Re: more on activity systems

From: Glenn Humphreys (glenhump@soonet.ca)
Date: Mon Dec 27 1999 - 08:54:59 PST


>Why aren't Yrjo's change lab workshops activity systems?

I tend to agree with Bill's careful reply, i.e. "maybe . . . but what's to
stop us from looking at it that way?".

If the change lab workshop is not an activity system, what is it that
teachers do when they organize a short seminar -- or researchers do when
they attend AERA for a few days each year? These cannot be thought about
as activity systems? I also wonder what Yrjo may have been driving at in
the context Bill was reporting.

Since we are thinking about pushing the application boundaries for
frameworks, how about this? Leontiev's categories activity, action,
operation seem to be best viewed as "perspectives" as I get the impression
from reading his words -- and from looking at how Yrjo's model develops
from Vygotsky's basic mediational triangle. How about using Yrjo's model
to look at an individual acting socially as a "micro" activity system
interacting with neighbouring activity systems? It introduces the notion
of "nested" activity systems, and inquires about the downward limits for
such an analysis. Certainly not an application Yrjo likely had in mind,
but it could be another very useful way to make sense of ongoing dyadic
interactions. Yes?

Glenn D. Humphreys
glenhump@soonet.ca

P.O. Box 11,
Echo Bay, Ontario,
Canada, P0S 1C0
Home: (705) 248-1226
Office: (705 942-7423
Fax:  (705) 248-1226 (Prearrange please)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Jan 11 2000 - 14:04:10 PST