At 7:27 AM -0400 9/4/03, Bill Barowy wrote:
>Hi Bob,
>
>I've been thinking about the creation of our course assessment form (in the
>US, assessment is distinguished from evaluation) as a boundary object, and
>here it borders on academic and administrative systems of activity. There
>are more than two. Its creation is leading systemic change in the university
>practices of evaluation, thru a new instrument (artifact), rules surrounding
>its use, and even its influence on other instruments, such as changes in the
>technological infrastructure to make it available on-line, while meeting
>policy concerning its use. While not a truely expansive learning of the
>institution, because for many of the collective subject the change will be by
>rote application, there is indeed significant change. I'm not confused about
>the Evaluation and CHAT at all.
I think that is a nice example of "evaluation" being seen as a mediating artifact (or tool) within an activity system. In other words you have removed the tensions I mentioned by placing evaluation in a traditional CHAT framework.
Essentially I do the same when I take CHAT and place its ideas into Evaluations I'm undertaking. CHAT then become a mediating tool in the Evaluation activity system.
Subjugating both CHAT and Evaluation to the level of tools in each other's methodological frameworks may relieve a bit of tension, but I think also removes the potential for learning. So for a while I'll keep the pressure up and continue asking the question, what have these two well established fields of inquiry have to learn from each other ?
Cheers
Bob
-- BOB WILLIAMS Mobile (64) 21 254 8983 Check out the free resources on my WEB site http://users.actrix.co.nz/bobwillSocial change happens when a small group of people hold fast to an idea despite overwhelming odds. It doesn't always work, but staying at home never does. Jon Carrol "San Francisco Chronicle"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 01 2003 - 01:00:09 PDT