Applying an activity system to online collaborative group work analysis

British Journal of Educational Technology

Volumn 41, Issue 5, 2010, Pages 776-795

  Choi, Hyungshin ^a   Kang, Myunghee ^a  

^a Ewha Womans University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLLABORATIVE GROUPS; COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ACTIVITIES; COLLABORATIVE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT; COLLABORATIVE WORK; COMPUTER-MEDIATED COMMUNICATION; FOUR-GROUP; SYSTEMATIC FRAMEWORK; UNIT OF ANALYSIS;

COMPUTER SUPPORTED COOPERATIVE WORK; DISTRIBUTED COMPUTER SYSTEMS; STUDENTS;

LEARNING SYSTEMS;

EID: 77955763060     PISSN: 00071013     EISSN: 14678535     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00978.x     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. 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, 2, 76 108.
2. Bennett, S. (2005). Supporting collaborative project teams using computer-based technologies. In T. Roberts (Ed. Online collaborative learning: theory and practice (pp. 1 27). Hershey, PA : Information Science.
3. Bielaczyc, K. Collins, A. (1999). Learning communities in classrooms: a reconceptualization of educational practice. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed. Instructional design theories and models Vol. II (pp. 269 292). Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Candy, P., Crebert, G. O'Leary, J. (1994). Developing lifelong learners through undergraduate education. Canberra : Australian Government Publishing Service.
5. Collis, B. Margaryan, A. (2004). Applying activity theory to computer-supported collaborative learning and work-based activities in corporate settings. Educational Technology Research and Development, 52, 4, 38 52.
6. Dillenbourg, P. (Ed 1999). Collaborative learning: cognitive and computational approaches. Oxford : Pergamon.
7. Dirkx, J. Smith, R. (2005). Learning to learn in online collaborative groups. In T. Roberts (Ed. Online collaborative learning: theory and practice (pp. 132 159). Hershey, PA : Information Science.
8. Engestrm, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: an activity theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki : Orienta-Konsultit.
9. Engestrm, Y. Middleton, D. (1996). Cognition and communication at work. Boston, MA : Cambridge University Press.
10. Glaser, R. Strauss, R. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago, IL : Aldine.
11. Hooper, S. Hannafin, M. (1988). Cooperative CBI: the effects of heterogeneous versus homogeneous groups on the learning of progressively complex concepts. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 4, 4, 413 424.
12. Hung, D., Tan, S. Koh, T. (2006). From traditional to constructivist epistemologies: a proposed theoretical framework based on activity theory for learning communities. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 17, 1, 37 55.
13. Hung, D. W. Chen, D.-T. (2000). Appropriating and negotiating knowledge: technologies for a community of learners. Educational Technology, 40, 30, 29 32.
14. Johnson, D. W. Johnson, R. T. (1996). Cooperation and the use of technology. In D. H. Jonassen (Ed. Handbook of research for educational communications and technology (pp. 1017 1044). New York : Macmillan Library Reference.
15. Johri, A. (2005). Online, offline and in-between: analyzing medicated-action among American and Russian students in a global online class. In T. Roberts (Ed. Computer-supported collaborative learning in higher education (pp. 283 312). Hershey, PA : Idea Group.
16. Jonassen, D. (2000). Revisiting activity theory as a framework for designing student-centered learning environments. In D. Jonassen S. Land (Eds Theoretical foundations of learning environments (pp. 89 121). Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum.
17. 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.
18. Kaptelinin, V. (1996). Activity theory: implications for human-computer interaction. In B. A. Nardi (Ed. Context and consciousness: activity theory and human-computer interaction (pp. 103 116). Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
19. 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 : MIT Press.
20. Nardi, B. A. (Ed 1996). Context and consciousness: activity theory and human computer interaction. Cambridge, MA : MIT Press.
21. Ng, C. Hung, D. (2003). Conceptualizing a framework for design of online communities. International Journal on E-Learning, 4, 60 71.
22. Palloff, R. M. Pratt, K. (2005). Collaborating online: learning together in community. San Francisco, CA : A Wiley Imprint.
23. Rovai, A. (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. Internet and Higher Education, 5, 319 332.
24. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2003). Using activity theory as an analytical lens for examining technology professional development in schools. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10, 2, 100 119.
25. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2007). Confronting analytical dilemmas for understanding complex human interactions in design-based research from a cultural-historical activity theory (CHAT) framework. The Journal of Learning Sciences, 16, 2, 452 485.