Activity systems analysis methods: Understanding complex learning environments

Activity Systems Analysis Methods: Understanding Complex Learning Environments

Volumn , Issue , 2010, Pages 1-148

  Yamagata Lynch, Lisa C ^a  

^a NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84885816865     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4419-6321-5     Document Type: Book

References (133)

1. Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., Yamagata-Lynch, L., Squire, K., & Keating, T. (2002). Using activity theory to understand the systemharacterizing a technology-rich introductory astronomy course. Mind, Culture, anctivity, 9(2), 76. doi: 10.1207/S15327884MCA0902-02.
2. Barab, S. A., Schatz, S., & Scheckler, R. (2004). Using activity theory to conceptualize online community and using online community to conceptualize activity theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11(1), 25-47. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca1101-3.
3. Barge, J. K. (2001). Practical theory as mapping, engaged reflection, and transformative practice. Communication Theory, 11(1), 5-13. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.2001.tb00230.x.
4. Bedny, G. Z., & Harris, S. R. (2005). The systemic-structural theory of activity: Applications to the study of human work. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(2), 128-147. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca1202-4.
5. Bozhovich, L. I. (2004). L. S. Vygotsky's historical and cultural theory and its significance for contemporary studies of the psychology of personality. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(4), 20-34. (Pubitemid 39174004)
6. Brushlinskii, A. V. (2004). The activity approach and psychology. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(2), 69-81. (Pubitemid 38722041)
7. Buchmann, M. (1990). Beyond the lonely, choosing will: Professional development in teacher thinking. Teachers College Record, 91(4), 481-507
8. Center for Activity Theory and Developmental Work Research. (2004). Cultural-Historical Activity Theory. Retrieved June 4, 2008, from http://www.edu.helsinki.fi/activity/pages/chatanddwr/chat/.
9. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9-13. doi:10.3102/0013189X032001009 (Pubitemid 36209336)
10. Cole, M. (1985). The zone of proximal development: Where cultural and cognition create each other. In J. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture, Communication, and Cognition (pp. 146-161). New York: Cambridge University Press.
11. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
12. Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1-46). New York: Cambridge University Press.
13. Collins, A., Joseph, D., & Bielaczyc, K. (2004). Design research: Theoretical and methodological issues. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 15-42. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls1301-2. (Pubitemid 38202849)
14. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. C. (2008). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (3rd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
15. Craig, R. T. (1996). Practical-theoretical argumentation. Argumentation, 10(4), 461-474. doi: 10.1007/BF00142979.
16. Craig, R. T., & Tracy, K. (1995). Grounded practical theory: The case of intellectual discussion. Communication Theory, 5(3), 248-272. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2885.1995.tb00108.x.
17. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
18. Davydov, V. V. (1999). The content and unsolved problems of activity theory. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinent & R.-L. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 39-52). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
19. Day, C. (1998). Re-thinking school-university partnerships: A Swedish case study. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(8), 807-819. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00026-2. (Pubitemid 128151668)
20. Denzin, N. K. (1989). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (3rd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
21. Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
22. Donlevy, J. G. and Donlevy, T. R. (1999). Teachers, technology and training. International Journal of Instructional Media, 26(4), 363-369.
23. El'konin, B. D. (1993). The nature of human action. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 31(3), 22-46.
24. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy. Retrieved November 30, 2009, from http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/Engestrom/expanding/toc. htm.
25. 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). New York: Cambridge University Press.
26. Engeström, Y. (1996). Developmental work research as educational research: Looking ten years back into the zone of proximal development. Nordisk Pedagogik, 16(3), 131-143.
27. Engeström, Y. (1999a). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19-38). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
28. Engeström, Y. (1999b). Expansive visibilization of work: An activity-theoretical perspective. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8(1-2), 63-93. doi: 10.1023/A:1008648532192.
29. Engeström, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics, 43(7), 960-974. doi: 10.1080/001401300409143. (Pubitemid 30458393)
30. Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptuliza-tion. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133-156. doi: 10.1080/13639080020028747.
31. Engeström, Y. (2008). From Teams to Knots: Activity-Theoretical Studies of Collaboration and Learning at Work. Cambridge University Press.
32. Engeström, Y., Brown, K., Christopher, L. C., & Gregory, J. (1997). Coordination, cooperation, and communication in the course: Expansive transitions in legal work. In Mind, culture, and activity: Seminal papers from the laboratory of comparative human cognition (pp. 501). New York: Cambridge University Press.
33. Engeström, Y., & Escalante, V. (1996). Mundane tool or object of affection? The rise and fall of the postal buddy. In B. A. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. MA: MIT Press.
