isfresearch.files.wordpress.com · web viewthe change room promotes teachers’ agency to change...
TRANSCRIPT
The Change Room promotes teachers’ agency to change their practiceHjordis Thorgeirsdottir
Downloaded from WWW 08/02/18
Journal of Educational Action Research, Taylor & Francis Online
http://www.tandfonline.com/eprint/rP42AqWCbG2aY2vHvRKw/full
ABSTRACT
It is generally agreed that it is difficult for schools to bring about lasting changes in
classroom practice. This paper gives an account of an action research group of 21
practitioners in an upper secondary school in Iceland, where a new model, the Change
Room, was introduced to enhance changes in classroom practice. The aim was to
increase students’ sense of responsibility for their studies. The Change Room
connected the Change Laboratory, one of the methods of developmental work research
established by Engeström and action research as elaborated by McNiff. In the Change
Room the activity theory provided the teachers with a conceptual framework and tools
to analyse what changes were needed and wanted in classroom practice and action
research provided an approach to guide them when carrying out and evaluating these
changes. Change Room meeting records were used for reflection, which revealed that
the main tensions teachers experienced in classroom practice was firstly between
didactic and dialogic teaching methods, secondly between the demand to cover the
syllabus and a sense of urgency for deep learning and thirdly between active and
passive students as learners. In order to resolve these tensions teachers tried out new
methods to attempt to change their practice in the direction of more active student
learning and more listening to students’ voices. The Change Room offers a promising
direction to increase teachers’ agency to change their practice and sustain that change.
As such, it speaks to international concerns about effective school reform.
Keywords: Action research, activity theory, tensions, teachers’ agency, expansive
learning, change practice
IntroductionIt is generally agreed that it is difficult for schools to bring about lasting changes in
classroom practice (Fullan 2007 Fullan, M. 2007. The New Meaning of Educational
Change. 4th ed. Routledge: Oxford. [Google Scholar]; Engeström 2008
Engeström, Y. 2008. From Teams to Knots. Activity-Theoretical Studies of
Collaboration and Learning at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[Crossref], [Google Scholar]).
As a school leader, it is my role to enhance teachers’ professional development and
provide support for teachers to change their practice. It is generally accepted that action
research helps teachers change their practice (Haggarty and Postlethwaite 2003
Haggarty, L., and K. Postlethwaite. 2003. “Action Research: A Strategy for Teacher
Change and School Development?” Oxford Review of Education 29 (4): 423–448.
[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Bartlett and Burton
2006 Bartlett, S., and D. Burton. 2006. “Practitioner Research or Descriptions of
Classroom Practice? A Discussion of Teachers Investigating Their Classrooms.”
Educational Action Research 14 (3): 395–405.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google
Scholar]; McNiff and Whitehead 2006 McNiff, J., and J. Whitehead. 2006. All You Need
to Know about Action Research. London: Sage. [Google Scholar];Somekh and Zeichner
2009 Somekh, B., and K. Zeichner. 2009. “Action Research for Educational Reform:
Remodelling Action Research Theories and Practices in Local Contexts.” Educational
Action Research 17 (1): 5–21.
[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; McNiff 2010 McNiff, J. 2010. Action
Research for Professional Development. Dorset: September Books.
[Google Scholar]).
It is also increasingly accepted that action research can be productively combined with
activity theory
(Darwin 2011 Darwin, S. 2011. “Learning in Activity: Exploring the Methodological
Potential of Action Research in Activity Theorising of Social Practice.” Educational
Action Research 19 (2): 215–229. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Somekh
and Nissen 2011Somekh, B., and M. Nissen. 2011. “Cultural-historical Activity Theory
and Action Research.” Mind, Culture and Activity 18: 93–97. [Taylor & Francis Online],
[Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]; Wells 2011 Wells, G. 2011. “Integrating CHAT
and Action Research.” Mind, Culture and Activity 18: 161–180.
[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar])
which is done in a new way in the Change Room, the study reported in this paper.
In the Change Room an action research group of 21 professionals in an upper
secondary school in Iceland went through an expansive learning cycle for two school
years from 2009 to 2011. The participants in the Change Room were around 30% of the
staff members of the school these years, with teaching experience ranging from 0 to
over 30 years and teach 10 different subjects; Biology, Chemistry, Citizenship, Danish,
English, Geology, History, Icelandic, Mathematics and Physics. There were also two
assistant school-leaders and one school counsellor in the group. The focus was on the
challenges or tensions that teachers are currently confronting in their practice and future
opportunities for classroom practice with the aim of increasing students’ sense of
responsibility for their learning.
The school, which will be referred to as Sjávarsíðuskólinn, is in Reykjavík, the capital
city of Iceland. There are 780 students in the school, 16–20 years old with about an
equal number of boys and girls. The main aim of the school is to prepare students for
further education at university level. Studies are organised over four years towards final
matriculation exams. Students can choose between two academic programmes, social
sciences and natural sciences.
In this article, I present the methodology of the Change Room and the main findings
regarding participants’ action research projects. All names of the participants and the
school are anonymised in this article. All participants’ projects were successful and the
examples given in this article are chosen to illustrate both changes in teaching and
assessment methods from different teaching subjects. In the first three sections of this
article I describe the methodology and the theoretical background of the research i.e.
action research, activity theory and the expansive learning cycle. In the latter three
sections I describe the findings i.e. the main conflicts found in classroom practice at
present; the main themes of action research projects of the individual participants in the
Change Room, active learning of students and listening to students’ voices; and how
the group experienced going through the expansive learning cycle. Finally, I discuss the
process and findings of the research in the Change Room, implications for further
research and attempt to answer the question if activity theory can productively be used
with action research to enhance professional development. This article is based on my
research for a Doctoral dissertation (Thorgeirsdottir 2016 Thorgeirsdottir, H. 2016.
Investigating the Use of Action Research and Activity Theory to Promote the
Professional Development of Teachers in Iceland. Doctorial thesis from University of
Iceland and University of Exeter.
http://hdl.handle.net/1946/23886. [Google Scholar]).
Theoretical background and methodologyIn my research, I combined activity theory, Change Laboratory and action research. I
believe that action research and activity theory provide some important insights into
learning that is valuable for professional development and school improvement. Both
action research and the Change Laboratory have been used to guide change in the
workplace and both suggest a methodology where researchers take an active part in
the activity system under study and in the transformation or changes in practice
(Engeström 1999a Engeström, Y. 1999a. “Activity Theory and Individual and Social
Transformation.” In Perspectives on Activity Theory, edited by Y. Engeström, R.
Miettinen, and R. Punamäki, 19–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[Crossref], [Google Scholar], 35; McNiff and Whitehead 2006 McNiff, J., and J.
Whitehead. 2006. All You Need to Know about Action Research. London:
Sage. [Google Scholar]). Activity theory provides a conceptual framework and tools to
analyse what changes are needed and wanted in classroom practice and action
research provides an approach to guide the participants when carrying out and
evaluating these changes.
Activity theory as developed by Yrjö Engeström (Engeström 2001 Engeström, Y. 2001.
“Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an Activity Theoretical Reconceptualization.”
Journal of Education and Work 14 (1): 133–156.
[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Engeström and Sannino 2010 Engeström,
Y., and A. Sannino. 2010. “Studies of Expansive Learning: Foundations, Findings and
Future Challenges.” Educational Research Review 5 (1): 1–24.
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]) looks at the workplace as an activity
system with complex interrelations amongst people and the surroundings within a social
and cultural context. The activity system changes over time and contradictions are the
main sources of change within the system.
