THEORETICAL ORIENTATION OF THE STUDY
3.2 An account of activity theory
3.2.1 First-generation activity theory
The first-generation activity theory is centred on Vygotsky's idea of mediated action. This notion explains how people/subjects (individuals, groups) make sense of objects (or tasks) through the usage of tools. Rogoff (2008) and Ho (2015) explained that in the mediated process learning is viewed not as pre-fixed or individualistic, but as an internalisation of interaction with people and artifacts in the social world (see Figure 3.1). The cultural mediation of actions is commonly expressed as a triad of a subject, object and mediating artifact (Engeström, 2001), which stresses the social nature of human learning and the role of language as well as other tools in learning activities (Thorgeirsdottir, 2015).
68
Figure 3.1: Vygotsky's model of the mediated act.
Engeström (2001) argued that mediated action involves artifacts such as a sign, symbols, text or cultural tools, and these tools fundamentally shape the mediated action. Engestrom (2007), as cited in Thorgeirsdottir (2015), further argued that language is the most important artifact in the mediated action, and pointed out that artifacts can be categorised into six types of artifacts: 1) descriptive; 2) narrative; 3) classification; 4) procedural; 5) explanatory; and 6) developmental.
These artifacts were distinguished according to the processes involved in their use.
Naidoo (2011) noted that the most widely accepted tools are those that closely fit within the social and conceptual structure of the classroom. She argued that gestures, graphs, shapes, lines, and diagrams are visual representations and are regarded as tools. The tools mediate between subject and object. In FA artifacts like informal observation, questioning, quizzes, assignments and so on mediate between the subject (teacher educators, students) and the object. This mediated action perspective is understood as the interaction between actors, their mediational means and the environments. The notion of learning as a mediated process provides a starting point to explain teacher educators' understanding and practice of FA. Kaptelinin and Nardi (2012b) argued that mediation action deals with how humans behave in their environments rather than how animals act in their natural habitats. Ho (2015) mentioned that the mediating role of other people is reflected more specifically in Vygotsky's theory of the zone of proximal development (ZPD), and further expanded on in Rogoff's idea of "guided participation" in communities of practice. In the words of Vygotsky (1980, p. 86), the ZPD was defined as:
69
The distance between the actual development as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem-solving under adults' guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.
In the policy document in Ghana the emphasis on FA can be linked to Vygotsky idea of ZPD, because the aim of incorporating assessment is not to evaluate performance but to assist an individual to move from the actual development in order to reach their potential development before evaluating their holistic performance. Using the correct tools, as explained in activity theory, teachers or teacher educators in the process of implementing FA are expected not to instruct but to provide guided participation, as defined by Rogoff (2008). Using informal tasks like observation, quizzes, questioning and so on, teacher educators are involved in guided participation to guide the students to reach their potential development.
Trumbull and Lash (2013) noted that the zone of proximal development (ZPD), a concept is taken from Vygotsky, has been invoked by FA theorists as useful for understanding the gap between a student's actual understanding and the student's targeted or potential learning. Engeström (2001) avers that the mediation action model of Vygotsky did not demonstrate the relationship between the subject and their environment in an activity, because the unit of analysis remained individually focused. This restriction of the first-generation model created the need for the second-generation activity theory.
3.2.1.1 Zone of proximal development and scaffolding
According to Polly, Allman, Casto, and Norwood (2017) the concept of the ZPD is the most widely applied sociocultural concept in the design of learning experiences. Vygotsky, cited in Polly et al.
(2017), defined ZPD as “the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem-solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers.” In other words, learning and development are best understood when the concentration is on the process rather than the result (Polly et al., 2017). This view is supported by Earl (2012) with reference to assessment. She proposed that by engaging deeply with the assessment process, learners can
“become comfortable with reflection and the critical analysis of their learning” (Earl, 2012, p. 28).
70
FA is used to gauge students’ learning, diagnose weaknesses, and adjust instruction as and when needed. Researchers of FA argue that FA identifies students' current level of knowledge relative to the desired goal in the ZPD (Sardareh & Saad, 2012; Shavelson, 2003). Shepard (2005), cited in Sardareh and Saad (2012), asserted that “FA collects and uses information about students' knowledge and performance to close the gap between students' current learning state and the desired state by pedagogical action” (p. 349). FA helps to form or shape students’ learning during instruction. Within the context of the sociocultural perspective this help, or support aimed at improving learning is called scaffolding.
According to Polly et al. (2017) scaffolding concerns itself with natural processes that support a learner in successfully completing a task within the ZPD. Scaffolding is described as teachers`
support given to the learner when they are in the ZPD, so that they can move to the next step in their learning (Sardareh & Saad, 2012). Teachers and peer assistance and scaffolding help students to move their learning forward when in their ZPD. FA and scaffolding are considered complementary concepts (Sardareh & Saad, 2012; Shepard 2005). According to FA researchers, FA practices a process of scaffolding (Brookhart et al., 2010; Pryor & Crossouard, 2008); FA has also been equated to scaffolding by Torrance and Pryor (1998). Torrance and his colleague argued that FA is the same as scaffolding because FA takes the form of teaching more than assessment.
Researchers have labelled assessment as formative when teachers provide students with constructive feedback that supports their learning (Black et al., 2003; Brookhart, 2017; Heritage, 2010b). Feedback, which is an important characteristic of FA, is noted to be an example of scaffolding. Wass and Golding (2014) explained in their work ‘Sharpening a tool for teaching: the zone of proximal development’, that the feedback given to students as they complete a task is an example of scaffolding. Similarly, Wass, Harland, and Mercer (2011) indicated that scaffolds might include the opportunity for peer support that teachers offer to students, where students can observe and replicate how a peer solves problems and obtain peer feedback. According to Trumbull and Lash (2013) and Hattie and Timperley (2007), feedback takes on a formative role when it provides information about the gap between a student’s current understanding and the desired level of understanding. It is very effective when it is focused at the right developmental
71
level of the students and aids the students in recognising ways to close the learning gap (Hattie &
Timperley, 2007).
In addition, Kawalkar and Vijapurkar (2013) emphasise that “teachers’ questions in the inquiry classroom not only explore and make students’ thinking explicit in the classroom but also serve to guide and scaffold it” (p. 2004). Questions teachers ask and the way they are asked impact students’ thinking as they engage in the process of knowledge construction (Chin, 2007; Kawalkar
& Vijapurkar, 2013). The sociocultural perspective of learning acknowledges that “activities do not exist in isolation, but they are part of broader systems of relations, social structures, in which they have meaning” (Willis, 2009, p. 1). According to Willis (2009), within the sociocultural paradigm learning is viewed as the process of participating in a community of practice, where expertise is developed in social and cognitive ways through the use of tools.