This is a presentation about an attempt to use Activity Theory as a programme evaluation methodology. Engagement with this theory shows that it has a language, a framework and a methodology , if used appropriately, could revolutionise programme evaluation.

1. Using Activity Theory to analyse the
implementation of the Science Extended
Curriculum Programme (ECP) at the
University of the Western Cape
Rita Kizito
Jaques Elengemole
University of the Western Cape
Teaching & Learning Colloquium 19 July 2013

2. What am I trying to do ?
• Analyse (examine, study, scrutinise) the implementation
of the Science Extended Curriculum Programme (ECP)
in terms of how participating individuals ( lecturers &
students) experience their involvement in the
programme.
• Uncover the merits ( as well as shortcomings) of a
programme designed to increase participation of under-
prepared students in higher education science.
• Programme Evaluation.

3. UWC Science ECP
• Designed to increase participation and improve the
performance of under-prepared students in higher
education science.
• Addresses five learning areas: Physics, Life Sciences,
Introduction to Science, Mathematics and Statistics.
• Students enrolling for this programme receive additional
and intensive support in these learning areas, allowing
them to complete a three-year B.Sc. programme in four
years.

4. About Programme Evaluation…
Scriven, M. (1991) Evaluation thesaurus,
fourth edition. Newbury Park: Sage.
Patton, M.Q .(2010 ).Qualitative research
and evaluation methods. Sage
Publications: Incorporated.

5. Shortcomings of evaluation methods
Dominant approaches to programme evaluation centre
around analysing the effects of single variables on learner
performance and are useful for understanding the impact of
several factors individually.`
They do not offer a comprehensive view of how events,
activities and processes shape the learning environment
and its participants (Patton, 2010).

6. Why use activity theory?
AT provides a language, a holistic framework and a
methodology for analysing educational practices that shape
the implementation of a learning programme by:
• availing ways for describing and explaining individual
and social practices, separately, or as integrated entities
(theoretical).
• offering a holistic, analytical tool for evaluating human
learning or developmental processes at both individual
and group levels, in different learning domains and at
disparate levels of complexity (methodological).

7. What is activity theory (AT)?
• AT or Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) is a set
of basic principles constituting a conceptual system for
describing and analysing human mental functioning and
behaviour ; or a socio-cultural and historical framework
and methodology for holistically analysing human activity
systems (Vygotsky 1978; Leont‟ev 1979; Engeström
1999; 2001).
• Within an activity system, a participant (subject) whose
agency is the focus of the analysis, acts on and
transforms an (object) producing an outcome through
mediating influences of other factors such as community,
division of labour and rules.

8. Activity System ( unit of analysis)
(tools) mediating artefacts for teaching and
learning e.g. learning materials, computers,
language, concepts, teaching methods
subject ( lecturer,
student, TA, tutor)
Object ( teaching/learning)
point
outcome ( better
student
performance)
rules of the
programme
ECP
Community
division of
labour

9. Contradictions
• All of the elements in activity system influence each
other and are influenced by social, cultural and historical
factors . Each activity is surrounded by other activities.
Internal contradictions and tensions within and among
the elements lead to transitions and transformation.
outcome outcome

10. Premises for CHAT
• Basic CHAT assumption :activity and consciousness are
dynamically interrelated in strings of collaborative
processes involving material production and social
exchanges (Marxist ideology).
• To Vygotsky (1978), social exchanges between people
were pivotal to individual development and occurred
through cultural mediation.
• Leonte‟ev (1979) was more interested in analysing how
the material forms of activity were transformed into
individual psychological processes.
• Engeström (2001) is credited with developing the activity
system model currently being used to describe and
analyse activity systems and to vouch for a theory of
expansive learning.

11. Premises for CHAT
• More recently, Stetsenko (2005, p. 74), has argued that
“ three processes underlie human life and development –
the material production of tools, the social exchanges
among people, and the individual mechanisms regulating
this production and these exchanges”..
“activity and consciousness are
dynamically interrelated”

12. Research Goal
Explore a group of coordinators‟, lecturers‟, teaching
assistants‟, students‟ and tutors‟ views about the
effectiveness of the ECP curriculum as a pedagogic entity
for science teaching in order to gain in-depth
understanding of implementing the science ECP curriculum
in a higher education context.

13. Research Questions
1. How do the ECP coordinators, lecturers, teaching
assistants, students and tutors experience their
involvement in the ECP?
2. What are the internal and external contradictions within
the activity system of ECP curriculum provision and
implementation? How can they be resolved?
3. What recommendations and possible models of how to
address these contradictions emerge from this
evaluative project?

14. Subjects (40)
Coordinators (5); Lecturers (5);Teaching Assistants (5)
Tutors (5);Students (20)
Participation is voluntary.
• Semi structured interviews to solicit information about
student experience and teaching practice.
• Observations focussing on classroom environmental
factors and teaching practices including tool use
,teaching practice and events. Etic (outsider ) & (emic)
(engaging).
Main data sources

15. semi structured interview template
1. Clarifying purpose of the activity and analysing the
context including division of labour, rules, norms and
regulations.
2. Motivation.
3. Life history (prior experience) and critical incidences
4. Tool use ( mediating artefacts) both material/physical
tools and mental tools.
5. Participant perceptions and emotions regarding
interview methods.

16. how am I planning to use AT?
• Reconstruct activity systems reconstructed from
• individual and collective perspectives.
• Compare teaching „worlds; and „learning worlds‟
• Search for tensions ( contradictions) evident both within
and between systems.

17. Data collected so far…
• Conducted 5 interviews ( too early to make conclusions)
• Preliminary results indicate that there are different
conceptions of teaching ( transforming the
individual/inculcating the relevant skills).
• No clear agreement about rules and division of labour in
the ECP.

18. Benefits of using activity theory
1. Provides a clear evaluative framework for comparison
of experiences and practices.
2. Allows focus on:
• detail of experience within a particular context
• the individual in relation to others, and within a
context of a collective, social and cultural system
(Vygoskian idea)
• An aggregated description and examination of
experiences and practices

19. References
1. Engeström, Y. 1999. Activity theory and individual and social
transformation. In Perspectives on activity theory, eds. Y.
Engeström, R. Miettinen and R.L. Punamäki. Cambridge: University
Press.
2. Engeström, Y. 2001. Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity
theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of education and work
14(1):133-156.
3. Leont‟ev A.N. 1979. The problem of activity on psychology. In The
concept of activity in Soviet psychology, eds. J.V. Wertsch.
4. Patton, M.Q .(2010 ).Qualitative research and evaluation methods.
Sage Publications: Incorporated.
5. Scriven, M. (1991) Evaluation thesaurus, fourth edition. Newbury
Park: Sage
6. Vygotsky, L. S. 1978; Mind in society: the development of higher
psychological processes. Cambridge: Harvard university press

20. Thank you!