34. Engeström, Y., & Middleton, D. (1996). Introduction: Studying work as mindful practice. In Y. Engeström, & D. Middleton (Eds.), Cognition and communication at work (pp. 1-14). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
35. Engeström, Y., & Miettinen, R. (1999). Introduction. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R.-L. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 1-16). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
36. Fetterman, D. M. (2009). Ethnography: Step-by-step (3rd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
37. Foot, K. A. (2002). Pursuing an evolving object: A case study in object formation and identification. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(2), 132-149. doi: 10.1207/S15327884MCA0902-04.
38. Gay, G., & Hembrooke, H. (2004). Activity-centered design: An ecological approach to designing smart tools and usable systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
39. Gallimore, R., & Tharp, R. (1990). Teaching mind in society: Teaching schooling, and literate discourse. In L. C. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and education: Instructional implications and applications of sociohistorical psychology (pp. 175-205). New York: Cambridge University Press.
40. Galperin, P. I. (1989). Mental actions as a basis for the formation of thoughts and images. Soviet Psychology, 27(3), 45-64.
41. Galperin, P. I. (1992). The problem of activity in Soviet psychology. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 30(4), 37-59.
42. Geertz, C. (1973). Thick description: Toward an interpretive theory of culture. In C. Geertz (Ed.), The interpretation of cultures (pp. 3-30). London: Basic Books.
43. Glaser, B. G. (1992). Emergence vs forcing: Basics of grounded theory analysis. Mill Valley, CA: Sociology Press.
44. Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Hawthorne, NY: Aldine de Gruyter.
45. Glesne, C. (2005). Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction (3rd ed.). Allyn & Bacon.
46. Hoadley, C. M. (2004). Methodological alignment in design-based research. Educational Psychologist, 39(4), 203-212. doi: 10.1207/s15326985ep3904-2. (Pubitemid 40030825)
47. Hyysalo, S. (2005). Objects and motives in a product design process. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 19-36. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca1201-3.
48. Ishler, A. L., Johnson, R. T., & Johnson, D. W. (1998). Long-term effectiveness of a statewide staff development program on cooperative learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(3), 273-281. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(97) 00039-5. (Pubitemid 128073060)
49. Kaptelinin, V. (2005). The object of activity: Making sense of the sense-maker. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 4-18. doi: 10.1207/ s15327884mca1201-2.
50. Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. A. (2006). Acting with Technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
51. Kozulin, A. (1990). Vygotsky's psychology: A biography of ideas. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
52. Kozulin, A. (1996). Vygotsky in context. In A. Kouzlin (Ed.), Thought and language (pp. xi-lvi). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
53. Lave, J. (1993). The practice of learning. In S. Chailklin & J. Lave (Eds.), Understanding practice: Perspectives on activity and context, Learning in doing: Social, cognitive, and computarional perspectives (pp. 3-32). New York: Cambridge University Press.
54. Lazarev, V. S. (2004). The crisis of "the activity approach" in psychology and possible ways to overcome it. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(3), 35-58. (Pubitemid 38978064)
55. Leontiev, A. A. (1981). Psychology and the language learning process. Oxford, New York: Pergamon Press.
56. Leontiev, A. A. (1995). Ecce homo ("Summit" psychology and the prospects of investigating activity). Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 33(4), 35-46.
57. Leontiev, A. N. (1974). The problem of activity in psychology. Soviet Psychology, 13(2), 4-33.
58. Leontiev, A. N. (1978). The problem of activity and psychology. In A. N. Leont'ev (Ed.), Activity, consciousness, and personality (pp. 45-74). Englewood Cliffs: Prentice Hall.
59. Leontiev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), The concept of activity in Soviet psychology (pp. 37-71). New York: M. E. Sharpe.
60. LePage, P., Bordreau, S., Maier, S., Robinson, J., & Cox, H. (2001). Exploring the complexities of the relationship between K-12 and college faculty in a nontraditional professional development program. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17(2), 195-211. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(00)00051-2.
61. Lieberman, A., & Miller, L. (1999). Teachers transforming their world and their work. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
62. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
63. Luria, A. R. (1979). The making of mind: A personal account of Soviet psychology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
64. Marken, J. A. (2006). An application of activity theory: A case of global training. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 19(2), 27-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1937-8327.2006.tb00364.x.
65. Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P. C., Krajcik, J. S., & Soloway, E. (1998). New technologies for teacher professional development. Teaching and Teacher Education, 14(1), 33-52. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(98)00059-6. (Pubitemid 128063843)
66. Matusov, E. (1998). When solo activity is not privileged: Participation and internalization models of development. Human Development, 41(5-6), 326-349. doi: 10.1159/000022595.
67. Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation: Revised and Expanded from Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education (3rd ed.). San Francisco, California: Jossey-Bass.
68. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
69. Mwanza, D. (2002a). Conceptualising work activity for CAL systems design. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(1), 84-92. doi: 10.1046/j.0266-4909. 2001.00214.x. (Pubitemid 36836976)
70. Mwanza, D. (2002b). Towards an activity-oriented design method for HCI research and practice. The Open University.
71. Nardi, B. A. (1996). Activity theory and human-computer interaction. In B. A. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction (pp. 1-16). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
72. Nardi, B. A. (2005). Objects of desire: Power and passion in collaborative activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 37-51. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca1201-4.
73. Packer, M. J., Goicoechea, J. (2000). Sociocultural and constructivist theories of learning: Ontology, not just epistemology. Educational Psychologist, 35(4), 227-241. doi: 10.1207/S15326985EP3504-02.
74. Prawat, R. (1999). Social constructivism and the process-content distinction as viewed by Vygotsky and the Pragmatists. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 6(4), 255-273. doi: 10.1080/10749039909524731.
75. Ratner, C. (2000). A cultural-psychological analysis of emotions. Culture and Psychology, 6(1), 5-39. doi: 10.1177/1354067X0061001.
76. Ratner, C. (2008). Cultural psychology and qualitative methodology: Scientific and political considerations. Culture and Psychology, 14(3), 259-288. doi: 10.1177/1354067X08088557.
77. Roschelle, J. (1998). Activity theory: A foundation for designing learning technology? The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(2), 241-255. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0702-5.
78. Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
79. Rogoff, B. (1995). Observing sociocultural activity on three planes: Participatory appropriation, guided participation, and apprenticeship. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 139-164). New York: Cambridge University Press.
80. Rogoff, B. (1998). Cognition as a collaborative process. In W. Damon, D. Kuhn, & R. S. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 2. Cognition, perception, and language (Vol. 2, pp. 679-744). New York: Wiley.
81. Roth, W. M., & Tobin, K. (2002). Redesigning an "urban" teacher education program: An activity theory perspective. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(2), 108-131. doi: 10.1207/S15327884MCA0902-03
82. Rozin, V. M. (2004). Value foundations of conceptions of activity in psychology and contemporary methodology. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 42(3), 72-89. (Pubitemid 38978066)
83. Sawyer, R. K. (2002). Unresolved tensions in sociocultural theory: Analogies with contemporary sociological debates. Culture and Psychology, 8(3), 283-306. doi: 10.1177/1354067X0283002.
84. Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). On paradigms and methods: What do you do when the ones you know don't do what you want them to? Issues in the analysis of data in the form of videotapes. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2(2), 179-214. doi: 10.1207/s15327809jls0202-3.
85. Scribner, S. (1997). A sociocultural approach to the study of mind. In E. Toback, R. J. Flamagne, M. B. Parlee, L. M. W. Martin, & A. S. Kapelman (Eds.), Mind and social practice: Selected writings of Sylvia Scribner (pp. 266-280). New York: Cambridge University Press.
86. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
87. Stetsenko, A. (2005). Activity as object-related: Resolving the dichotomy of individual and collective planes of activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 70-88. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca1201-6.
88. Stetsenko, A., Arievitch, I. (1997). Constructing and deconstructing the self: Comparing post-Vygotskian and discourse-based versions of social constructivism. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 4(3), 159-172. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca0403-3.
89. Strauss, A. L. (1987). Qualitative analysis for social scientists. London: Cambridge University Press.
90. Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
91. Suchman, L. (1987). Plans and situated actions. New York: Cambridge University Press.
92. Tharp, R. G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, and schooling in social context. New York: Cambridge University Press.
93. Toomela, A. (1996). How culture transforms mind: A process of internalization. Culture and Psychology, 2(3), 285-305. doi: 10.1177/1354067X9600200305. (Pubitemid 126310595)
94. Toomela, A. (2000). Activity theory is a dead end for cultural-historical psychology. Culture and Psychology, 6(3), 353-364. doi: 10.1177/ 1354067X0063005.
95. Toomela, A. (2008a). Vygotskian cultural-historical and sociocultural approaches represent two levels of analysis: Complementarity instead of opposition. Culture and Psychology, 14(1), 57-69. doi: 10.1177/1354067X07085812.
96. Toomela, A. (2008b). Activity theory is a dead end for methodological thinking in cultural psychology too. Culture and Psychology, 14(3), 289-303. doi: 10.1177/1354067X08088558.
97. Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
98. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
99. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The problem and the method of investigation. In R. W. Rieber, & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky: Volume 1 problems of general psychology (pp. 43-51). New York: Plenum Press.
100. Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. New York: Cambridge University Press.
101. Wertsch, J. V. (1985a). Introduction. In J. V. Wertsch (Ed.), Culture communication and cognition: Vygotskian perspective (pp. 1-18). New York: Cambridge University Press.
