bellamy - Warning Concerning Copyright Restrictions The Copyright Iaw of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyright material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction not be “used for any purposes other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use,” that user may be liable for copyright infringement. . 6 Designing Educational Technology: Computer- Mediated Change R. K. E. Bellamy It has been suggested that the introduction of technology into schools can be the catalyst for educational change (Papert 1980; David 1991; McClintock 1992; Dwyer 1994). McClintock argues that this relation- ship between technology and educational reform is evident when one takes a historical perspective on educational technology. For example, when books were rare resources, only a few people had access to the teachings written in them. With the arrival of the printing press, books became more widely available, and education also became available to a wider audience. Although these facts offer historical evidence for tech- nology- driven educational change, they do not explicate why technology should be a catalyst for change, and if it is, what technology should be placed in schools. They do not even describe how a designer of educa- tional technology should go about answering such a question. This chapter describes the preliminary stages of work that seeks to answer these questions. It uses activity theory as a framework and vo- cabulary to understand the relationship between technology and educa- tional change and to suggest future directions for work in education. Activity theory is an appropriate framework because it seeks to under- stand technological innovation as part of a general process of cultural evolution in which artifacts mediate human activity (Leont’ev 1981). WHY TECHNOLOGY CAN LEAD TO CHANGE Activity theory, which derives from the work of Vygotsky (1978, 1981) and was developed by Leont’ev (1981), posits that tools mediate thought. Vygotsky argued that the mind emerges through interaction with the 124 R. K. E. Behmy environment. In particular, through a process of internalization of cx- ternal activity, artifacts such as instruments, signs, procedures, machines, methods, laws, forms of work organization, and accepted practices affect the kinds of mental processes that develop. In turn, humans can control their own behavior by using and creating artifacts. This process of mediation provides a basis for arguments suggesting that technology can lead to educational reform. Nevertheless, activity theory does not suggest that technology alone mediates behavior; any artifact, technological or otherwise, has the potential to change activity. In addition, the constellation of artifacts within a given activity will affect whether, and how, the introduction of a particular technology into a sit- uation will change that situation. Following Leont’ev, Cole and Engestriim (1991) suggest that to understand an activity fully, one must understand how artifacts mediate the activity within the cultural context in which the activity is situated. Figure 6.1 illustrates Cole and Engestriim’s formulation of the complex relationships between elements in an activity. As in the activity analysis of Leont’ev, Cole and Engestriim show that in an activity, artifacts such as tools and symbol systems mediate between the individual (the subject of the activity) and the individual’s purpose (the object of the activity). In addition, they extend the analysis of activity to show that in an activity the individual is not isolated but is part of a community, and the activity Medlatlng adfaCt OUtCOme labor Fire 6.1 Cole and Engestrom’s analysis of activity and the mediating relationships among the individual, tools, or artifacts and organizations participating in the activity. Designing Educational Technology 125 will be affected by the individual’s participation within this community. Additionally, the subject’s relationship to the community is mediated by rules and the community’s full collection of tools. And, in turn, the community’s relationship to the object of the activity is mediated by the division of labor- how the activity is distributed among the members of the community, that is, the role each individual in the community plays in the activity, the power each wields, and the tasks each is held respon- sible for. This last relationship occurs because in order for a community to achieve a common objective, the activities of the individuals in it must be organized, and the paths of communication coordinated, so that together they form the set of actions that will achieve the common objective. Cole and Engestriim illustrate very clearly that from the perspective of the individual participating in an activity, the individual’s actions toward the object (objective) of the activity will be affected by three factors: the tools used (instruments, signs, language, etc.), the community he or she belongs to in terms of the rules of that community (the laws, accepted practices, etc.), and the division of labor in that community (the roles, communication procedures, etc.). In addition, given the bidirectional nature of mediation, the tools, rules of the community, and division of labor within the community will affect