Activity Theory, Expansive Learning Cycle

Activity theory addresses learning activities that take place in a complex environment (non-linear, dynamic, heterogeneous) as opposed to a linear learning environment (homogenous, static, instructional). In the following diagram the subject interacts with the object mediated by various influences from the environment; instruments, division of labor, community, and rules (Engerstom, 2001).

Retrieved from: http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/File:Activity-theory.gif

When viewing theories Engerstom (2001) poised that any theory must answer the following four questions:

1. Who are the subjects of learning, how are they defined and located?;
2. When do they learn, what makes them make the effort?;
3. What do they learn, what are the contents and outcomes of learning?;
4. How do they learn, what are the key actions or processes of learning? (P. 133).

It is from activity theory that Engersom (2001) derived the Cycle of Expansive Learning. This cycle could be viewed as an extension of 

Shewart's Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle (McLean 2006, p. 19) and Lewin's planned approach to change. Both of these change theories are identified under the action research literature. 

Engerstom's cycle of expansive learning is shown in the following figure:

Figure Retrieved from: http://edutechwiki.unige.ch/en/File:Expansive-learning.png

In this expansive learning cycle the following steps are followed:

1. Charting the Situation
• Something must be done.
• Commitment to change.
2. Analyzing the Situation
• How did we work in the past (history)?
• What are our present troubles and contradictions?
3. Creating a new Model/Vision
• How do we want to work in the future?
4. Concretizing and Testing the new Model
• What changes do we want to try next month?
5. Implementing the new Model
• Putting into practice the first steps.
• Pushing for the next steps.
6. Spreading and Consolidating
• Teaching others what we learned (knowledge distribution)
• Codifying the new rules, etc.
• Permanent reflection (Weber, 2008, p. 53).

Activity theory focuses more on cultural theory while action research focus more on conducting research in natural settings. In either case, there are similarities in the various change models from both schools of theory. Diversifying one's knowledge base can only be productive in allowing one to view change models from different perspectives, resulting in more productive results.

References:

Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive learning at work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14, 133-156. doi: 10.1080/13639080020028747

McLean, G. N. (2006). Organization Development: Principles, Processes, Performance. San Francisco, CA: Berrtt-Koehler.

Weber, S. (2008). Intercultural learning in business and human resource education. In Nijhof, W. J., & Nieuwenhuis, L. F. M. (ads.), The Learning Potential of the Workplace, 47-69. Rotterdam, Netherlands: Senge.

Action Research, Action Learning: Research in Organizations

Action research is a research method that was designed to conduct research in the field as opposed to conducting research in the lab. Action research was coined and practiced successfully by Kurt Lewin and has been used extensively in various disciplines and differing field (live) situations since.  

Compared to traditional research, action research is considered more as a quasi-experimental design. Bryman (2008) identified quasi-experiments as: "studies that have certain characteristics of experimental designs but that do not fulfill all of the internal validity requirements" (pp. 40-41). In natural settings, such as those found in educational settings and in organizations, it is nearly impossible to conduct a pure 'traditional' experiment: resulting in action research being one of the primary experimental designs utilized in natural environments (in one form or another).

Bargal (2008) identified action research as being composed of both quantitative and qualitative research methods: "the scientific and systematic accumulation of data as well as the development of the interventions that represent practical solutions to problems experienced by people and their communities" (p. 18). Bargal (2006) highlighted Lewin's 'action research' systematic steps:

1. Action research combines a systematic study, sometimes experimental, of a social problem as well as the endeavors to solve it.
2. Action research includes a spiral process of data collection to determine goals, action to implement goals and assessment of the result of the intervention.
3. Action research demands feedback of the results of intervention to all parties involved in the research.
4. Action research implies continuous cooperation between researchers and practitioners.
5. Action research relies on the principles of group dynamics and is anchored in tis change phases. The phases are: unfreezing, moving, and refreezing. Decision-making is mutual and is carried out in a public way.
6. Action research takes into account issues of values, objectives and power needs of parties involved.
7. Action research serves to create knowledge, to formulate principles of intervention and also to develop instruments for selection, intervention and training.
8. Within the framework of action research there is much emphasis on recruitment, training and support of the change agents (p. 4, Figure 1).

A more condensed version of action research can be found in Gall, Gall, and Borgs' (2010) steps:

1. Selection of a focus for the study.
2. Data Collection.
3. Analysis and interpretation of the data.
4. Taking Action.
5. Reflection (pp. 491-493).

As a version of action research, action learning has developed to become a unique problem solving activity used in the classrooms, training rooms, and within organizational teams. Action learning is similar to a training exercise; however, the main difference is that a real problem is being considered opposed to some hypothetical simulated scenario. This process is beneficial to the organization by resolving real issues as well as providing a means for training groups to learn together and to solve real-time problems. Gorrell (2012) identified the benefits of action learning as: "Action learning provides an opportunity to combine the real work objectives of an important offsite event with the beneficial outcomes of a reflective team-building experience" (p. 26). Recommended action learning steps provided by Gorrell (2012) were:

1. Restate the problem statement.
2. Determine assumptions behind the issue.
3. Set goals that would solve the issue at hand.
4. Set specific tasks to realize the goals.
5. Create an accountability matrix.
6. Offer post-action learning feedback (p. 29).

