6.1. Introduction
6.2.3. Mediating Artefacts/ Tools
127
essay writing skills. The secretary of the Commerce Teachers’ Association reported in this manner:
Sebenzile: They focus on essay type questions and how to answer according to marks because you know learners, if they say it is a 40 marks question they will write an open ended things, so there he guided us on how to make learners write over 32 and not over 40 because if you start by writing the introduction to give 3 points you will get that 3 marks then you get to the body, you must make sure that if it’s out of 27 how many points should we write per subheading. (Interview held on the 23rd September 2013)
The above quote elaborates on another object of the Business Studies revision workshop. The
focus was how to teach learners to answer examination questions with a hope that if learners are able to answer essay questions they can perform better because essay the s carry more marks in question paper. The main concern of these Commerce teachers is to improve learner performance. Furthermore, in the Economics revision workshop, the facilitator stressed that teachers must do the tasks that he gave teachers with the learners. The Business Studies facilitator similarly guided the teachers on how to answer different types of questions. From a CHAT perspective the external Business Studies and Economics subject experts (community) acted as intermediary aids (Patchen & Smithenry, 2013) that helped Business Studies and Economics teachers by guiding them on how to teach learners to answer examination question papers.
128
papers. The classroom where the meeting was held had twelve tables with chairs, chalkboard and chalk. Economics teachers were seated in ten tables, the other table was occupied by the Department of Basic Education officials and the executive committee members, and the front table was used by the facilitator. The Economics facilitator used a laptop, projector and power point presentation to explain the Economics content. He also used these tools for questions. The teachers were given handouts and question papers. The teachers were answering the activities in their books and the charts and the chalkboard were used by teachers to illustrate the graphs whenever a teacher was asked to illustrate for the whole group.
The membership fee from each member of the Commerce Teachers’ Association is also an important tool for enabling the mediation of objects. For the meetings to take place each teacher was expected to contribute a membership fee of R50 to cover the costs of transporting, accommodation and a token of appreciation for the facilitators. All the participants that were interviewed reported that the membership fees should be deposited by all members into the Bank account. The workshop was delayed because the secretary of the Commerce teachers ‘association was explaining and requesting Economics teachers to pay the R50 membership fees. These are some of her words:
The funding of this organisation is from its members, which are us teachers, so colleagues let us pay our membership fee. Money is needed for petrol, accommodation and the gift of the facilitator. For next year new executive will be elected teachers must come to the fore as it will enrich their CV. So please donate your membership fee so that we can cover these costs. Currently there are no sponsors. (Interview held on the 23rd September 2013)
The R50 issue seemed to be the issue that delayed the starting of the Economics revision workshop. The facilitator did not have enough time to do revision of all the topics as planned in the planning meeting. From a CHAT perspective this suggests object/subjects contractions.
These contradictions emanate from the membership fees (mediating tools). In fact, the workshop started late because teachers did not pay their membership fees. Therefore, Economics teachers as subjects did not enact all the objects because there were no tasks that were facilitated on the other two topics. In other words, the Economics teachers did not learn all the topics that were scheduled for the workshop because the workshop started late.
During the workshops the facilitators used power point presentations to elaborate on the content and for projecting questions. The chalkboard was used more frequently to illustrate
129
calculations. The teachers were also given notes on the three topics. During the interview session held with the Economics subject advisor, the subject advisor stressed the importance of the notes from facilitators by stating that the group was formed, amongst other reasons, to get information. The 13 pages of photocopied slides were given to teachers and other teachers saved the presentation in their memory sticks which also formed part of mediation tools. The Commerce teachers reported that they were working with past examination question papers during revision workshops. When Sebenzile, the secretary of the Commerce Teachers’ Association, talked about using the past examination question papers, she further elaborated about external examination moderators that were invited in 2010 by the Commerce teachers’ association with the assistance of one the books publishers. She says:
The book publisher assisted us in organising people who set question papers,.. In that workshop the external moderators who controlled in 2009, marking of grade 12 paper was helping us in those aspects that were seen to be neglected by learners.