The Change Laboratory is one type of developmental work research methodology
advanced by Engeström for the expansive learning of researcher and participants in
cooperating to create new activity at work (Pihlaja 2005 Pihlaja, J. 2005. Learning in
and for Production. Department of Education, University of Helsinki. Accessed May 29,
2009.
http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/kay/kasva/vk/pihlaja/ [Google Scholar], 185). It is based
on Engeström’s theory of the cycle of expansive learning (1999bEngeström, Y. 1999b.
“Innovative Learning in Work Teams: Analyzing Cycles of Knowledge Creation in
Practice.” In Perspectives on Activity Theory, edited by Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, and
R. Punamäki, 377–404. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Crossref], [Google
Scholar], 384) and on Vygotsky’s method of double stimulation where participants are
put in a structured situation and provided with active stimulus or tools to construct new
solutions to problems they are facing in their workplace (Engeström 2007 Engeström, Y.
2007. “Putting Vygosky to work: The Change Laboratory as an Application of Double
Stimulation.” In The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky, edited by H. Daniels, H. Cole
and J. V. Wertsch, 363–382. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[Crossref], [Google Scholar], 364). In the Change Laboratory, we have a double
stimulation. The first stimulus is the data from the work place and the second stimulus is
the conceptual framework of activity system. Contradictions are the necessary power of
expansive learning and contradictions are the driving force of change within the activity
system according to the activity theory (Engeström 2001, 2007 Engeström, Y. 2001.
“Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an Activity Theoretical Reconceptualization.”
Journal of Education and Work 14 (1): 133–156.
Engeström, Y. 2007. “Putting Vygosky to work: The Change Laboratory as an
Application of Double Stimulation.” In The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky, edited
by H. Daniels, H. Cole and J. V. Wertsch, 363–382. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.; Edwards 2008 Edwards, A. 2008. “Activity Theory and Small-Scale Intervention
in Schools.” Journal of Educational Change 9: 375–378.[Crossref], [Google Scholar];
Engeström and Sannino 2010 Engeström, Y., and A. Sannino. 2010. “Studies of
Expansive Learning: Foundations, Findings and Future Challenges.” Educational
Research Review 5 (1): 1–24.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar];
Johannsdottir 2010 Johannsdottir, T. 2010. “Deviations from the Conventional:
Contradictions as Sources of Change in Teacher Education.” In Cultural-Historical
Perspectives on Teacher Education and Development: Learning Teaching, edited by V.
Ellis, A. Edwards, and P. Smagorinsky, 163–179. London: Routledge. [Google
Scholar]). It is important for people engaged in expansive learning to identify and
discuss the manifestations of contradictions within the activity system of the learners.
The notion of action research has a long history and has been influenced by many
researchers. My own approach is based on the ideas of Jean McNiff. It places the
individual ‘I’ at the centre of an inquiry with the question: How can I improve my
practice? But the individual sees him/herself always in relation to other people whether
or not they are present in time and space (McNiff and Whitehead 2006 McNiff, J., and J.
Whitehead. 2006. All You Need to Know about Action Research. London:
Sage. [Google Scholar]; McNiff 2010 McNiff, J. 2010. Action Research for Professional
Development. Dorset: September Books. [Google Scholar]). The individuals go through
the action-reflection cycle, the process of ‘observe – reflect – act – evaluate – modify –
move in new directions’ (McNiff and Whitehead 2006 McNiff, J., and J. Whitehead.
2006. All You Need to Know about Action Research. London: Sage. [Google Scholar],
9). The process is on-going as when you have reached a provisional conclusion, that
point itself will have raised a new question and the cycle starts again. The aim is to
improve practice and generate a new educational theory of practice. A really powerful
starting point is when the practitioners experience and recognise tensions because their
values are denied in practice (Whitehead and McNiff 2006
Whitehead, J., and J. McNiff. 2006. Action Research Living Theory. London: Sage.
[Crossref], [Google Scholar]). When we experience tension because our values and
practice are in conflict, it is important not only to be critical, but to go beyond that and
take a step forward to change the situation and shape our future (McNiff 2007 McNiff, J.
2007. “Action Research for Cultural Renewal.” Paper Presented at the Conference
Challenges and Opportunities within Practitioner Research. Accessed September 10,
2010. http://www.jeanmcniff.com/items.asp?id=21 [Google Scholar]). It is our social
responsibility to try to change our educational practice so we can find ways to make it
more in line with our educational values.
The meetings of action research groups provide a space for teachers to discuss their
work, introduce their own educational theories and how they experience conflict
between their values and the practice (McNiff and Whitehead 2006 McNiff, J., and J.
Whitehead. 2006. All You Need to Know about Action Research. London:Sage. [Google
Scholar]). The activity theory and the Change laboratory provides the tools, the
conceptual framework and historical analysis to understand the tensions and conflicts
teachers experience in the classroom and to analyse what changes are needed to try to
solve these tensions (Engeström 2007 Engeström, Y. 2007. “Putting Vygosky to work:
The Change Laboratory as an Application of Double Stimulation.” In The Cambridge
Companion to Vygotsky, edited by H. Daniels, H. Cole and J. V. Wertsch, 363–382.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.[Crossref], [Google Scholar]).
The Change RoomThe action research group in Sjávarsíðuskólinn began in 2005 and we have had the
same outside consultant from the start, Dr. Hafthor Gudjonsson from the School of
Education at the University of Iceland. The outside consultant’s role is very important
and positive within the action research group and it continued to be so in the Change
Room. He took part in the discussions at the meetings, gave participants feedback on
their presentations of action research projects and occasionally connected the
discussion to pedagogical concepts or theories. He was encouraging, rephrasing,
questioning and often he pointed out a way forward for individual action research
projects. He does what Postholm and Skrovset (2013 Postholm, M.B., and S. Skrovset.
2013. “The Researcher Reflecting on Her Own Role during Action Research.”
Educational Action Research 21 (4): 506–518. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google
Scholar]) argue to be one of the most important tasks for the outside researcher who
works with action research practitioners and that is to articulate the positive side of
things in order to build up a good atmosphere characterised by trust.
Between 2009 and 2011 the action research group worked on a special project, The
Change Room, in which we connected action research and the conceptual framework of
activity theory. We held 19 meetings in the Change Room and one follow up meeting.
Group members interviewed each other about the past history of the school and their
experience of changes in classroom practice through the years, held small group
discussions about classroom practice in the present, and introduced and discussed
ideas of participants’ action research projects. A total of 15 presentations took place of
action research projects.
In the Change Laboratory outside researchers go into the workplace and do
ethnographic research, identify tensions and conflicts and provide the material for
discussions at the group meetings (first stimuli). In our Change Room the participants
themselves provided material at the meetings from their own teaching experience in
Sjávarsíðuskólinn. Being in the role of a Doctoral student intending to explore the
activities of the Change Room, I had the task of organising the work in the Change
Room, transcribing the interviews and the meetings and applying the conceptual
framework of the activity theory (second stimuli). The main tensions were depicted in
the activity system and the action research projects were visualised in the activity
system of the classroom.
The Change Room also differs in another way from the Change Laboratory i.e. in the
Change Laboratory the whole group works together to find one solution to solve a
conflict and the whole group tries out that new form of practice. In the Change Room the
group has the overall aim of changing their teaching practice to enhance students’
sense of responsibility for their studies. Individual teachers try out different ways to
reach that aim, meaning that many new working methods were piloted. The
individualisation of the changes in practice i.e. the participants’ different solutions to
solve the same tension in practice reflects the autonomy of teachers in the classroom
and the necessity for them to have ownership of research to experience the
empowerment of action research (Kjartansdottir 2010 Kjartansdottir,
2010. “Starfendarannsóknir til valdeflingar. Með rannsóknum á starfi sínu geta kennarar
öðlast vald yfir þekkingunni á fagi sínu.” [Action Research as an empowering tool:
teachers who research their work will get more power over the knowledge their
profession is built on]. Ráðstefnurit Netlu. Menntakvika 2010: 1–9.