the mental processes that develop for the individual. This discussion suggests that mediation can provide an explanation of why the introduction of new technology into education has the potential to reform the educational system. The introduction of new artifacts into an activity affects, from the perspective of the activity, the kinds of pro- cesses, social and individual, that develop. Similarly, the existing social processes of the community in which the activity takes place, and the mental processes of the individuals performing the activity, will affect how a new artifact will be used. MEDIATION IN K- 12 EDUCATION Accepting the proposal of activity theorists that artifacts mediate human activity and accepting Cole and Engcstrom’s extension of activity tbcory provides a framework within which to understand how new technologies 126 R. K. E. Belhy Mediating Artifact (radio, TV pen andpapr, chalkboard, compufer. language, etc.) ObJoct + Outcome (nrres of (teachers. labor conduct. adminislralors. (PriflCiPaI, governing class r& s, parents. body. leaching, etc.) sfudents, etc.) specialist teaching, learning, etc.) Figure 6.2 Application of Cole and Engcstrbm’s activity analysis to K- 12 education. can affect educational change. Cole and EngestrBm’s analysis can be used as a framework for describing the activity of K- 12 education (figure 6.2). ’ The activity of K- 12 education involves a community consisting of teachers, parents, students, and administrators. This community lives by a set of rules, both explicit and implicit, that govern the individuals in it- for example, school rules concerning attendance, lesson times, ap- propriate dress, the behavior of teachers, corporal punishment, equity. The division of labor reflects the different roles individuals play within the education system: the school administrators who deal with school budget and other records, teachers in the classroom with the students, and others. It also reflects the responsibilities these individuals have toward other members of the community. The obiect of the education system is learning; some might say it is to educate children to be con- tributing members of society. This objective is mediated by multiple ar- tifacts: books, pen and paper, and more recent technologies such as radio and television. The outcome of this activity is educated students. Cole and Engestrijm’s analysis suggests that when considering whether technology could be the catalyst for educational change, it is not enough to consider individual artifacts. Rather, any analysis must consider the Designing Educational Technology whole complex of educational activity. The effect of a new technologycr, education will be as much determined by individuals’ mediating the objectives through the technology as it will be determined by the exist13 tools and community structures. The importance of such factors is confirmed by studies in which tc& nology has been introduced into schools to effect educational rcforn Ringstaff, Kelley, and Dwycr (199.3) dcscribcd four factors ~II; II inll+ enced how much technology changed the educational process: psycho- logical factors (teachers’ being comfortable with the idea of using thp technology and seeing it as an exciting opportunity rather than a thrc& technical support, ease of access to technology, and collegial and institr tional support. Technical support is important because if something ~1” wrong, teachers often do not have the time or the cxpcricncc with 11r technology to solve the problem. Access is important because if there ;VC not enough computers, then it is difficult to integrate them effectively inb the students’ activities and for the students to treat them as tools. St@ dents waste time waiting around and get bored. Finally, collcgial ad institutional support are important because although individual teachah may be ready to adopt technology, obstacles are often put in place& schools where not everyone is in favor of the technology or when t h* administration feels that the technology is causing it to lose control. Thus WC can see, from an educational technology perspective, the im- portance of Cole and Engestriim’s introduction of community, division of labor, and rules into the analysis of an activity. IMPLlCAllONS OF ACTMTY THEORY FOR THE DESIGN PROCESS Activity theory can inform our thinking about the process of dcsignilr3 educational technology to effect educational reform. In particular, throu& emphasis on activity, it becomes clear that technology cannot be design&. in isolation of considerations of the community, the rules, and the tli\‘ l- sions of labor in which the technology will be placed. Multiple ;~ p- proaches to design have evolved that argue for taking into accoLlnf the situation for which an artifact is being designed. One of thcsc is 128 R. K. E. Bellamy participatory design (Ehn 1988). A second is situated action (Suchman 1987). The approach to design used for the work described in this chap ter is based on the participatory design approach; the whole situation is taken into account when designing, and the end users for whom the technology is being designed are involved in the design process. This approach to design is iterative. I seek to inform the design of technology by studying the use of initial prototypes in realistic situations. I discover what is good and bad about the prototype with respect to its initial design goals. This information is then used to inform the sub- sequent redesign of the technology, which itself is subjected to further study. 