Advertisement

Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 15, Issue 3, pp 205–217 | Cite as

What is an affordance and can it help us understand the use of ICT in education?

  • Michael Hammond
Article

Abstract

This paper revisits the concept of affordance and explores its contribution to an understanding of the use of ICT for teaching and learning. It looks at Gibson’s original idea of affordance and at some of the difficulties long associated with the use of the word. It goes on to describe the translation of the concept of affordance into the field of design through the work, in particular, of Norman. The concept has since been translated into research concerning ICT and further opportunities and difficulties emerge. The paper locates key points of divergence within the usage of ‘affordance’, as involving direct perception, invariant properties and complementarity. It concludes by arguing that affordance offers a distinctive perspective on the use of ICT in education because of its focus on possibilities for action.

Keywords

Affordances Perception of ICT Ecological psychology Uses of ICT 

References

  1. Armstrong, V., Barnes, S., Sutherland, R., Curran, S., Mills, S., & Thompson, I. (2005). Collaborative research methodology for investigating teaching and learning: the use of interactive whiteboard technology. Educational Review, 57(4), 457–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Baerentsen, K., & Trettvik, J. (2002). An activity theory approach to affordance, in ACM International Conference Proceeding Series; University of Aarhus. Denmark, 31, 51–60.Google Scholar
  3. Brown, J., Stillman, G. and Herbert, S. (2004) Can the notion of affordances be of use in the design of a technology enriched Mathematics curriculum? In I. Putt, R, Faragher and M. McLean (Eds) Proceedings of the 27th Annual Conference of the Mathematics Education Research Group of Australasia, Sydney, MERGA, 1, 119–126.Google Scholar
  4. Chemero, A. (2003). An outline theory of affordances. Ecological Psychology, 15(2), 181–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Conole, G., & Dyke, M. (2004). What are the affordances of information and communication and technologies. ALT-J Research in Learning Technology, 12(2), 113–124.Google Scholar
  6. Derry, J. (2007). Epistemology and conceptual resources for the development of learning technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 23, 503–510.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dillon, P. (2004). Trajectories and tensions in the theory of information and communication technology in education. British Journal of Educational Studies, 52(2), 138–150.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Downes, T. (2002). Blending play, practice and performance: children’s use of the computer at home. Journal of Educational Enquiry, 3(2), 21.Google Scholar
  9. Gall, M., & Breeze, N. (2005). Music composition lessons: the multimodal affordances of technology. Educational Review, 57(4), 415–433.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gaver, W. (1996). Situating Action II: affordances for interaction: the social is material for design. Ecological Psychology, 8(2), 111–129.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. Gaver, W. (1991). Technology affordances, Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on Human factors in computing systems: New Orleans (pp. 79–84). United States: Louisiana.Google Scholar
  12. Gibson, J. (1986). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  13. Greeno, J. (1994). Gibson’s affordances. Psychological Review, 101(2), 336–342.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hammond, M., Younie, S., Woollard, J., Cartwright, V., Benzie, D. (2009) What does out past involvement with computers in education tell us?, The Association for Information Technology in Teacher Education.Google Scholar
  15. Hutchby, I. (2001). Technologies, texts and affordances. Sociology, 35, 441–456.Google Scholar
  16. John, P., & Sutherland, R. (2004). Teaching and learning with ICT: new technology, new pedagogy, Education. Communication and In Information, 4(1), 101–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. John, P. (2005). The sacred and the profane: subject sub culture, pedaogogical practice and teachers’ perception of the classroom uses of ICT. Educational Review, 57(4), 471–490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. John, P., & Sutherland, R. (2005). Affordance, opportunity and the pedagogical implications of ICT. Educational Review, 57(4), 405–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kennewell, S. (2001). Using affordances and constraints to evaluate the use of information and communications technology in teaching and learning. Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, 10(1&2), 101–116.Google Scholar
  20. Kennewell, S., Tanner, H., Jones, S., & Beauchamp, G. (2008). Analysing the use of interactive technology to implement interactive teaching. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 24(1), 61–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Latour, B. (2002) Morality and technology, the end of the means, Theory, Culture and Society, 19, 5/6, 247 –260 (translated by Couze Venn).Google Scholar
  22. Laurillard, D., Stratfold, M., Luckin, R., Plowman, L. & Taylor, J. (2000) Affordances for learning in a non-linear narrative medium, Journal of Interactive Media in Education, 2000 (2) accessed at [www-jime.open.ac.uk/00/2]
  23. Mercer, N. (2007) Interactive whiteboards as pedagogic tools in primary schools. Full research report, ESRC End of Award report RES - 000- 22- 1269, ESRC, Swindon.Google Scholar
  24. Michaels, C., & Carello, C. (1981). Direct Perception. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
  25. McGrenere, J. and Ho, W. (2000). Affordances: Clarifying and evolving a concept. Proceedings of Graphic Interface 2000. Montreal, Canada, May. Pp. 179–186Google Scholar
  26. Norman, D. (1998). The Psychology of Everyday Things. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  27. Pea, R. (1993). Practices of distributed intelligence and designs for education. In R. Pea (Ed.), Distributed Cognitions, Psychological and educational considerations. Cambridge: Cambridge university Press.Google Scholar
  28. Scarantino, A. (2003). Affordance explained. Philosophy of Science, 70, 949–961.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Sutherland, R. (2004) Interactive Education: Teaching and Learning in the Information Age, Full Report, L139251060, ESRC, Swindon and accessed http://www.esrcsocietytoday.ac.uk/ESRCInfoCentre/ViewFullAwardPage.aspx?data=lWEC7sNY9jm1ZHivC4z6rQ%3D%3D&xu=0&isAwardHolder=&isProfiled=&AwardHolderID=&Sector=&Awardnumber=L139251060
  30. Teacher Training Agency. (1998). The Use of ICT in Subject Teaching: Expected outcomes for teachers. London: Teacher Training Agency.Google Scholar
  31. Turvey, M. (1992). Affordances and prospective control: an outline of the ontology. Ecological Psychology, 4(3), 173–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Valenzuela, J. and Soriano, C. (2005) Cognitive metaphor and empirical methods, Barcelona Language and Literature Studies, 14, online journal access at www.publicacions.ub.es/revistes/bells14/PDF/metaphor_02.pdf
  33. Warren, W. H. (1984). Perceiving affordances: visual guidance of stair climbing. Journal of Experimental, Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 683–703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Webb, M. (2005). Affordances of ICT in science learning: implications for an integrated pedagogy. International Journal of Science Education, 27(6), 705–735.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Centre for New Technologies Research in EducationInstitute of Education University of WarwickCoventryUK

Personalised recommendations