[Google Scholar]; Gudjonsson 2013 Gudjonsson, H. 2013. “Action Research in Iceland:
Glimpses and Reflections.” In Value and Virtue in Practice –Based Research, edited by
J. McNiff, 43–53. Poole: September Books. [Google Scholar]).
Although the action research projects consist of individuals’ work, the group as a whole
also went together through a collective learning process, the expansive learning cycle,
which we now turn to.
The expansive learning cycle in the Change RoomEngeström’s work (2001 Engeström, Y. 2001. “Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an
Activity Theoretical Reconceptualization.” Journal of Education and Work 14 (1): 133–
156. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar], 2007 Engeström, Y. 2007. “Putting
Vygosky to work: The Change Laboratory as an Application of Double Stimulation.” In
The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky, edited by H. Daniels, H. Cole and J. V.
Wertsch, 363–382. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Crossref], [Google
Scholar]), suggests that, if changes or transformations in the workplace as an activity
system are going to happen, the staff group needs to go together through the expansive
learning cycle and changes take place from action to activity as shown in Figure 1. The
first step is acceptance of the need for changes. In the second step, the group looks at
the history of the practice in the workplace and what tensions they are confronting in the
workplace. For the third step, the participants put forward ideas about changes they
want to make in their practice and in the fourth step, these ideas are developed further
and tried out on the fifth step. On the sixth step the new working method is evaluated
and reflected on and for the final step the new working method is confirmed and
introduced to others in the workplace. In the Change Room the aim was for the action
research group to go together through the expansive learning cycle as is shown in
Figure 1.
Figure 1. The expansive learning cycle in the Change Room. Source: Adapted from
Engeström (2001, 2007 Engeström, Y. 2001. “Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an
Activity Theoretical Reconceptualization.” Journal of Education and Work 14 (1): 133–
156. Engeström, Y. 2007. “Putting Vygosky to work: The Change Laboratory as an
Application of Double Stimulation.” In The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky, edited
by H. Daniels, H. Cole and J. V. Wertsch, 363–382. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.).
Display full size
QuestioningFrom September to November 2009 there were general discussions about the teaching
practice at present and I presented the activity theory to the group. The overall aim of
the project was to find new ways to increase the students’ sense of responsibility for
their learning in the school.
Historical analysisIn December 2009, the participants interviewed each other in pairs about the changes in
Sjávarsíðuskólinn from past to present. In February 2010, I gave them the transcriptions
of their interviews and my interpretation of the interviews by using Engeström’s activity
system framework and identified tensions within the activity system of the school. Then
we discussed the findings both in small groups and in the group, as a whole.
Modelling the new solutionIn February 2010, October 2010 and in February 2011 all the participants presented
their ideas about changes in classroom practice i.e. the action research projects they
were planning or already working on.
Mist (50+ Icelandic 22) explained her change in teaching methods by pointing at a
tension regarding the coverage of lesson material:
This winter I am going to change the methods in the history of literature in the fourth
grade, there is tension as there is a lot of material covered but I doubt that a lot of it
really lasts. Group work, … in a care home for the elderly … The aim is to bring
generations together and do this more alive in order to create a reality, something
different from this stone dead schooling. (Meeting, 6 October 2010)
Alternatively, Sandra’s (40+ History 20) action research project is influenced by her
collaboration with teachers in Europe who are putting emphasis on students’ active
learning:
I am looking at students’ activity and methods and collecting material that will be partly
interactive and I will try that out this winter. I am participating in a European
collaborative project with History teachers that is being developed, called ‘Historiana’. I
am in a group that is working with a theme called ‘Rights and Responsibility’. (Meeting,
6 October 2010)
Examining the new modelThe group and the outside consultant responded to the ideas. From now on the
individuals really began to focus on the tensions in classroom practice.
Implementing the new modelDuring a two years’ period, from autumn 2009 to May 2011, each participant in the
Change Room carried out his or her action research project trying to find new ways to
increase students’ responsibility for their learning. Each teacher went through the action
research cycle of observe, reflect, act, evaluate and modify.
Reflecting and evaluating the processFrom March 2010 to May 2011 individuals presented their action research projects at
group meetings in the Change Room. As indicated earlier, my role was to transcribe the
meetings and visualise the action research projects in the activity system of the
classroom from the perspective of the teacher as the subject. The outcome of that work
was presented to the teacher and the group at the next meeting and discussed by the
group.
Consolidating the practiceWe are just arriving at this stage of the cycle. The action research group comprises
about 30% of the staff group and has just started to introduce their new working
methods to the whole staff community. That work is not finished and we have yet to see
how many teachers will try them out and which of the new working methods will prove
successful in the long run at system level and transformation of practice take place.
At a meeting in February 2011 the group discussed the use of the activity system of the
classroom to visualise two of the action research projects of Rakel and Jónas in the
activity system of the classroom.
Rakel:
I find it very enjoyable to see it like this. Dagmar: Very smart. HafÞór: What do you say
Jónas? Jónas: Very much so. I need though more time to consider this. Are the subjects
perhaps more than just the teacher? I am not sure. I think this is great. Very enjoyable
analysis of the tensions in the system. Very smart, I am very pleased. HafÞór: Very
smart to see so many threads together in one picture. Jónas: Very good to create a
schema for many variables. Rakel: This works similar as mind maps. Dagmar: Yes,
exactly. Mist: This is a direct methodology to mirror our practice but perhaps I don’t
need to say it, but it has rather unpleasant effects on me, especially the triangle and the
arrows up and down, I don’t have this thinking in me. … Dagmar: I agree with Rakel, I
see this as a mind map because in some kind of pictorial form but I also understand that
this has unpleasant effects because these are aggressive picture form, spear, caution
and danger. Question if it is possible to make the forms softer? Petra: It is perhaps
possible to find another symbol for tensions other than the lightening, some flowers?
Dagmar: Pictures influence us, on the emotional spectrum. Elísabet: Perhaps a spiral?
Jónas: Should the flowers not rather be seeds? Actually I think that these are really
beautiful shapes for me and do not shock me. … People who have an interest in
pictures can change the picture so we would have some flower and some form that is
not aggressive. The only thing one can do is to recreate it with forms that you are
equally found of. Finnur: Can I then ask for roses and thorns (Meeting, 3 February
2011).
Here we can see how people’s attention is directed at the tensions and also how they
link the picture of the activity system of the classroom to a mind map, a tool they are
familiar with. This can be viewed as their way of transferring knowledge in order to
understand better the conceptual framework of the activity system.
It is a collective process going through the expansive learning process described here
above where both individual and collective learning takes place. A double stimulation
drives the learning process (Engeström 2007 Engeström, Y. 2007. “Putting Vygosky to
work: The Change Laboratory as an Application of Double Stimulation.” In The
Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky, edited by H. Daniels, H. Cole and J. V. Wertsch,
363–382. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]), the
first stimuli being the data from the participants action research projects and the second
stimuli the conceptual framework of the activity system of the classroom. The double
stimulation enables the participants to use outside resources to influence their learning
process and thereby their behaviour (Sannino 2011 Sannino, A. 2011. “Activity Theory
as an Activist and Interventionist Theory.” Theory and Psychology 21 (5): 571–597.