1 recognize that it is not just the technology that is important in determining its usability and usefulness. The context and participants are also important factors. Thus, my design process starts by involving researchers, teachers, students, collaborative partners, and others. To- gether we think about and design both the technology and the situation in which the technology will ultimately be studied. In the designs described, this participatory design approach was used. During the technology development stage of the projects, my colleagues and I worked directly with teachers and students to confirm the validity of the design goals, iron out technical issues, and get feedback about the design. We worked with teachers to familiarize them with the technology and to give them an understanding of the technology from a learner’s perspective, so that they could take ownership of the technology as learners before thinking about it from a teacher’s perspective. This is usually hard for teachers to do, because they often do not have either the opportunity or the time to become familiar with technology. In addition to involving students and teachers in the design of the technology, we worked with them to dcvclop the associated curriculum and auxiliary materials that were important to the use of the technology. IMPLICATIONS OF ACTIVITY THEORY FOR EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY The description of activity theory offered to this point has focused on mediation as a process of cultural change. However, Vygotsky argued that mediation is a process underlying both phylogenetic development- Designing Educational Technology 12Y where culture is seen as the highest form of development- and . . . also genetic development. Thus, more detailed examination of the concept of mediation within child development can provide a basis for the develop- ment of principles for the design of particular educational technologies. Just as cultural evolution is a process of mediation between subject and object, Vygotsky believed that learning for individuals is mediated by the world. Human learning, he argued, proceeds from external action to in- ternal mental activity. Children act in the world without understanding what they are doing; however, through the process of acting in the world, gradually they notice patterns in their behavior and come to understand their external activity. With this new understanding of their activity comes the internalization of that activity. Gradually children rely less OII the external supports of people and objects in the world to cue their bc- havior as their behavior becomes directed by internal mental processes. However, because the process is one of internalization of cxtcrnal activ- ity, a child’s thought processes are inextricably tied to the structure of the external activity that initiated this learning. Once internalized, howcvcr, a child’s thought processes can go beyond those permitted by the cx- ternal activity. Vygotsky argues that this development occurs through the child’s actively changing the external world to support new ways of thinking. Activity theorists argue that human activity and the means that medi- ate it have arisen through social interaction. Given their belief that the same processes undcrlic both cultural and individual dcvclopmcnt, soci; il interaction is also key to Vygotsky’s theory of child development. One of the ways children interact with the world they do not understand is by mimicking adult activity. Similarly, adults can provide a secondary means of mediation or a social scaffold (Ilruncr IY60, 197.5) hc~ wcru the* child and the world. In other words, with the aid of an adult, children arc often able to perform tasks that as individuals they would be incapable of. For example, a father asks his daughter where her toy is. She rcplics that she doesn’t know. He then asks, “Is your toy in the bedroom?” to which she responds, “No.” He next asks, “IS your toy in the bathroom?” to which she responds, “No.” He then asks, “Is your toy in the car?” His daughter runs off and returns seconds later from the direction of the car. 230 R. K. E. B& my clutching her toy in her hand. Thus, the child has two levels of perform- ance: the level that she can achieve alone and the level that she can ach- ieve with the help of a more experienced individual. Vygotsky refers to this latter performance ability as the zone of proximal development. Vygotsky’s theory of human development has a number of implica- tions for education. First, because thought is mediated by artifacts, the styles of thinking exhibited by a particular culture are based on the tools used within that culture. This suggests that if the aim of education is to provide children with the means to actively engage in the culture of which they are part, then they should have access to, and participate in, cultural activities similar to those of adults and should be using artifacts similar to those used by adults. Children cannot use the same artifacts as adults