The above quote reveals another community member (external moderator) that was also involved in object enactment by subjects (Commerce teachers). The external moderators guided teachers by highlighting certain questions that were found to be neglected by learners during the marking of final examination papers. In the CHAT context the above artefacts are material tools that were modified by human beings as a means of regulating subjects’
interactions with the facilitator and one another (Blunden, 2010). These material tools were used in conjunction with psychological tools.
Psychological tools were also used as mediating artefacts. From the CHAT framework, psychological tools include representation, signs, language, experiences, knowledge etc. The language that enables communication during mediation was English. The facilitator explained the topic after which questions followed. The facilitator enabled the interaction between him and the teachers with questions. The questions enabled the teachers to interact with one another as they were seated in groups. In this case it is the language, experiences, skills and knowledge of both facilitator and subjects that came into play. This is shown in the following extract:
Mr Khambule: If there is a shift in any curve it is in the long run, if there is shift it’s a long run condition,
Mr Khambule: What is the impact of the movement?
130 All teachers: The quantity increase.
Mr Khambule: Remember that the price will also drop because of abundance. (The facilitator projected the graph with AC and MC for teachers to calculate normal profit), learners must know that normal profit is a long term condition, when do firms make economic profits? Teachers must equip learners with such questions. The examiners are not sympathetic they just set the question paper
Mr Khambule: Calculate the total cost and the total revenue from the given graph. Learners must understand the dynamics. Show them the relationship between the graph of an industry and the individual firm’s break-even point in normal profit. What drives people away from the business or what drive them out? Short term economic profit drives them in and long term losses drive them out or away, when they sustain long term economic loss. The firm’s demand curve is perfectly elastic (while illustrating in a chart) what is the implication of a horizontal demand curve? (Observation held on the 27th August 2013)
The above extract shows that the facilitator’s talk was more dominant than the teachers’ talk but there were some instances where these Economics teachers share their experiences. The teachers shared how they teach some topics, especially the graphs. According to the CHAT perspective, the facilitator as a member of the community uses psychological tools which are the language, his knowledge, experiences and expertise to teach different curves of a perfect market. The subjects internalized what is taught and then externalization was evident when they engage with the tasks. For example, one of the male teachers seated in table 3 explained how he introduced the elasticity and inelasticity of the kinked demand curve of the oligopoly by stating that he first uses the real elastic to show elasticity before showing the elastic and inelastic part of the kinked demand curve. The facilitator continued to project the graphs and asked teachers to illustrate the answers in the graph in front of all teachers. The facilitator asked in this way:
Mr Khambule: Show what would happen if the new firms enter the market.
The male teacher from table 9 drew the graph on the board. The facilitator applauded the teacher and asked the rest of the house if learners knew how to draw the graph drawn by one of the teachers. Again, the facilitator added another curve in the same graph (graph 2) the horizontal curve that corresponds with R40) and asked another question:
Mr Khambule: Which curve represents long term equilibrium?
131
Seeing that there was no response from teachers, he explained that if there is a shift in any curve it is the long term equilibrium and he immediately asked another follow up question:
Mr Khambule: What is the impact of the move in the price and quantity?
All teachers: The quantity increase.
Mr Khambule: The price drops because of abundance.
The above-mentioned observation extracts show that the facilitator opened the discussion with teachers by using questions. Questions and answers were the main mediating artefacts which enabled interaction between Economics teachers and the facilitator for Economics teachers to develop more understanding of graphs and concepts of the market structures.
Furthermore, questions, knowledge and sharing of answers were the mediating artefacts that also lead to collaboration and engagement between teachers which occurred when they were demonstrating their answers on the board for the house at large. In terms of the CHAT multi- voicedness principle, this task reflects an interchange where one was being a resource for others while drawing on others as resources during collective engagement in activity.
This collaboration and engagement of Economics teachers seem to show a relationship between knowledge as possession of individuals and knowledge as the collective activity of knowers (Ahmed, 2014). This relationship is in line with Engeström (2005) when he contends that the centrality of relational dimensions and interdependence in CHAT involves both learning from and with each other and exploring the activity jointly. In this Economics activity system, the subject- object relation was not only mediated by psychological and material tools and artefacts, but also by the community and division of labour in interaction