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]). The intended outcome of expansive
learning is the participants’ ability and will to shape their learning and agency to change
their practice (Sannino 2011 Sannino, A. 2011. “Activity Theory as an Activist and
Interventionist Theory.” Theory and Psychology 21 (5): 571–597. [Crossref], [Web of
Science ®], [Google Scholar]). The learning process within the Change Room is a
combination of modalities of individual and collective learning. Individual learning
through affirmation from the group members and transferability of others action
research projects in discussions at the meetings in the Change Room leads to changes
in the personal, -professional theory of practice. Collective learning through
collaborative analysis of tensions in the practice at the group meetings has led to
increased agency of the participants enabling them to make changes in their practice.
The learning process was directed at the classroom practice. I will now describe the
activity system of the classroom in general and the tensions the participants
experienced within the activity system of the classroom.
The activity system of the classroomThe activity system is the unit of analysis. The school is a network of interconnected
activity systems with the activity system of the classroom in the forefront (see Figure 2).
The activity system of the classroom is shown here from the perspective of the Subject,
the teacher. The Object is the students or the students’ learning. The Tools are cultural
instruments, both material and mental instruments that fundamentally shape the actions
of the subject, for example computers and the subject’s ideas about the process of
learning. The tools mediate between the teacher and the student and learning takes
place. Engeström’s (2001 Engeström, Y. 2001. “Expansive Learning at Work: Toward
an Activity Theoretical Reconceptualization.” Journal of Education and Work 14 (1):
133–156. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]) activity system also includes the
collective dimension and draws attention to the complex interrelations between the
subject and the social and cultural context. The Rules refer to the values and regulation
of action and interaction of subjects, for example the school curriculum, the laws
concerning secondary education, the time table. The Community is the group having an
influence or an interest in the same object i.e. the students of each class, the teacher’ s
subject department, the action research group and sometimes other parties inside and
outside the school. The Division of labour refers to the division of tasks and power
relations within the classroom, both vertically and horizontally between teachers and
students. The traditional roles are the active teacher with the power and authority and
the passive powerless students who are receivers of knowledge. The desired outcome
of the system is competent students with competence and the ability to move on to
further education and work and become responsible citizens of society as shown in
Figure 2.
Figure 2. The activity system of the classroom in Sjávarsíðuskólinn. Source: Adapted
from Engeström (2001 Engeström, Y. 2001. “Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an
Activity Theoretical Reconceptualization.” Journal of Education and Work 14 (1): 133–
156. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]).
Display full size
By adding the elements of Rules, Community and Division of labour Engeström
emphasises the social aspects of the activity and calls for analysis of the interactions of
these elements with each other. Activity theory draws our attention to possible tensions
within the activity system which are the sources for change or transformations according
to Engeström (Engeström and Sannino 2010 Engeström, Y., and A. Sannino. 2010.
“Studies of Expansive Learning: Foundations, Findings and Future Challenges.”
Educational Research Review 5 (1): 1–24.
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]).
Tensions in the activity system of the classroomThe focus of this study is the contradictions or tensions in the classroom as experienced
by the subject i.e. the teacher. The tensions are viewed simultaneously as a sign of
need for change, and as a constructive mechanism for change since by addressing
these tensions the resolutions may contribute to the school’s development i.e. changes
in classroom practice.
Based on what teachers said in their presentations of action research projects and
discussions at meetings in the Change Room, I have identified three main tensions that
the teachers experienced in the activity system of the classroom. These are all tensions
between different elements within the activity system of the classroom.
Subject – toolsFirst, there is a tension between one and two-way communication or between didactic
and dialogic teaching methods. Is the teacher a provider of subject knowledge or a
supervisor and facilitator of active learning?
Nanna, the teacher says:
This one-way communication isn’t working at all so I am trying out various methods. … I
feel that one really needs to contest it because I have just finished my teachers’ training
course where I learned about different theories that one-way communication does not
work but never the less I am up there feeling that I need to tell them everything. One
needs to contest and stop this as it is not working, and to do it somehow differently.
Elísabet, the teacher explains:
I have now the courage to try out different ways of teaching. I remember that in the
beginning I was extremely scared of group work, I just got goose bumps. I was just
down in the dumps, got into the class and let them govern themselves. I found it so
difficult, I just wanted to spoon-feed them. It just had to be so that I needed to spoon-
feed them, each one in his/her own corner. I am improving and I know I can improve
even more in this field, I know that definitely. This is a slow process …
In order to solve this tension the teachers feel they need to move from one way
communication or the lecture method towards two way communication that involves
various teaching and learning methods that activate students’ learning actions.
Subject – rulesSecond there is tension between the demand to cover the syllabus and a sense of
urgency for deep learning. The demand, both formal and informal, is that teachers cover
all the material in the course according to the school’s curriculum of Sjávarsíðuskólinn
and according to the syllabus or teaching plan of the term in the course. But that
demand is often in conflict with the view of many teachers in the Change Room that
‘Less is more’, i.e. they tend to think that it is more useful for students to cover less
material and dig deeper into it. That learning process will able students to learn material
in a different way and a more self-directed way than otherwise is possible.
Elísabet, the teacher says:
The demand is to cover all the material according to the curriculum. … You get anxious
that you need to cover all the material and that means you lack time; you push it hard
and have less time for the students to work with the material themselves.
Helena, the teacher says:
I think it is worth considering if we don’t need to start thinking about giving us more
space for the learning material rather than instilling all the material in such a short time.
Rakel, the teacher says:
You often experience that when you try to move from the lecture method then your
coverage of the material slows down.
Object – toolsThirdly, there is tension between students as passive or active learners. Is the student
in the role of a knowledge receiver or is s/he a responsible active and creative learner?
This tension appears according to the teachers for example in variations in students’
school attendance, homework, activity in classroom work and attitudes to their studies.
Helena, the teacher says:
My action research is twofold but both projects relate to the same issue, students’ active
learning. I don’t like certain conditions when teaching in the classroom. My experience
tells me and you probably recognize this that when I am giving lectures the students too
often relax in their chairs and take a pause. I also see lack of students’ homework as a
serious problem. They don’t read their schoolbooks at home, they turn up unprepared in
class and that violates the prerequisite for covering the teaching material in the class. I
am experiencing myself more and more often as a reteller from A to Z.
Figure 3 gives an overview of these three main tensions in the activity system of the
classroom in Sjávarsíðuskólinn and shows where the tensions are placed within the
activity system.
Figure 3. Tensions in the activity system of the classroom in Sjávarsíðuskólinn. Source:
Adapted from Engeström (2001 Engeström, Y. 2001. “Expansive Learning at Work:
Toward an Activity Theoretical Reconceptualization.” Journal of Education and Work 14
(1): 133–156. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]).
Display full size
Building on discussions at the meetings and participants presentations and reports of
action research projects in the Change Room, two themes have emerged with
considerable force. There is a clear willingness amongst the teachers first, to enhance
students’ active learning and second to listen to students’ voices. Now I turn to
presenting these themes.
Teachers’ changes in classroom practiceStudents as active learnersThe theme of students’ active learning is described for example by students’ ownership
of learning and students’ boundary-crossing during the learning process.
Helena, a teacher put selected students’ material on the intra net in Sjávarsíðuskólinn
where all the students could access it as learning material. This material was chosen by
the teacher and students, examples from students’ products, students’ answers to
assignments and students’ notes from lectures. Helena, the teacher pointed out that the
students were editing their own learning material. This databank was called ‘Interesting
in the eyes of the students’.
Helena, the teacher says:
That material became part of learning material for an exam and it had positive effects.
Students saw it rewarding to get their name in the databank; it made them proud and
had positive effects.
A month later, Helena said at a meeting in the Change Room:
At our last meeting, I told you about the students’ Databank and now I have given the
students an exam. I would like to point out that the exam questions which I asked
directly from material in the Databank gave far far the best results on the exam. This is
their own and it has so much impact’.