because they are at a different developmental level; however, arti- facts modeled on adult artifacts and simplified in certain ways can medi- ate children’s development of the skills necessary for use of the same artifacts and participation in the same activities as adults. The idea of children’s engaging in similar activities and using artifacts similar to those used by adults is related to the idea of authentic learning recently described in the educational literature (Lave 1991). Besides using artifacts in their culture, adults actively change culture through the in- vention and development of new artifacts. This suggests that children should be educated so that they can participate in this process. Education should enable children to design new artifacts and give children the cx- pcricncc of evolving their culture through their own designs entering the culture and being used by others. Such artifacts could take any form, but typical examples might be presentations, written documents, models, di- agrams, pictures, and videos. The main point is that children should be constructing such artifacts and sharing them with their community. Second, according to Vygotsky, thought is mediated not only by arti- facts but also by social structures, conventions, and rules. This social nature of child development suggests that learning situations should fea- ture collaboration among people with all levels of expertise, adults and children. In such a situation, those with more experience provide models of appropriate behavior and social scaffolding. This suggests, in addition, that if understanding is socially mediated, children should be engaging in discussion and debate with a community consisting of experts and fellow Designing Educational Technology I learners. In this situation, experts, teachers, and students all lcnrn from one another, although the student may be the one most transform&* This is why recent educational literature stresses the need for collab* rative learning. Embedding learning within a community of people at different skII’ levels has recently been described in the educational literature as corn. munities of practice (Lave 1991; Lave and Wenger 1991). In a comtnJ- nity people at all skill levels work together to achieve the communi~ yPr shared goals. Those with less skill work side by side with the experts, ;In c# over time the less skilled, through observation and directed participation, become experts. Thus, experts provide a social scaffold for novices. P such situations, beginners move from peripheral participation in an .a~- tivity to central participation. On the periphery of the activity they r+ expected to do tasks that they may not yet have mastered, but only wit4 the support of their more expert colleagues. Three principles for the design of educational environments have I~ Peb derived from Vygotsky’s work: l Authentic activities: Children should have access to, and parti- ipate in, similar cultural activities to those of adults and should by using age- appropriate tools and artifacts modeled on thosr usrcl by adults, 9 Construction: Children should be constructing artifacts ;~ nd sharing them with their community, l Collaboration: Educntionnl cnvironmcnts should invcblvc. c. oIl&- oration between cxpcrts and students and bctwccn ~ntl~ v~ tlu~ C learners and fellow learners. Below I describe two cxamplcs of educational technology tlrsigtl, according to the principles derived from Vygotsky’s view of child dc\ e( opment. EXAMPLES OF EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY Based on the theories of mediation and its basis in social intcracticlll f: have, in collaboration with others, been engaged in the design ad w d- uation of educational technology that seeks to support learning in schools. In the two systems described, the process of design used was one 132 R. K. E. B& my Designing Educutional Technology 133 in which the whole educational environment was designed. The technol- ogy was just one component. Dinosaur Canyon Dinosaur Canyon (Fenton and Bellamy 1994), designed for teaching earth sciences to middle school students, is a simulation of a canyon, a petrology and a paleontology lab. It was designed to allow students who could not study petrology and paleontology by visiting a real canyon and collecting fossils and rocks for later analysis in a real paleontology or petrology lab. Dinosaur Canyon provides a simulated context for stu- dents to engage in the activities of interpretation of rocks and fossils en- gaged in by expert petrologists and paleontologists. To date Dinosaur Canyon has been used in one school, for two middle school science classes, for one semester. Figure 6.3 shows typical screens from Dinosaur Canyon. The PJaeonbAqy bb Students using Dinosaur Canyon work in small groups, each group studying a portion of a geological sequence through a canyon. They se- lect a lo- meter by lo- meter square in their area and proceed to map features and to collect fossils and rock samples. They then take these samples to two simulated research laboratories. In the Petrology Lab, they can analyze the rocks, looking at them under a petrologic micro- scope, and obtain radiometric dates and trace element analyses. In the Paleontology Lab, they can view and measure fossils. The