1. Professional development and innovative
pedagogy in an online community through
the lens of activity theory
Global Skills for College Completion
http://www.globalskillscc.org/
Brenda G Kaulback
Knowledge in the Public Interest (KPI) Learning
Design and Community Support
Fielding Graduate University, School of Human and
Organizational Development
Specialization: Information Society and Knowledge
Organizations (ISAKO)

2. Outline of Presentation
 Global Skills for College Completion
(GSCC)
 Activity Theory
 GSCC as Activity System
 Three Aspects of GSCC as
Highlighted by Activity Theory
 Conclusion

3. Community Colleges
 Two-year institutions educate nearly half of all
US undergraduates
(Mellow, Woolis, Laurillard, 2011)
 Approximately 20% of CC students transfer to
four-year institutions
(National Center for Educational Statistics)
 More low-income students, immigrant students,
and black and Latino students enroll in
community colleges than in four-year colleges
and universities
(Mellow, Woolis, Laurillard, 2011)

4. Developmental Education
 More than one half of community college students
are required to enroll in at least one developmental
education course. And many take more than one.
(National Postsecondary Student Aid Study, 2003-4)
 Pass rates of developmental education students
barely reach 60 percent
(Bailey, 2012; Gates, 2010)
 Seventy-five percent of student who take
remedial classes will not graduate from
college.
(National Center for Education Statistics, Bailey, 2012)

5. GSCC Premises
Pedagogy is a part of the story.
Educators estimated pedagogy
accounted for 30% of student success.
(Knowledge in the Public Interest, Pedagogy Matters Survey,
2011)
 Technology offers new ways to deliver
professional development to improve
pedagogy.

6. Global Skills for College
Completion
◦ Improve faculty teaching practice
◦ Develop a developmental education
pedagogy
◦ Create a model of professional
development)

7. GSCC Campuses

8. Global Skills for College
Completion
◦ “When practitioners, with the help of
researchers, transform their own work, a
new kind of learning emerges .”
(Sannino, Daniels, Gutiérrez, 2009)

9. Technology-enabled Tasks
◦ Document and reflect on practice
◦ Dialogue about practice and innovations
◦ Learn from each other and innovate

10. Activity Theory, Briefly
 Activity is the unit of analysis
 Systems view
 Joint collaborative activity
 Change comes from contradictions in
system
 Marx, Vygotsky, Leontyev, Engeström

11. Activity System of GSCC

12. Three aspects of GSCC highlighted by
activity theory
 The mutual boundaries of the
learning and knowledge creation
systems
 The contradictions created by the use
of tags, themes, patterns
 The changing division of labor

13. Mutual boundaries of the learning
and knowledge creation systems
 Professional Development
and
 Developmental Education Pedagogy
 Professional Development Pedagogy

14. Three aspects of GSCC highlighted by
activity theory
 The mutual boundaries of the learning
and knowledge creation systems
 The contradictions created by the
use of tags, themes, patterns
 The changing division of labor

15. Sample Themes

16. Faculty Pattern Sample

17. Three aspects of GSCC highlighted by
activity theory
 The mutual boundaries of the learning
and knowledge creation systems
 The contradictions created by the use
of tags, themes, patterns
 The changing division of labor

18. Division of Labor

19. Limitations of GSCC as a
Networked Learning PD Model
 Not in a university setting
 No assessment
 No credentialing
 High-performing faculty

20. Viewing GSCC through an
Activity Theory Lens
 Overall useful in terms of seeing activity
systems and contradictions in the system
 Situated in real practice making insights
relevant and practical
 Important to be able to move back and
forth between system level and more
granular level
 Changes that emerge from
contradictions are long term – important
to view from a shorter term view

21. Leontyev, speaking about the basis of
activity theory in Marxism, describes
activity as a “sensory, practical activity
in which people enter into a practical
contact with objects of the surrounding
world, test their resistance, and act on
them, acknowledging their objective
properties.”