This indicates that the students saw the Databank as a useful tool for learning and
through it they experienced having influence on their learning environment that gave
them a feeling of ownership of their learning.
Another way to encourage active student learning was out of school learning experience
i.e. students’ boundary-crossing out of the traditional classroom to another territory, for
example going on field trips, school visits to foreign countries and expeditions to
institutions.
One example was students’ leaving the classroom and entering the real world,
experiencing a new social encounter in a care home for the elderly. Students from two
classes in the fourth school-year visited the care home and discussed in pairs, with one
resident to each pair of students. There were three visits, two discussions about the
resident’s life and their experience of literature and poems and in the last visit the
students gave the resident their written report about the project.
The aim was to bridge the gap between generations and give the students an
opportunity to connect their studies of the history of Icelandic literature with the life-
history and experience of people born early in the twentieth century.
Mist, the teacher says:
The aim is to see if the old people can give the students a new understanding from a
different standpoint in their learning. … The aim is of course to break the generation gap
in a way. I feel that these kids are looked in their world of equal age group and equals.
They talk together on Facebook and their world becomes closed because they spend so
much time only with each other.
And Mist connected together the visits to the care home and the classes in school by
letting the students prepare their visits in class and giving an oral report on their visits in
class and the class discussed their experience.
Mist says:
What has been most successful is to see a new side of the students. New sides, how
well they are doing and how good they are in presenting when they tell the class about
their visit. And a certain empathy and warmth is created in the group when they discuss
this. And of course, they also make jokes and have a laugh about it, and I think it is
alright … I think there is a beautiful spirit around it.
In class the students also gave anonymous answers about their experience of this
project between the visits. In most cases the answers were positive although some
found it too time-consuming and talked about not being able to connect it with their
learning for the final exam. The following is an example of an answer from a student
that pointed out the positive effects before the last visit to the care home:
I found the project beautiful. It was fun to talk to the old people and to be able to make
them happy with our visit. I felt it nice to get to know someone who had a story to tell,
someone outside the family. The project was a great success and looked very well.
In Figure 4, Mist’s action research project is visualised in the activity system of the
classroom where both the tensions are shown in the oval shaped boxes and the tools
used when trying to solve these tensions through changes in classroom practice and
factors influencing that process are shown in rectangle boxes. Mist is moving from one
way to two-way communication and introducing new tool i.e. students’ project work to
increase active student’s learning to solve the tension between students as passive
victims and students as active creative learners. Her teacher’s agency is increasing, she
has become a risk taker in her work and her style is changing from being a provider of
knowledge into a facilitator of students’ creative learning.
Figure 4. Activity system of the classroom. Active and creative learning.
Display full size
Listening to students’ voices
It is important to listen to the students’ voices to be able to develop and improve
classroom practice. The aim of listening to students’ voices is to enhance their self-
esteem as learners and increase their ambition and longing to succeed. It is a
democratic process to listen to students’ voices and it increases the likelihood that they
experience a feeling of belonging to our learning community (Fielding 2007 Fielding, M.
2007. “Jean Rudduck (1937–2007) ‘Carving a new order of experience’: A Preliminary
Appreciation of the Work of Jean Rudduck in the Field of Student Voice.” Educational
Action Research 15 (3): 323–336. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]).
Students’ voices may be actualised in various ways, for example by activating their
ideas, by students’ evaluation of the teaching and learning and allowing students to
make decisions about assessment. All these methods enable the students to influence
their learning environment, for example it can lead to changes in teaching methods,
changes in time frame for exams or the composition of assessment.
Mist said that the students’ answers gave a valuable insight into the personal effect of
the teaching material on the students but she took it one step further. Mist took the
students’ answers to questions about a novel they were reading and turned it into
teaching material by putting the answers on power point slides and used it in the class
conversation about the novel.
Mist said:
And by making a power point show of their anonymous answers and showing it to the
class I could use their own ‘voices’ as a platform for an open discussion in the class as
well. And by putting their answers all together in such a context it also became a
collective knowledge for the class as a whole and a new dimension in understanding,
criticising and expressing the reading of the novel.
See Figure 4 for interpretation of Mist’s action research in the activity system of the
classroom.
Listening to students’ voices was also done through the student’s evaluation of the
teaching and learning both in general and evaluation specifically of the new methods
teachers were trying out in their action research projects. They used both open and
closed questions in questionnaires or discussions with the students in the classroom. It
can be seen from the teachers’ presentations of their action research projects in the
Change Room that student’s evaluation has increasingly become a part of their action
research projects.
Elísabet says about the consultations with her students:
I took a pause every now and then, just stopped and asked: What are you learning?
What do you think of the teaching? What are my pros and cons? What are your
attitudes towards the subject? I think what matters the most is the voice of the student,
that he or she has a saying. It also matters for the class spirit that they feel their
perspective valued.
Listening to students’ voices was also done through individualising students’
assessment in a course in Mathematics. Jonas, the teacher, named this innovative
assessment procedure alpha – beta – gamma (αβγ) when the composition of student’s
assessment varies between individual students. The students could choose between
three different weights of final exam and semester work. Firstly, alpha (α) with the final
exam weighting 70% and the semester work 30%. Secondly, beta (β) with the final
exam weighting 60% and the semester work weighting 40% of the final grade. And
thirdly, gamma (γ) with the final exam and term work both weighting 50% each in the
final grade.
This idea came about from the teacher’s reaction to a conflict or a tension over the
assessment results in the autumn term especially the exam results. In class discussion
about the assessment one student asked if the assessment could not be different
between the students? The first reaction from the other students was rejection but
Jónas, the teacher, decided to consider it further and he developed the idea of alpha –
beta – gamma (αβγ) some weeks later and carried it out for the first time that same
term. The next school-year, Jónas carried alpha – beta – gamma (αβγ) out again in the
same course but now from the beginning of the autumn term and he concluded that the
results of the exams were very good in both instances and almost all the students
choose the best composition for themselves. Jónas said about the latter experience:
This was great. … The anxiety had disappeared from the group and that led to that the
group did rather well. We worked similarly in the spring term. … The aim is to influence
how people work during the term and increase by that active learning during the classes
and the other aim is to lessen the exam anxiety.
One can conclude that alpha – beta – gamma (αβγ) is a promising tool that may enable
teachers to come up with more democratic forms of assessment. Alpha – beta – gamma
(αβγ) may also enhance teachers and students’ communication about assessment and
increase students’ sense of responsibility for their learning. Each student needs to
reflect on what kind of a student he or she is and what kind of weighting of components
in the final grade of the course is best suited for him or her. See Figure 5, where Jónas’
action research project is visualised in the activity system of the classroom where both
the tensions are shown in oval shaped boxes and the tools used when trying to solve
these tensions through changes in classroom practice and factors influencing that
process are shown in rectangle boxes. Jonas is increasing cooperation with students on
assessment and creating an individual form of assessment to solve the tension around
exam results and students as passive and active learners. He is listening to students’
voices through discussions with students or as Jonas described it:
My vision is that successful teaching involves dialogue with students. Dialogue about
teaching methods, assignments, assessment and the object of learning. It was dialogue
and consultation with students that led to alpha – beta – gamma (αβγ)
Figure 5. Activity system of the classroom. Alpha – beta – gamma.
Display full size
Participants’ evaluation of the Change RoomAt the last meeting in the Change Room in May 2011, eleven participants, anonymously
evaluated their experience in the Change Room by answering a questionnaire with both
open and closed questions. The answers to the first seven closed questions evolved
around the Change Room and showed a very positive attitude towards it as nine
teachers were very satisfied and two were satisfied. As is shown in Figure 6, the
participants were especially positive towards the meetings and the focus on tensions in
classroom practice. They were also positive although less positive regarding the
influence of the Change Room on their action research projects and the usefulness of
the analysis of the action research projects in the activity system of the classroom.