program is highly visual and interactive. For example, at a loca- tion in the canyon, students drag hammer icons to the place they wish to sample; when the mouse is clicked, the hammer icon strikes the rock and hammering noises sound. A rock sample icon appears, which they drag to a backpack and can take to the lab. Once in the lab, which contains a bench and several instruments, the student drags the sample icon across the lab to the instrument that he or she wishes to use, and the relevant information appears. Students can store and retrieve samples and can move freely back and forth through the entire program. Table 6.1 shows how Dinosaur Canyon relates to the three principles for educational environments and Vygotsky’s theory of child develop- ment. In terms of support for authentic activities, Dinosaur Canyon was A1omx1omkmlbn I: igurc 6.3 Typical screens from Dinosaur Canyon. dcsigncd spccificnlly (0 c~~ nblc stutlcnts to cng;\~ c in the S; IIW ;rc. tivitic*\ #II expert petrologists and paleontologists: the interpretation and analysis of rocks and fossils. To this end, during the classroom USC of Dinosaur Canyon, the students wcrc very much on their own in managing their work and finding the appropriate intcrprctations. To help them in their research, the students were provided with a list of rcfcrenccs and n number of books were available in the classroom. The library staff wcrc primed ahead of time so that they were ready to help students find ncldi- tional appropriate materials. Obviously a simulation has disadvantages in terms of providing for authentic activity; it can never be as tangible and immediate as reality or as inexhaustible a source for research. Additionally, it can contain littlc that is not at least partially known and understood, because its contents 134 R. K. E. Bellamy Designing Edwztional Techno/ ogy 135 Table 6.1 Dinosaur Canyon’s support of Vygotsky’s principles of educational technology Collaboration Construction Authentic activities Students must construct Students engage in the Students work in small groups to study a set of locations. croups must collaborate in order to reach a CO- herent interpretation of the canyon. Expert geologists arc available to talk to stu- dents about their discov- cries. Teachers throughout the school are designated as subject matter experts. Students become local experts: an interpretation of the same activities as expert canyon using their find- geologists and palcon- ings from the program tologists do. and through research of the literature. Each student presents his or her findings to fellow learners and the teacher in the form of a pre- sentation to the class and ‘a report on any aspect of the canyon he or she chooses to study in detail. spring from the experience of its creator. However, simulations also have some overwhelming advantages. Some of these, are immediately appa- rent: the simulation is repeatedly, quickly, and inexpensively available to students; it is easily expandable (a brand- new laboratory or research site ‘is available for the price of a few hours of designer and programmer time). Most vitally of all, the simulation can be designed so that its data are easily accessible to school- age children. For example, it is rare to find a fossil mammal skeleton in the field, and it is even rarer to find one that is not twisted, crushed, and missing several bones. The problems of identification, for a school- age student, would be insuperable. In a simu- lation, such a skeleton can be presented in an identifiable form. Similarly, few field sites contain the variety of rock types, fossils, structures, and geological problems that can be easily incorporated into a simulation. Although the canyon is a construct, it is important to note that every ef- fort was made in the design to ensure the integrity of the geological in- formation with respect to dates, paleoenvironments, and sequence. This integrity of information is vital if students are to feel that they are r. 1 . ~r;*.; tv Construction is central to Dinosaur Canyon. The whole purpose of the program is to provide an environment that children explore in order to come to a coherent understanding of the history of the canyon. To help them in managing this task, students were provided with research notc- books containing templates for recording their research findings. Thcrc was also a shared schematic of the canyon placed on the classroom wnll that students used to post findings and possible interpretations. Thcsc templates helped students manage their work and the process of inter- preting the canyon, but they were not given any answers. The students had to construct their own answers and explanations based on all the information they had available. They were also required to write and present a report of an aspect of the canyon that they found particularly interesting. Most students eagerly seized the opportunity to shape and carry out their own work. They were very inventive in their approaches, as in the case of one pair of students who sought to derive insights into the dino- saur footprints they had discovered by videotaping themselves running and by attempting various mathematical analyses. The conversations between such students and the teacher tended to be collegial in nature, with