Various other versions of action research and action learning can be found. Regardless of the steps or design, it is recommended to take care to: a) identify the problem carefully, b) place the problem in the environment, c) carefully collect any appropriate data, d) properly analyze the data, e) make a decision, and f) reflect on the processes practiced to make the next problem solving exercise that much easier. And above all, and probably most important, g) assure you have management buy-in.

References:

Bargal, D. (2008). Action research: A paradigm for achieving social change. Small Group Research, 39(17), 17-27. doi: 10.1177/1046496407313407

Bargal, D. (2006). Personal and intellectual influences leading to Lewin's paradigm of action research. Action Research, 4(4), 367-388. doi: 10.1177/1476750306070101

Bryman, A. (2008). Social Research Methods (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2010). Applying Educational Research (6th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Gorrell, P (2012). Action learning for teams. Chief Learning Officer, July, 26-29.

Learning from Training: Learning Theories

Learning is perceived to be both a cognitive construct and a social construct.  Some may argue that learning is predominantly cognitive while others would argue that learning is primarily social.  In either case, regardless of which epistemology you prescribe to, learning from training works best when both cognitive and social activities are incorporated.

Learning as a cognitive construct:

Merriam, Caffarella, and Baumgartner (2007) identified the cognitive perspective of learning from the camps of Piaget, Kuhn, and Dewey.  This perspective views learning as: "meaning… by the individual and is dependent on the individual's previous and current knowledge structure. Learning is thus an internal cognitive activity" (p. 291). This stream of learning theories view past experiences, existing knowledge, and interactions with the environment as critical to new learning.

Learning as a social construct:

Merriam et al. (2007) identified the social perspective of learning from the campus of Vygotsky and Driver. This perspective views culture and social interaction as being critical to learning.  "This approach involves learning the culturally shared ways of understanding and talking about the world and reality (Merriam et al., 2007, p. 292).  From this perspective culture, artifacts, and social interaction with others is critical to new learning.

The learning spectrum:

Merriam et al. (2007) describe these two learning theories as a type of spectrum, with cognitive theories on one end of the spectrum and social theories on the opposite end of the spectrum.  Realistically, the location one is on this learning spectrum is situational. In some situations the learning could be more cognitive, while in other situations this learning could be mostly social.  

Training and Learning:

Viewing the composite of learning from the middle of the learning spectrum one would view learning as both cognitive and social.  Situationally, this would be the optimal position to maximize learning from training.  Specific learning activities have been identified that would take advantage of both the cognitive and social theories of learning.  Listed below are a few activities / theories that could be used during training to optimize learning.

• Activity Theory (AT): Activity theory 'conceptualizes learning as involving a subject (the learner), and object (the task or activity) and mediating artifacts…. Activity theory… combines the individual and the social (including culture and history) in understanding an activity such as learning' (Merriam et al., 2007, p. 292).

• Action-Based Learning: Action-Based Learning is "a dynamic, real-time method of training that brings a group of individuals together to identify the cause of real problems and arrive at possible solutions…. requiring those solutions to be put into action and the results fed back to the group" (Kirkpatrick, & Kirkpatrick, 2010, p. 116).

• Evaluative Research: Evaluative research can be used in a training environment as a means to combine both a groups knowledge and experience through social interactions.  Evaluative research "involves statements about cause-and-effect relationships" (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2010, p. 12). One example of an evaluative research model is a needs assessment where "a set of procedures for identifying and prioritizing needs related to societal, organizational, and human performance" (McKillip, as cited in Gall et al., 2010, p. 515) is conducted.  Another type of evaluative research would be responsive evaluation, responsive evaluation "focuses on identifying and describing stakeholders' issues… and concerns" (Gall et al. 2010, p. 516).

• Action Research: Action Research is research conducted in the workplace, where the problem exists.  Gall et al. (2010) identified seven steps to an action research project:
• Selection of a Focus for the Study (or training)
• Data Collection
• Analysis and Interpretation of the Data
• Taking Action
• Reflection
• Continuation or Modification of Practices
• Preparing a Report of the Findings (or group presentation)
• *parenthesis include items added, not in original referenced material*

Summary:

Effective training could maximize learning by focusing activities along the middle of the learning spectrum. Various activities are available from the education and research literature that could be used in training situations that provide learning opportunities for participants.  The above activities are only a few of those available that could be used in a training exercise.  Those listed are identified to maximize learning as viewed from the middle of the learning spectrum.

References:

Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. (2010). Applying Educational Research (6th ed.). Boston, MS: Pearson.

Kirkpatrick, J. D., & Kirkpatrick, W. K. (2010). Training on Trial: How Workplace Learning Must Reinvent Itself to Remain Relevant. New York, NY: American Management Association (AMACOM).

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in Adulthood: A Comprehensive Guide (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.