102. Wertsch, J. V. (1985b). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
103. Wertsch, J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind: A sociocultural approach to mediated action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
104. Wertsch, J. V. (1998). Mind as action. New York: Oxford University Press.
105. Wertsch, J. V., Del Rio, P., & Alvarez, A. (1995). Sociocultural studies: History, action, and mediation. In J. V. Wertsch, P. Del Rio, & A. Alvarez (Eds.), Sociocultural studies of mind (pp. 1-34). New York: Cambridge University Press.
106. Wertsch, J. V., Tulviste, P., & Hagstrom, F. (1993). A Sociocultural approach to agency. In E. A. Forman, N. Minick, & C. A. Stone (Eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children's development (pp. 336-356). New York: Oxford University Press.
107. Wiedenkeller, Pat. (2008). Fuel Prices Squeeze School Districts. The New York Times.com. Retrieved October 5, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/ 07/nyregion/nyregionspecial2/07Rbus.html.
108. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2003a). How a technology professional development program fit into the work lives of teachers. Teaching and Teacher Education, 19(6), 591-607. doi: 10.1016/S0742-051X(03)00056-8. (Pubitemid 36977240)
109. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2003b). Using activity theory as an analytical lens for examining technology professional development in schools. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10(2), 100-119. doi: 10.1207/S1532-7884MCA1002-2.
110. 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 the Learning Sciences, 16(4), 451-484. doi: 10.1080/10508400701524777.
111. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., & Smaldino, S. (2007). Using activity theory to evaluate and improve K-12 school and university partnerships. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30(4), 364-380. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2007.08.003. (Pubitemid 47559968)
112. Yin, D. R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Beverly Hills, CA, Sage Publications, Inc.
113. Zeek, C., Foote, M., & Walker, C. (2001). Teacher stories and transactional inquiry: Hearing the voices of mentor teachers. Journal of Teacher Education, 52(5), 377-385. doi: 10.1177/0022487101052005004.
114. Zinchenko, V. P., & Leontiev, D. A. (1995). Discussion of problem of activity. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 33(4), 8-11.
115. Barab, S. A., Barnet, G. M., Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., 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. doi: 10.1207/S15327884MCA0902-02
116. Barab, S. A., Schatz, S., & Scheckler, R. (2004). Using activity theory to conceptualize online community and using online community to conceptualize activity theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 11(1), 25-47. doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca1101-3
117. Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (1993). A cultural-historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon (Ed.), Distributed cognitions: Psychological and educational considerations (pp. 1-46). New York: Cambridge University Press
118. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit Oy. Retrieved November 30, 2009, from http://lchc.ucsd.edu/MCA/Paper/Engestrom/expanding/toc. htm
119. Engeström, Y. (1999b). Expansive visibilization of work: An activity-theoretical perspective. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 8(1-2), 63-93. doi: 10.1023/A:1008648532192
120. 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). New York: Cambridge University Press
121. Engeström, Y. (1996). Developmental work research as educational research: Looking ten years back into the zone of proximal development. Nordisk Pedagogik, 16(3), 131-143
122. Engeström, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics, 43(7), 960-974. doi: 10.1080/001401300409143 (Pubitemid 30458393)
123. Foot, K. A. (2002a). Pursuing an evolving object: A case study in object formation and identification. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 9(2), 132-149. doi: 10.1207/S15327884MCA0902-04
124. Gay, G., & Hembrooke, H. (2004). Activity-centered design: An ecological approach to designing smart tools and usable systems. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
125. Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. A. (2006). Acting with Technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press
126. Kaptelinin, V. (2005). The object of activity: Making sense of the sense-maker. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 4-18. doi: 10.1207/ s15327884mca1201-2
127. Marken, J. A. (2006). An application of activity theory: A case of global training. Performance Improvement Quarterly, 19(2), 27-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1937-8327.2006.tb00364.x
128. Mwanza, D. (2002a). Conceptualizing work activity for CAL systems design. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18(1), 84-92. doi: 10.1046/j.0266-4909. 2001.00214.x (Pubitemid 36836976)
129. Nardi, B. A. (1996). Context and consciousness: Activity theory and human-computer interaction. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
130. Nardi, B. A. (2005). Objects of desire: Power and passion in collaborative activity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 12(1), 37-51 doi: 10.1207/s15327884mca1201-4
131. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C. (2003b). Using activity theory as an analytical lens for examining technology professional development in schools. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 10(2), 100-119. doi: 10.1207/S1532-7884MCA1002-2
132. 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 The Learning Sciences, 16(4), 451-484. doi: 10.1080/10508400701524777
133. Yamagata-Lynch, L. C., & Smaldino, S. (2007). Using Activity Theory to Evaluate and Improve K-12 School and University Partnerships. Evaluation and Program Planning, 30(4), 364-380. doi: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2007.08.003 (Pubitemid 47559968)