the students in near- total charge of their work. Students tended to take strong ownership of their work once their research became spcci- alized, and they often wrote fine reports. Only three (of twenty- seven) students proved reluctant to propose questions or topics for research; two of these students eventually worked in a moderately independent manner, but one did not. She was eventually given a conventional book research topic, which she completed very well. All of these students had achieved well in previous units, and it may be that the dcgrcc of BU- tonomy that Dinosaur Canyon demanded was threatening to them. Support for collaboration is another important principle for cducn- tional environments derived from activity theory. Although collaboration is not a necessary part of interacting with the program, collaboration is 11 central part of Dinosaur Canyon as it is used in the classroom. Collabo- ration occurs on many levels: student- student, teacher- student, expcrt- student, and group- group, for example. When working with Dinosaur Canyon, students meet in small groups, with each group studying a set 01 five locations. The complete set of locations has been purposely designccl 136 R. K. E. B& my to encourage between- group collaboration in that findings from any sin- gle location or even set of five locations can have a coherent inter- pretation, but that interpretation breaks down when those findings are seen in the context of the whole canyon. Only through understanding the particular locations in the context of the whole canyon can a coherent interpretation be reached. Thus, a coherent explanation of the canyon can be achieved only by talking to other groups and understanding their findings and interpretations. Another example of collaboration was that between experts and students, To support this style of collaboration, we identified teachers throughout the school who had an area of expertise- physics, chemistry, or geology (the teacher of the class in which the program was used was an expert geologist)- that might be relevant to the program. Students could go to these experts with questions relevant to the expert’s domain of expertise. Obviously, not all schools have teachers who are expert, and this is one of the problems faced in trying to generalize the use of Dinosaur Canyon to other schools. An additional form of student- expert collaboration occurred between students and student experts. Through the course of using Dinosaur Canyon, particular students in the class developed specialties. These students became local experts who could answer questions about their specialty. Classroom use of Dinosaur Canyon entailed all three of the principles for an educational environment derived from activity theory. The simu- lated canyon allowed students to engage in authentic activities of expert paleontologists and petrologists without overwhelming the students with the complexity of an actual research situation. In this way, the simulation mediated the students’ learning about how to conduct paleontologic and petrologic research. Students created an interpretation of the canyon, represented that interpretation, and presented it to their fellow students and teacher. Finally collaboration was pervasive throughout the class- room use of Dinosaur Canyon. Although the classroom use of Dinosaur Canyon did address all three principles, the principle of support for col- laboration was addressed only at the level of the school and in some cases only at the level of the classroom. I have already discussed the problem of access to experts faced in generalizing the use of Dinosaur Canyon to other schools. The next example of educational technology Designing Educational Technology 137 directly addresses support for collaboration between distant locations. Such a tool could be used together with Dinosaur Canyon to link stu- dents researching Dinosaur Canyon with appropriate subject matter cx- perts who may possibly be located at distant locations I Media Fusion Media Fusion (Bellamy, Cooper, and Borovoy 1994), a program devel- oped using. model- based communication technology (Borovoy and Cooper 1993), allows students to construct digital video (or text) mcssagcs that can contain embedded pointers to a data analysis application. The data analysis tool is Tabletop, designed at the Technology and Research Center in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Tabletop is ideally suited for USC with Media Fusion because it has been designed specifically for use by school students, with the design goal of enabling authentic inquiry with data.. Media Fusion focuses on allowing students to explore issues concern- ing global warming. It contains seed video and text messages created by experts on global warming and actual global warming data that the students can explore. An example screen is shown in figure 6.4. The top video message, “MacNeiVLehrer Global Warming,” contains two pointers that are positioned along its scroll bar. As the QuickTimeTM digital video clip plays, the scroll box moves along the scroll bar. When the scroll box “hits” the first pointer, it launches a data analysis appli- cation, called Tabletop (Hancock, Kaput, and Goldsmith 1992), and configures a prespecified graph derived from a particular