22. Results
 Qualitative data extremely positive
 No corresponding rise in pass rates

23.  I know, without a doubt, that I am a better teacher now.
 Because I CAN characterize myself as a teacher and
BECAUSE I have the tags and themes to act as
identifiers as well as quality assurance guides, I am a
better teacher.
 Frankly, I had not been actively practicing as a
teacher. I had been teaching, but I had not been
studying what was happening in the classroom and
consistently using that information to make me a better
teacher …
 I think that I'm a more effective teacher because I'm a
more confident teacher. The GSCC experience has
made me more aware of the nuances of my teaching
practice. It has helped me to hone my craft and not
doubt my instincts. Even though my pass rates did not
dramatically improve, I feel like more students passed
my class BECAUSE I was in GSCC. I think that over

24.  I had to explain to my colleagues why I chose to
construct each lesson so, why I timed it so, how I could
tell whether my students were learning… and in doing
this I was explaining myself to myself in a way that I
ought to have done before
 I’ve always practiced a pedagogy of caring, but I felt
that was more of a weakness than a strength. It’s been
a privilege to work with others who care as much as I
do.
 The tags have helped me drill down on what I do and
why, and they’ve given me a vocabulary to talk about
teaching that’s free of controversy and evaluation ...
 One of my best learnings was the ability to characterize
myself as a teacher through tags and conversations
with peers. It was truly an "ah ha" moment for me.
 Quite simply, life-changing.

25. Possible Interpretations
 Pedagogy didn’t improve
 It is still early
 Faculty high performers
 Pass rates affected by other than
pedagogy
 Difference between use value and
exchange value

26. Conclusion 1
 The coextensive activities provide a way
of grounding the learning in the practice
of the learners.
 Questions:
 To what extent do the varying
motivational factors of each activity
impact engagement with the learning?
Will a weaker emphasis on generating
new knowledge for the field decrease
participant motivation?

27. Conclusion 2
 Innovation and improved practice were
generated through the mirror provided by
patterns and by the contradictions
between one’s own pattern and that of
respected faculty.
To what extent will a different
demographic (not high-performing
faculty) impact the development of
contradictions and innovation?

28. Conclusion 3
 The division of labor and changing role of the
teacher and learner supported a collegial
community of learners engaged in joint labor.
Questions:
 At the same time, the reaction of the learners
to the changing role created some push-back
from learners and a rethinking of the division
with the creation of a role for faculty coaches.
To what extent is this desire a result of the
impact of change? Will this new division of
labor adequately respond to the desire for
more intervention?

29. References
 Bailey, T., Jeong, D. W., Cho, S.W., (2012). Referral, enrollment, and completion
in developmental education sequences in community colleges. In Economics of
Education Review, 29 (2010) 255–270.
 Cohen, A.M., and Sanchez, J. R. (1997). The Transfer Rate: A Model of
Consistency. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Community Colleges.
(ERIC ED409952) (cited in NCES)
 Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to
developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-Konsultit
 Key facts on developmental education. Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
website. Retrieved March 6, 2012 from
http://www.gatesfoundation.org/postsecondaryeducation/Pages/key-facts-on-
developmental-education.aspx
 Leont'ev, A.N. (1978). Activity, consciousness, and personality. Translated from
Russian by Marie J. Hall. Englewood Cliffs, NJ; London: Prentice-Hall. Retrieved
March 6, 2012 from http://www.marxists.org/archive/leontev/works/1978/index.htm
 Mellow, G. O., Woolis, D. D. and Laurillard, D. (2011): In search of a new
developmental-education pedagogy. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning,
43:3, 50-59.
 Sannino, A. , Daniels, H., Gutierrez. (2009). Learning and expanding with activity
theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.
 U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. (2001).
Research and development report: Community college transfer rates to 4-year
institutions using alternative definitions of transfer. By Ellen M. Bradburn and
David G. Hurst. Project Officer, Samuel Peng. Washington, DC: Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2001/2001197.pdf