Figure 6. Participants’ evaluation of the Change Room.
Display full size
There were also open questions about influence of the Change Room on attitude to the
practice, influence of the Change Room on action research and positive and negative
influence of participation in the Change Room. In the answers to the open questions
teachers emphasised learning from the presentations of others’ action research
projects. One participant said:
You learn a lot from others action research projects and it is good to see it within the
activity system, it shows you the basic parts of the work that we are all dealing with in
our teaching.
They also valued the focus on conflicts or tensions in classroom practice. As one
participant put it:
I understand better tensions in the teacher’s job and how outside factors influence
Sjávarsíðuskólinn.
Some participants clearly appreciated the input of the activity theory in the Change
Room, which helped them to see their work in a larger perspective and to analyse their
situation. That was confirmed at the follow up meeting in September 2011 as some of
the participants and the outside consultant pointed out positive effects of visualising the
action research projects in the activity system of the classroom.
HafÞór (Outside consultant) concluded:
I just think that I have seen in your data, as I have read them, that people are seeing
themselves in a larger context. That this helps people to see themselves in a larger
perspective, this Change Room and the activity theory. These figures we have been
looking at. The rules, division of labour and all that. This opens up. I think people are
saying that.
Some of the participants also saw it as a tool for analysing. Finnur explained.
What seems to me perhaps is that the Change Room has been welcomed at the table
with us in our discussions. And it becomes for us in some way a tool for analysing.
When you start to mirror yourself in this analysing tool it creates an extra dimension in
our conversations and our own experience of ourselves. …
Nanna explained:
I think this is an instrument for analysis. One is performing something and you can think:
Yes, I am doing this and there is tension here. I am fighting the curriculum or trying to
cover the material or something like that. This puts it on paper. I am always fighting this
because of the tension between these two factors. I think this helps me to analyse
myself.
This indicates the importance of the discussions about tensions in the practice and how
that helped the participants to better understand their teaching situation.
Two participants in the Change Room made use of activity theory in their presentations
of their research, Jónas in his presentation on ‘alpha, beta gamma’ at a conference on
school development in Reykjavík and Ingunn in her report and journal article in Netla,
on her project, ‘Actual attendance’.
Ingunn argued:
Each activity system has a community, certain rules, division of labour and tools and
within each institution we have many activity systems. The activity system of
Sjávarsíðuskólinn is multivoiced and as has been discussed here before the attitudes of
the subject (teachers and staff) and the object (i.e. students) do not go hand in hand
concerning actual attendance. Tension between subject and object appears clearly
when we look at the school as an activity system. It is necessary to consider the
reasons for the tension and find ways to resolve the tension in order to enhance the
schooling. (Erlingsdóttir 2012 Erlingsdóttir, S. 2012. “Raunmæting „fær fólk til að skrópa
minna“. Starfendarannsókn um viðhorf starfsfólks of nemenda til nýrrar
skólasóknarreglu í Menntaskólanum við Sund. [Actual attendence “makes people less
likely to skip class”. Action research on staffs’ and students’ attitudes towards a new
attendence rule in Sund College]. Ráðstefnurit Netlu Menntakvika, 2012: 1–17.
http://netla.hi.is/menntakvika2012/alm/004.pdf.[Google Scholar], 14)
But I also found voices of doubt about the usefulness of the activity theory. One
participant said in the evaluation:
The form and the theory around the Change Room were unattractive at the beginning.
An obstacle that I had to overcome.
This is in line with experience of traditional Change Laboratories in Finland where
participants find it difficult to understand activity theory and activity systems (Virkkunen
as cited in Roth and Lee 2007Roth, W.M., and Y.J. Lee. 2007. “‘Vygotsky’s Neglected
Legacy’: Cultural-historical Activity Theory.” Review of Educational Research 77 (2):
186–232. [Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar], 213; Virkkunen and
Newnham 2013 Virkkunen, J., and D.S. Newnham. 2013. The Change Laboratory. A
Tool for Collaborative Development of Work and Education. Rotterdam: Sense
Publisher. [Google Scholar]). I also found within the action research group a tension
between praxis and theory. One participant expressed doubts of the relevance of
activity theory to his practice.
Bjarki said:
There is nothing wrong with us being focused on the praxis, we are practitioners. We
like to do something that shows results quickly. We are not creating grand theories as
such. We like to do something that can be seen tomorrow or the next day. That is our
role.
The most common complaint (six persons) in the participants’ evaluation of the Change
Room was lack of time, both for individual work and meetings. Here are examples from
the participants’ anonymous answers:
… we are always running out of time at the meetings.
Perhaps often shortage of time to reflect on one’s work …
Mainly shortage of time but that is nothing new.
Timing of the group meetings not convenient.
Shortage of time.
When asked to give examples about the influence of the Change Room on their
attitudes towards their work, the participants gave examples of positive influences. They
pointed out that it gave them agency to change their practice. Individual agency in
relation to action research has been described as ‘the capability of a self to take actions
that will have impact on a social situation’ (Somekh 2006 Somekh, B. 2006. Action
Research a Methodology for Change and Development. Maidenhead: Open University
Press. [Google Scholar], 15).
Here are three examples of individual agency from the Change Room:
Instead of being stuck in a routine, I am always thinking about new and better methods
to make students more active in their learning.
I am much more conscious and more ready to respond and even completely change
things around, – my attitude has moved more in the direction of seeing teaching as a
relaxed work done in cooperation with students.
It has both helped me to realise my limitations to influence things and also to notice
possibilities for improvements.
They also expressed the view of the positive influence of the action research group
during the research process in the Change Room. In the pair interviews about changes
from the past to the present in Sjávarsíðuskólinn, 11 of 18 participants mentioned the
action research group as a positive change within the community of Sjávarsíðuskólinn.
Here is one example:
I feel a positive experience of a change in my work being this group. I have been a
member of the group for four years. … So, if I compare it with the past I think it is a
provider of vitamin that you can rely on, cross curriculum from different teaching
subjects.
In the presentations of their action research projects some of the participants described
themselves as change agents and described the changes they had made in classroom
practice in general terms.
Oddur described:
I come from the natural sciences where exams were the assessment method. I have
become more student centred and more open for more types of assessment methods
and today I consider continuous assessment very sensible.
Mist explained:
I have sometimes called action research the third eye in my job. The eye that keeps me
constantly aware of what I am doing, why I am doing it and when I need to change my
methods.
DiscussionBy combining action research and activity theory in the Change Room we were trying to
create a new way for teachers to develop professionally.
The Change Room also fostered a change in the teacher–student relationship when the
students’ voices were heard more and the students became more active learners. The
group is developing a pedagogy of active student learning. Therefore, this project has
the potential to encourage teachers to transform their practice and is a model that is
worth trying in other schools. But it is difficult to distinguish if the influence is from the
Change Room or the action research projects.
Wells (2011 Wells, G. 2011. “Integrating CHAT and Action Research.” Mind, Culture
and Activity 18: 161–180. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]) has promoted the idea that action research can add to the activity theory
about the relationship between learning and development, both in the context of
students’ learning and teachers’ professional development. I agree with that. Action
research can do this through the development of new learning and teaching methods in
practice. I also consider that the activity theory can provide analytical tools to throw light
on the possibilities of action research on system level (Edwards 2000 Edwards, A.