database. All of this information (the application, the file, and the various parameters that describe the scatter plot) was encoded into the pointer when the message was created. Thus, Media Fusion seeks to support collaboration, one of the princi- ples for the design of educational environments derived from activity theory (table 6.2). Using Media Fusion, students can create their own video messages (provided they have a video camera and a digitizing board), specify various analyses of the data (in Tabletop), and drag thcsc analyses onto the QuickTime digital video. These pointers2 can then hc moved around or deleted. When the student is satisfied that the video I 138 R. K. E. Be/& my I5 f : 0 IO i 0 t : S n Figure 6.4 Screen from Media Fusion. The top right shows the MacNeil/ Lchrcr video clip. The bottom right shows a list of existing messages. On the left is the Tablctop data analysis tool. message conveys the appropriate message, it can be saved. Later it is sent to other students at the same or other locations. Construction is also central to the use of Media Fusion because the only way students can communicate is by constructing a message that represents their current understanding of some aspect of global warming. The technology underlying Media Fusion allows the user to create a narrative that explicates his or her path of reasoning. A single video message might have several pointers, all perhaps to the same application and the same database file, but each showing a different way of looking at the data. This might mean plotting different fields against each other, changing the scales of an axis, or simply highlighting certain data points in one view and others in subscqucnt views. Collcctivcly tbcsc can bc used as evidence to support the argument delivered in the message. Designing Educational Technology 13Y Table 6.2 Media Fusion’s support of Vygotsky’s principles of educational technology Collaboration Construction Authentic activities Students work in small Students construct an Students invcstigatc is- groups. intcrprctation of the sues that arc of currrnt Students collaborate via domain through data importance to the world. electronic networks with analysis, sharing their Students USC real- wc~ rld students in another analysts and discussing data to understand school across the them with other students. current cvenfr. country. Students have access to the arguments prcscntctl to govcrnmcnt and to current discussions between scientists. The rcceivcr of such a mcssagc can both inspect the graph cn~ l~ cddrd within a message and manipulate that graph. In this way users conic to understand the data not only in terms of the graphical view construct4 by the sender of the message but in their own terms. In turn, the rcceivcr of a message can create a personal view of the data (through direct ma- nipulation of the graph that they have rcccived) and can embed the new view in his or her response. In this way, users can discuss issues shown in the video, use data to augment their reasoning about those issues, and share their understandings. The collection of messages dcvclopcd in this manner serves as a history of the community’s inquiry and undcrstandinc: of the issues being discussed. Media Fusion has been used by two schools over four days, for two hours per day. During that time, students worked at the machines in small groups of three, four, or five. The results of this preliminary study suggest that being able to collaborate with fellow learners by sending video and text messages helped the students come to a better under- standing of the issues. As one student put it: “It helps you understand things better, to be able to make a graph and stuff like that and talk to people on the other side of the country about it.” Much of the discussion centered around alternative interpretations of the data or discussion oi whether the data supported the argument. Having to negotiate an understanding may have been a factor in slu dents’ nhilitv tn reason ahour the darn. In previous studies of T; ihlctop, it 140 R. K. E. Bellamy Designing Educational Technology has been noted that students still held on to their own opinions even in the face of data that seemed to contradict them. This was not evident in the study. When a student stated something that was not shown in the graph, others would question the view, and the student typically would reevaluate what he or she had said. All of the teachers emphasized the importance of the audience in mo- tivating the students; one sad, “instead of ‘let’s explain this to the teacher because we have to, ’ it’s ‘we want to say something that’s valid to these kids, we don’t want to look really stupid, so we want to find some in- teresting information.