Skip to main content

Activity Theory in Formal and Informal Science Education

The ATFISE Project

  • Chapter
Activity Theory in Formal and Informal Science Education

Abstract

This book aims to contribute to an emergent agenda for cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) and science education in Europe. It especially focuses on the application of activity theory in formal and informal science education. This focus leads to rethinking scientific literacy (Roth & Lee, 2004), as well as to rethinking the role of information and communication technologies (van Eijck & Roth, 2007; Kaptelinin & Nardi, 2006).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit, Oy.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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, MA: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: Analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. Punamaki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y. (2005). Developmental work research: Expanding activity theory in practice. Berlin: Lehmanns Media.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamaki R. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fleer, M., & Hedegaard, M. (2010). Children’s development as participation in everyday practices across different institutions. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 17(2), 149–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hedegaard, M. (2009). Children’s development from a cultural-historical approach: Children’s activity in everyday local settings as foundation for their development. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 16, 64–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jorde, D., & Dillon, J. (Eds.). (in preparation). A handbook of science education in Europe. Rotterdam: Sense.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. (2006). Acting with technology: Activity theory and interaction design. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kaptelinin, V., Nardi, B. A., & Macaulay, C., (1999). The activity checklist: A tool for representing the “Space” of context, ACM /Interactions. Methods & Tools, 6, 27–39.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lantolf, J. (2006). Sociocultural theory and L2: State of the art. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(1), 67–109.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plakitsi, K., & Kokkotas, V. (2010). Time for education: Ontology, epistemology and discursiveness in teaching fundamental scientific topics. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1203, 1347–1353. This paper was based on a presentation to the 1st International Conference of International Society for Cultural and Activity Research (I.S.C.A.R.), Seville, Spain, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kravtsova, E. E. (2006). The concept of age-specific new psychological formations in contemporary developmental psychology. Journal of Russian and East European Psychology, 44(6), 6–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness. London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mwanza, D., & Engeström, Y. (2003). Pedagogical adeptness in the design of e-learning environments: Experiences from the Lab@Future project. In Proceedings of e-learn 2003: International conference on e-learning in corporate, government, healthcare, and higher education (Vol. 2, pp. 1344–1347). Phoenix, AZ.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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. 69–103). Cambridge and London: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2006). PISA 2006 results. Science Competencies for Tomorrow’s World (2 Vols.).

    Google Scholar 

  • Piliouras, P., Plakitsi, K., & Kokkotas, P. (2007). Sofia doesn’t speak during team work. Using discourse analysis as a tool for the transformation of peer group interactions in an elementary multicultural science classroom. Paper presented to 12th Biennial Conference for Research on Learning and Instruction, EARLI 2007, Budapest, Hungary.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plakitsi, K., & Kokkotas, V. (2006). Enhancing teachers’ education through interpretive-philosophical meditation about the nature of science: The MaPrOject. Paper presented to the Joint North American – European and South American (N.A.E.S.A.) Symposium Science and Technology Literacy in the 21st Century, May 31–June 4, 2006, University of Cyprus. Proceedings, Vol. 1, pp. 200–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plakitsi, K., & Kokkotas, V. (2007). Reflective, informal and non-linear aspects of argumentation in school practice. Yearbook of School of Education, University of Ioannina, B: 199–213.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W.-M., & Lee, S. (2004). Science education as/for participation in the community. Science Education, 88(2), 263–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roth, W. M., & Tobin, K. (2004). Cogenerative dialoguing and metaloguing: Reflexivity of processes and genres [35 paragraphs]. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung/Forum: Qualitative Social Research, 5(3), Art. 7. Retrieved from http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0114-fqs040370.

  • Roth, W.-M., & Tobin, K. (Eds.). (2005). Teaching to-gether, learning together. New York: Peter Lang.

    Google Scholar 

  • van Eijck, M., & Roth, W.-M. (2007a). Keeping the local local: Recalibrating the status of science and Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) in education. Science Education, 91, 926–947.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Eijck, M., & Roth, W. M. (2007b). Rethinking the role of information technology-based research tools in students’ development of scientific literacy. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 16(3), 225–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (M. J. Hall, Trans., Vol. 5, Child Psychology). New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2013 Sense Publishers

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Plakitsi, K. (2013). Activity Theory in Formal and Informal Science Education. In: Plakitsi, K. (eds) Activity Theory in Formal and Informal Science Education. Cultural and Historical Perspectives on Science Education. SensePublishers, Rotterdam. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-317-4_1

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Societies and partnerships