2000. “Looking at Action Research through the Lenses of Sociocultural Psychology and
Activity Theory.” Educational Action Research 8 (1): 195–204 [Taylor & Francis
Online], [Google Scholar]) and activity theory brings positive aspects into research, both
the demand for historical analysis and a conceptual framework to develop new concepts
(Ellis 2011 Ellis, V. 2011. “Reenergising Professional Creativity from a CHAT
Perspective: Seeing Knowledge and History in Practice.” Mind, Culture and Activity 18:
181–193. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]). The Change
Room emphasises a historical view and focus on tensions that gives increased weight
to the first step in the action research cycle i.e. to choose what changes to make in the
practice. It is my conviction that there is a consonance or harmony between action
research and the activity theory. Other researchers have come to the same conclusion
(Hooker 2009 Hooker, M. 2009. “How Can I Encourage Multi-Stakeholder Narrative and
Reflection on the Use of ICT in Teacher Professional Development Programmes in
Rawnda.” Educational Journal of Living Theories 2 (3): 324–364.
[Google Scholar]; Feldman and Weiss 2010 Feldman, A., and T. Weiss. 2010.
“Understanding Change in Teachers’ Ways of Being through Collaborative Action
Research: A Cultural-historical Activity Theory Analysis.” Educational Action Research
18 (1): 29–55.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]; Somekh 2010 Somekh, B.
2010. “The Collaborative Action Research Network: 30 Years of Agency in Developing
Educational Action Research.” Educational Action Research 18 (1): 103–121. [Taylor &
Francis Online], [Google Scholar];
Darwin 2011 Darwin, S. 2011. “Learning in Activity: Exploring the Methodological
Potential of Action Research in Activity Theorising of Social Practice.” Educational
Action Research 19 (2): 215–229. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar];
Wells 2011 Wells, G. 2011. “Integrating CHAT and Action Research.” Mind, Culture and
Activity 18: 161–180. [Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]).
Action research and activity theory have a lot in common, for the values, the goals,
focus on learning, attention is on activity in the workplace and measures taken to
improve practice by combining research and intervention.
There are though conflicting findings in former studies with action research groups on
the tension between praxis and theory. Researchers from universities as Rhodes,
Bateman, and Farr (2005 Rhodes, C., J. Bateman, and J. Farr. 2005. “Partnership or
Parallelism? Modelling University Support for Teacher Research in Schools.”
Professional Development Today, 8 (3): 25–30. [Google Scholar]) and Postholm and
Skrovset (2013 Postholm, M.B., and S. Skrovset. 2013. “The Researcher Reflecting on
Her Own Role during Action Research.” Educational Action Research 21 (4): 506–518.
[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]) have found it difficult to introduce theory to
the action research group whereas Bartlett and Burton (2006 Bartlett, S., and D. Burton.
2006. “Practitioner Research or Descriptions of Classroom Practice? A Discussion of
Teachers Investigating Their Classrooms.” Educational Action Research 14 (3): 395–
405.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar], 402) found the teachers involved in
reading relevant literature to ‘become increasingly involved in theory’.
Ellis (2011Ellis, V. 2011. “Reenergising Professional Creativity from a CHAT
Perspective: Seeing Knowledge and History in Practice.” Mind, Culture and Activity 18:
181–193.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]) argues that
action research produces a special kind of knowledge, i.e. practical knowledge but
linking it with the conceptual framework of the activity theory can enable practitioners to
develop general theory about practice. The Change Room is designed to make a bridge
between practice and theory and utilise the activity theory to enhance improvement of
practice. We saw in the Change Room the transferability of their research within the
action research group, we saw teachers creating their own personal theories about
teaching and we saw that activity theory appealed to some of the teachers but not to
others. Perhaps the next step in developing the Change Room is to encourage the
participants themselves to visualise their action research projects in the activity system
of the classroom.
In the Change Room, individual teachers were beginning to change their practice in
increasing the students’ responsibility for learning, for example by increasing students’
feeling of ownership of their studies and students’ boundary crossing. They were also
giving them various opportunities to influence the learning process such as choosing
learning material, choosing assignments, presenting their projects and taking active part
in both assessment and evaluation of the teaching and learning. The new learning
methods have not taken over the majority of time but have gained increased weight. For
example, in Biology where two teachers were working together to introduce a special
kind of students’ group work, cooperative learning (CLIM) took up half of the semester
time and traditional teaching methods took up the other half of the semester time.
But has the Change Room and action research the potential to change teaching
practice in the whole school? Action research is carried out on an individual level but in
the Change Room action research is utilised to encourage changes at group and
institutional level. Some changes have already been made on an individual level in
Sjávarsíðuskólinn but further research is needed on whether these changes can be
extended on system level.
ConclusionThe aim of this study was to strengthen action research as a model for teachers’
professional development by combining action research and activity theory in a new
methodology, the Change Room. In the Change Room, the methodology of the
expansive learning cycle and the action research cycle were combined in a new way. In
the Change Room, participants focused on tensions in the classroom practice and to
resolve these tensions they tried out new teaching and assessment methods through
their action research projects. The participants in the Change Room themselves
collected and presented the data that was used as first stimulus in the learning process
rather than outside researchers presenting the data as occurs in traditional Change
Laboratory. The proposed solutions to solve the tensions experienced in classroom
practice were carried out on individual level through the action research projects of the
participants and not planned at system level and carried out by the whole group as in
traditional Change Laboratory.
In the Change Room, sustainable changes were made in classroom practice by the
participants. These involved a shift from teaching to learning that increased students’
responsibility for their learning through increased emphasis on active learning and
listening to students’ voices. A situated pedagogy of active student learning is being
developed that links together the action research projects in the Change Room. The
Change Room created a space for organised discussions and presentations of action
research projects visualised in the activity system of the classroom. Expansive learning
took place in the group and that again increased the teachers’ agency to change their
practice.
It is hoped that teachers’ commitment and enhanced agency to change their practice
will lead to improvements of classroom practice and enrich school life in
Sjávarsíðuskólinn. Jointly I think action research and activity theory has enriched and
expanded the process of professional development and changes in classroom practice
and as such the Change Room speaks to international concern about possibilities of
sustainable school change.
Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
AcknowledgementsI like to express my deepest gratitude to my co-researchers, the participants in the
action research group who carried out the research in the Change Room with me.
1 References2 Bartlett, S., and D. Burton. 2006. “Practitioner Research or Descriptions of Classroom
Practice? A Discussion of Teachers Investigating Their Classrooms.”
Educational Action Research 14 (3): 395–405.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google
Scholar]
3 Darwin, S. 2011. “Learning in Activity: Exploring the Methodological Potential of
Action Research in Activity Theorising of Social Practice.” Educational Action
Research 19 (2): 215–229.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]
4 Edwards, A. 2000. “Looking at Action Research through the Lenses of Sociocultural
Psychology and Activity Theory.” Educational Action Research 8 (1): 195–204.
[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]
5 Edwards, A. 2008. “Activity Theory and Small-Scale Intervention in Schools.” Journal
of Educational Change 9: 375–378.[Crossref], [Google Scholar]
6 Ellis, V. 2011. “Reenergising Professional Creativity from a CHAT Perspective:
Seeing Knowledge and History in Practice.” Mind, Culture and Activity 18: 181–
193.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
7 Engeström, Y. 1999a. “Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation.” In
Perspectives on Activity Theory, edited by Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, and R.
Punamäki, 19–38. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.[Crossref], [Google
Scholar]
8 Engeström, Y. 1999b. “Innovative Learning in Work Teams: Analyzing Cycles of
Knowledge Creation in Practice.” In Perspectives on Activity Theory, edited by Y.
