Using activity theory to conceptualize online community and using online community to conceptualize activity theory

Mind, Culture, and Activity

Volumn 11, Issue 1, 2004, Pages 25-47

  Barab, Sasha ^a,b   Schatz, Steve ^a   Scheckler, Rebecca ^a  

^a INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b INDIANA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 3943104270     PISSN: 10749039     EISSN: 15327884     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15327884mca1101_3     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. Barab, S. A., Barnett, M. G.,&Squire, K. (2002). Developing an empirical account of a community of practice: Characterizing the essential tensions. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 11, 489-543
2. Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., Yamagata-Lynch, L., Squire, K., & Keating, T. (2002). Using activity theory to understand the systemic tensions characterizing a technology-rich introductory astronomy course. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9,76-108
3. Barab, S. A., Cherkes-Julkowski, M., Swenson, R., Garrett. S., Shaw, R. E.,&Young, M. (1999). Principles of self-organization: Ecologizing the learner-facilitator system. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 8, 349-390
4. Barab, S. A.,& Duffy, T. (2000). From practice fields to communities of practice. In D. Jonassen & S.M. Land (Eds.), Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 25-56). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
5. Barab, S. A., Kling, R., & Gray, J. (Eds.). (in press). Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press
6. Barab, S., MaKinster, J. G., Moore, J., Cunningham, D.,&the ILF Design Team. (2001). Designing and building an online community: The struggle to support sociability in the Inquiry Learning Forum. Educational Technology Research and Development, 49(4), 71-96
7. Barab, S. A., MaKinster, J., & Scheckler, R. (2003). Designing system dualities: Characterizing a web-supported teacher professional development community. Information Society, 19, 237-256
8. Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: Theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2, 141-178
9. Dewey, J., & Bentley, A. (1989). Knowing and the known. In J. A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The later works, Volume 16 (pp. 1-279). Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press. (Original work published 1949)
10. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta-konsultit
11. Engeström, Y. (1993). Developmental studies of work as a testbench of activity theory: The case of primary care medical practice. In S. Chaiklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context (pp. 64-103). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
12. Engeström, Y. (1994). Teachers as collaborative thinkers: Activity-theoretical study of an innovative teacher team. In I. Carlgren, G. Handal, & S. Vaage (Eds.), Teachers minds and actions: Research on teachers' thinking and practice. London: Falmer
13. Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinin, & R. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19-38). New York: Cambridge University Press
14. Garrison, J. (2001). An introduction to Dewey's theory of functional "trans-action": An alternative paradigm for activity theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 8, 275-296
15. Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1983). Epistemological and methodological bases of naturalistic inquiry. In G. F. Madaus, M. S. Scriven.,&D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation(pp. 311-334). Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff
16. Jonassen, D. H., & Rohrer-Murphy, L. (1999). Activity theory as a framework for designing constructivist learning environments. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(1), 61-79
17. Kim, A. J. (2000). Community building: Secret strategies for successful online communities on the Web. Berkeley, CA: Peachpit Press
18. Kling, R.,&Courtright, C. (in press).Characterizing collective behavior online: The social organization of hangouts, clubs, associations, teams and communities. In S. Barab, R. Kling,&J. Gray (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press
19. Kling, R., McKim, G., Fortuna, J.,&King, A. (2001). A bit more to IT: Scientific communication forums as socio-technical interaction networks. Unpublished manuscript
20. Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction (pp. 17-44). Cambridge,MA:MITPress
21. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action: How to follow scientists and engineers through society. Milton Keynes, England: Open University Press
22. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press
23. Leont'ev, A. (1974). The problem of activity in psychology. Soviet Psychology, 13(2), 4-33
24. Leont'ev, A. (1981). Problems of the development of mind. Moscow: Progress
25. Leont'ev, A. (1989). The problem of activity in the history of Soviet psychology. Soviet Psychology, 27(1), 22-39
26. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
27. Miettinen, R, (1997). The concept of activity in the analysis of heterogeneous networks in innovation process. CSIT Workshop, "Actor Network and After." Retrieved January 20, 2002, from http://communication.ucsd. edu/MCA/Paper/ Reijo/Reijo.html
28. Nardi, B. (Ed.). (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
29. Preece, J. (2000). Online communities: Designing usability, supporting sociability. Chichester, UK: Wiley
30. Schuler, D. & Namioka, A. (Eds.). (1993). Participatory design: Principles and practices. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc
31. Scriven, M. S. (1983). Evaluation methodologies. In G. F. Madaus, M. S. Scriven, & D. L. Stufflebeam (Eds.), Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (pp. 229-260). Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff
32. Smith, M. A., & Kollock, P. (Eds.). (1999). Communities in cyberspace. London: Routledge
33. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press