
The hierarchical issue
Operation level (below consciousness)– Typing skills– Eye-hand synchronization …
Action level (conscious)– Answering a question …
Activity level– Cloze– Chat session …
Final comments
AT as a simple and visual way to explain the complexity of situated CALL
We learn and change through the instruments we create
Playing with different identities Possibility of starting a new research
paradigm if all lose ends in CALL are put together