Studying doctoral education: Using activity theory to shape methodological tools

Innovations in Education and Teaching International

Volumn 46, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 265-277

  Beauchamp, Catherine ^a   Jazvac Martek, Marian ^b   McAlpine, Lynn ^c  

^a BISHOP'S UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^b MCGILL UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Activity theory; Doctoral education; Higher education

Indexed keywords

EID: 75149151831     PISSN: 14703297     EISSN: 14703300     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14703290903068839     Document Type: Article

References (18)

1. Blackler, F. (1993). Knowledge and the theory of organizations: Organizations as activity systems and the reframing of management. Journal of Management Studies, 30, 863-884.
2. Edwards, A., & Daniels, H. (2004). Using sociocultural and activity theory in educational research. Educational Review, 56(2), 107-111.
3. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theory approach to developmental research. Helsinki, Finland: Orienta Konsultit.
4. Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R.-L. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
5. Golde, C.M. (2000). Should I stay or should I go? Student descriptions of the doctoral attrition process. Review of Higher Education, 29, 299-309.
6. Green, B. (2005). Unfinished business: Subjectivity and supervision. Higher Education Research and Development, 24(2), 151-164.
7. John-Steiner, V. (1999). Sociocultural and feminist theory: Mutuality and relevance. In S. Chaiklin, M. Hedegaard, & U. Jensen (Eds.), Activity theory and social practice (pp. 201-244). Aarhus, Denmark: Aarhus University Press.
8. Knight, P., Tait, J., & Yorke, M. (2006). The professional learning of teachers in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 31, 319-339.
9. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
10. Leadbetter, J. (2005). Activity theory as a conceptual framework and analytical tool within the practice of educational psychology. Educational and Child Psychology, 22(1), 18-28.
11. Lundell, D., & Beach, R. (2003). Dissertations writers' negotiations with competing activity systems. In C. Bazerman & D. Russell (Eds.), Writing selves/writing societies: Research from activity perspectives. Perspectives on Writing. Fort Collins, CO: The WAC Clearinghouse and Mind, Culture and Activity. Retrieved July 30, 2007, from http://wac.colostate.edu/books/selves_societies/lundell_beach/
12. McAlpine, L., & Hopwood, N. (2006, December). Conceptualizing the research PhD: Towards an integrative perspective. Paper presented at the conference of the Society for Research in Higher Education, Brighton, UK.
13. McAlpine, L., & Jazvac-Martek, M. (2008, March). Tracking the lived experience of doctoral students: What weekly logs tell us about the nature of their academic practice(s). Paper presented at the conference of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
14. McAlpine, L., Jazvac-Martek, M., & Hopwood, N. (2007, December). Doctoral student experience: Events that contribute to feeling like an academic. Paper presented at the conference of the Society for Research in Higher Education, Brighton, UK.
15. McAlpine, L., & Norton, J. (2006). Reframing our approach to doctoral programs: A learning perspective. Higher Education Research and Development, 25(1), 3-17.
16. Roth, W.-M. (2004). Activity theory and education: An introduction. Mind, Culture and Activity, 11(1), 1-8.
17. Roth, W.-M. (2007). Emotions at work: A contribution to third-generation cultural-historical activity theory. Mind, Culture and Activity, 14(1/2), 40-63.
18. Smagorinsky, P., Cook, L., Moore, C., Jackson, A., & Fry, P. (2004). Tensions in learning to teach: Accommodation and the development of a teaching identity. Journal of Teacher Education, 55(1), 8-24.