Chapter 6. An Evolving System of Exceptional Academic Activity 6.1 Introduction and Overview of 1 Introduction and Overview of Chapter
6.2 System Components
An evolving system of exceptional academic activity (hereafter referred to as “the evolving system”) was constructed primarily in response to the analytical dialogue engaged in with the eight auto-photographical compilations and photo-elicitation interviews in relation to these compilations. Descriptive analyses from four of these compilations appeared in Chapter 5.
Although all participants, photographs, and discussions around these were included in the construction and analysis of the evolving system, more emphasis was necessarily afforded to photographs that reflected the participants’ current academic activity (as requested of them during the auto-photography induction session). Figure 6-1 is a graphic representation of the evolving system that was constructed during the data analysis processes.
6.2.1 Subject, object, and outcome.
As explained in Chapter 2 (section 2.3), sociocultural perspectives conceive of the subject and object as existing in a mutually constitutive and dialectical relationship. Nonetheless, in
constructing an evolving system of exceptional academic activity, the subject,73 was identified as academically exceptional undergraduate students who were in the second half of their
undergraduate degree. In addition, the subject was only informed by academically exceptional African students. Moreover, all students who informed the subject were also in the process of excelling. This was theoretically relevant for a study that aimed to investigate the phenomenon of exceptional academic achievement in action, and not primarily as an outcome. This is proposed to signify resonance with research from a sociocultural and activity theory stance,
73 I refer to the subject (i.e., the student) in the collective sense, and not in the sense of an individual student.
Figure 6-1. An evolving system of exceptional academic activity
which advocates a focus on activity over outcomes, and processes over products (Engeström, 1996, 1999a, 2009a; John-Steiner & Mahn, 1996).
Although ontologically indistinguishable from the subject, the object in the evolving system was conceptualised to refer to academic activity in higher education, with a specific focus on
undergraduate education. Student and academic activity are (or at least should be) inherently related. In this study, this relationship exemplified the ontological unity of the subject and object.
The outcome of the evolving activity system was projected as exceptional academic
achievement; however, given that the subject was technically still engaged in the activity at the time of data production, this outcome was not assured.
6.2.2 Mediating artefacts.
At a time when stimulus–response theories of human behaviour were dominant, Vygotsky (1978) proposed an alternative model of mediated human behaviour (see Figure 2-2). In this way, mediating artefacts can be conceived of as “helping” (or possibly hindering) the subject
“act” upon the object. A mediating artefact then is that which mediates a subject’s activity, and serves as an important explanatory factor in sociocultural theories of human thought and behaviour (Daniels, 2001b). Each of the four participants described in Chapter 5 used a variety of study strategies in their pursuit of exceptional academic achievement. For example, using a diary (and planning what has to be done during allocated times on certain days) is an example of a time management strategy of which most of the participants in Phase 2 of the study provided evidence. In addition, the participants also provided evidence of being self-reflective and
engaging in self-talk as a study strategy.74 However, it was not only the presence of and ability to engage various psychological and concrete tools in the study process that were relevant for high- achieving students, but rather the variable and flexible ways in which they were used.
74 See for example (among others) Hloniphile, FGD 1, 514; Khulekani, FGD 1, 519; Ntokozo FGD 3, 384; Bongane, PEI 1, 119; Sindi, PEI 2, 869.
On the issue of diaries, I hate diaries. I can never, cos I don’t stick to them. So I’ve just chucked them out. I only had a diary for one month. Then I thought no, this is not happening. And I think time management obviously is an issue but there isn’t one way to study. I think that students usually see someone studying in a particular way and they want to study like that. But that’s wrong, cos the thing is you need to identify what is (.) what works for you, and also you need to identify times which are productive for you. There is no use going to the library and sitting for hours … if you think you’re going to sit in the library and read over that book for the whole day, you’re not going to get anything from it. So, I think it’s about identifying what makes you learn best and when do you learn best. So, for example, for some people you might be a morning person. If you’re a morning person, have your breakfast and do your work. If you’re a night person, stay up. If you’re an eleven o’ clock person, when the students are sleeping from campus. Ja, that sort of thing. So I think people are confined by particular methods which are suggested by lecturers. And it ends up that it may not be the best technique for you … So it’s about identifying how you work best I think. (Ntokozo, FGD 3, 396)
Similarly, it was identified that –
When I study, I don’t (.) you know they give you these tips how to study and stuff. I don’t use one method, I use whichever one on that day I feel like using. I find that sometimes I can’t mind map, sometimes it’s enough to summarise, sometimes enough just to highlight, sometimes enough to read aloud, out loud. I don’t ever stick to one specific study method. (Joy, FGD 3, 365)
When constructing the evolving system, a prominent mediating artefact which enabled epistemic access to the participants was therefore conceptualised as the variable and flexible use of self- regulated learning (SRL) study strategies. Social cognitive definitions of SRL isolate this as the process whereby students “personally activate and sustain cognitions, affects, and behaviours that are systematically oriented toward the attainment of learning goals” (Schunk & Zimmerman, 2008, p.vii). Specifically, nine sub-processes75 are closely related to high academic achievement outcomes for students across all levels of study. Instead of locating these SRL sub-processes as separate mediating artefacts in their own right, what became evident during the data analysis was that these sub-processes were selectively and variably used by high-achieving students as and when needed. In the evolving system then, SRL sub-process were more accurately
75 These sub-processes include goal setting, task strategies, self-instruction, self-monitoring, imagery, time management, environmental structuring, help-seeking, and self-evaluation/reflection (Zimmerman, 2002a).