Engeström, R. Miettinen, and R. Punamäki, 377–404. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.[Crossref], [Google Scholar]
9 Engeström, Y. 2001. “Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an Activity Theoretical
Reconceptualization.” Journal of Education and Work 14 (1): 133–156.[Taylor &
Francis Online], [Google Scholar]
10 Engeström, Y. 2007. “Putting Vygosky to work: The Change Laboratory as an
Application of Double Stimulation.” In The Cambridge Companion to Vygotsky,
edited by H. Daniels, H. Cole and J. V. Wertsch, 363–382. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. [Crossref], [Google Scholar]
11 Engeström, Y. 2008. From Teams to Knots. Activity-Theoretical Studies of
Collaboration and Learning at Work. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
[Crossref], [Google Scholar]
12 Engeström, Y., and A. Sannino. 2010. “Studies of Expansive Learning:
Foundations, Findings and Future Challenges.” Educational Research Review 5
(1): 1–24.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
13 Erlingsdóttir, S. 2012. “Raunmæting „fær fólk til að skrópa minna“.
Starfendarannsókn um viðhorf starfsfólks of nemenda til nýrrar skólasóknarreglu
í Menntaskólanum við Sund. [Actual attendence “makes people less likely to skip
class”. Action research on staffs’ and students’ attitudes towards a new
attendence rule in Sund College]. Ráðstefnurit Netlu Menntakvika, 2012: 1–17.
http://netla.hi.is/menntakvika2012/alm/004.pdf. [Google Scholar]
14 Feldman, A., and T. Weiss. 2010. “Understanding Change in Teachers’ Ways of
Being through Collaborative Action Research: A Cultural-historical Activity
Theory Analysis.” Educational Action Research 18 (1): 29–55.[Taylor & Francis
Online], [Google Scholar]
15 Fielding, M. 2007. “Jean Rudduck (1937–2007) ‘Carving a new order of
experience’: A Preliminary Appreciation of the Work of Jean Rudduck in the Field
of Student Voice.” Educational Action Research 15 (3): 323–336.[Taylor &
Francis Online], [Google Scholar]
16 Fullan, M. 2007. The New Meaning of Educational Change. 4th ed. Routledge:
Oxford. [Google Scholar]
17 Gudjonsson, H. 2013. “Action Research in Iceland: Glimpses and Reflections.” In
Value and Virtue in Practice –Based Research, edited by J. McNiff, 43–53.
Poole: September Books. [Google Scholar]
18 Haggarty, L., and K. Postlethwaite. 2003. “Action Research: A Strategy for
Teacher Change and School Development?” Oxford Review of Education 29 (4):
423–448.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
19 Hooker, M. 2009. “How Can I Encourage Multi-Stakeholder Narrative and
Reflection on the Use of ICT in Teacher Professional Development Programmes
in Rawnda.” Educational Journal of Living Theories 2 (3): 324–364. [Google
Scholar]
20 Johannsdottir, T. 2010. “Deviations from the Conventional: Contradictions as
Sources of Change in Teacher Education.” In Cultural-Historical Perspectives on
Teacher Education and Development: Learning Teaching, edited by V. Ellis, A.
Edwards, and P. Smagorinsky, 163–179. London: Routledge. [Google Scholar]
21 Kjartansdottir, E. 2010. “Starfendarannsóknir til valdeflingar. Með rannsóknum á
starfi sínu geta kennarar öðlast vald yfir þekkingunni á fagi sínu.” [Action
Research as an empowering tool: teachers who research their work will get more
power over the knowledge their profession is built on]. Ráðstefnurit Netlu.
Menntakvika 2010: 1–9. [Google Scholar]
22 McNiff, J. 2007. “Action Research for Cultural Renewal.” Paper Presented at the
Conference Challenges and Opportunities within Practitioner Research.
Accessed September 10, 2010. http://www.jeanmcniff.com/items.asp?
id=21 [Google Scholar]
23 McNiff, J. 2010. Action Research for Professional Development. Dorset:
September Books. [Google Scholar]
24 McNiff, J., and J. Whitehead. 2006. All You Need to Know about Action
Research. London: Sage. [Google Scholar]
25 Pihlaja, J. 2005. Learning in and for Production. Department of Education,
University of Helsinki. Accessed May 29, 2009.
http://ethesis.helsinki.fi/julkaisut/kay/kasva/vk/pihlaja/ [Google Scholar]
26 Postholm, M.B., and S. Skrovset. 2013. “The Researcher Reflecting on Her Own
Role during Action Research.” Educational Action Research 21 (4): 506–518.
[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]
27 Rhodes, C., J. Bateman, and J. Farr. 2005. “Partnership or Parallelism?
Modelling University Support for Teacher Research in Schools.” Professional
Development Today, 8 (3): 25–30. [Google Scholar]
28 Roth, W.M., and Y.J. Lee. 2007. “‘Vygotsky’s Neglected Legacy’: Cultural-
historical Activity Theory.” Review of Educational Research 77 (2): 186–232.
[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
29 Sannino, A. 2011. “Activity Theory as an Activist and Interventionist Theory.”
Theory and Psychology 21 (5): 571–597.[Crossref], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]
30 Somekh, B. 2006. Action Research a Methodology for Change and
Development. Maidenhead: Open University Press. [Google Scholar]
31 Somekh, B. 2010. “The Collaborative Action Research Network: 30 Years of
Agency in Developing Educational Action Research.” Educational Action
Research 18 (1): 103–121.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google Scholar]
32 Somekh, B., and M. Nissen. 2011. “Cultural-historical Activity Theory and Action
Research.” Mind, Culture and Activity 18: 93–97.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web
of Science ®], [Google Scholar]
33 Somekh, B., and K. Zeichner. 2009. “Action Research for Educational Reform:
Remodelling Action Research Theories and Practices in Local Contexts.”
Educational Action Research 17 (1): 5–21.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Google
Scholar]
34 Thorgeirsdottir, H. 2016. Investigating the Use of Action Research and Activity
Theory to Promote the Professional Development of Teachers in Iceland.
Doctorial thesis from University of Iceland and University of Exeter.
http://hdl.handle.net/1946/23886. [Google Scholar]
35 Virkkunen, J., and D.S. Newnham. 2013. The Change Laboratory. A Tool for
Collaborative Development of Work and Education. Rotterdam: Sense
Publisher. [Google Scholar]
36 Wells, G. 2011. “Integrating CHAT and Action Research.” Mind, Culture and
Activity 18: 161–180.[Taylor & Francis Online], [Web of Science ®], [Google
Scholar]
37 Whitehead, J., and J. McNiff. 2006. Action Research Living Theory. London:
Sage.[Crossref], [Google Scholar]
•
Related articlesCreating a dialogic environment for transformative science teaching practices:
towards an inclusive education for science Cristina G. Reynaga-Peña et al.,
Journal of Education for Teaching
To Let Learn or Not to Let Learn: Negotiating Tensions in Preservice Teacher
Education Saroja Ringo, Action in Teacher Education
Developing a material-dialogic approach to pedagogy to guide science teacher
education Lindsay Hetherington et al., Journal of Education for Teaching
Participatory Design Research and Educational Justice: Studying Learning and
Relations Within Social Change Making Megan Bang et al., Cognition and
Instruction
Engagement and learning in simulation: recommendations of the Simnovate
Engaged Learning Domain Group Ollivier Dyens et al., BMJ STEL
Can nurse teachers manage student incivility by guided democracy? A grounded
theory study Mostafa Rad et al., BMJ Open
Effects of congruence between preferred and perceived learning environments in
nursing education in Taiwan: a cross-sectional study Chun-Yen Chang et al.,
BMJ Open
Demographic Changes on Public Education for Culturally Diverse Exceptional
Learners: Making Teacher Preparation Programs Accountable Festus E.
Obiakor, Multicultural Learning and Teaching Browse journals by subject