“ ’ Part of the power of collaboration appeared to be increased self- assessment of work because it was being subjected to peer assessment. Students want to say something sensible and to say it in a manner that sounds appropriate. Media Fusion supported collaboration between students at different locations and between students in the same classroom, particularly those working together in a group around the computer. This within- group collaboration was particularly evident when students were composing messages. Students would continually discuss among themselves the is- sues, data, messages they had received, how the data related to different issues, and so forth as they decided what to say in a video message. The teachers noted that there was also a great deal of peer teaching within the groups. This peer tutoring helped the weaker students and more able students, who were able to learn through teaching. Media Fusion was also designed to support expert- student collabo- ration. To this end, seed video and text messages linked to views of the database were created and added to the system before it was given to the students. Video messages of experts discussing global warming were created from footage taken from the “MacNeillLehrer News Hour.” This particular video was used because the show presents authentic issues, treats them in depth, and represents each one from multiple per- spectives- a format that invites response. Additional messages made by an expert in the field of study were also included. Compared to an isolated individual learner, the community has access to a much more varied and rich pool of information, because all the members of the community can pool their knowledge and cognitive re- sources in order to understand an issue. In retrospect, however, the I amount of knowledge available in this study was not as great as it mi# have been had experts been fully integrated into the learning communit . In this study, the students were not able to communicate with the 3 expcr shown in the MacNeil- Lehrer video or the expert who made the se d messages. Support for authentic activity is provided by Media Fusion in a nur%* ber of ways. First, the topic chosen, global warming, is a current concern for governments and citizens throughout the world. Second, the conrob* of the seed video and text message contained arguments about globcv I warming made by experts. These are the same kinds of arguments bc;, a presented to governments and which are the basis for much discussioti among scientists. Finally, the databases designed for use in the sys~ am consisted of actual data, making this unlike the storybook situatiom sometimes invented for textbooks. Here students have access to the s; lm@ kinds of data’used by policy analysts and policymakers. By linking discovery tools (data analysis tools) and communicarrbh tools Media Fusion supports learning because it allows students IO ax- plore and manipulate the kinds of data that are being used to supPort opinions presented in messages they receive, formulate their own under- standing, and express it in messages they send. Collaboration with fcll& learners provides meaning to the students’ inquiry and a direct W; IYO$ sharing their understanding of issues, in this way influencing the dr&- ’ opment of the community’s understanding of global warming. Howcq although communication and collaboration with other Icarncrs is I&- portant, the principles derived from activity theory also stress the ueed for communication and collaboration with experts at all levels. Fu~ ti+ development and use of Media Fusion will involve not just students b& also experts as part of the learning community. In this way, students *JI ‘CL have access to experts’ arguments and will be able to engage in d; s - cussion with experts. I EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY AND EDUCATIONAL CHAN( 1 The argument I have investigated is that technology can be a catalyst fd educational change. I have described two examples of technology- ha Y- J- I 142 R. K. E. Bellamy educational environment designed according to principles derived from Vygotsky’s theories of child development. Our informal studies suggest that these tools do change educational activity. In the classrooms in which these tools were studied, students and teachers engaged in very different behaviors from those typically seen in a traditional classroom. For example, the teachers found themselves in the role of facilitator. One teacher in an interview following the Media Fusion study saw the role of teacher “not so much somebody who’s telling the students exactly what to do and how to do it, but rather to guide them through a process.” Another said, “I’m not the sole giver of information anymore.. . . I set sort of an academic playing field and kind of let them go for it.” Furthermore, our informal studies suggest that these students are learning valuable lessons and important, lasting skills. However, it is not clear that these technologies will promote such changes in all educational situations. Recognizing the importance of community in determining rhe media- ting role of new artifacts within an activity we spend much time design- ing not only the technology, but the whole educational environment in which we test our technology. Following Ringstaff, Kelley, and Dwyer (1993) we pay special attention to psychological factors: teachers’ being comfortable with the idea of using the technology and seeing it as an exciting opportunity rather than a threat, technical support, ease of access to technology, and collegial and institutional support. In all the studies described here, much time was spent preparing teachers and working with them to make them comfortable with the idea of using technology in their classrooms. We do not necessarily teach them to use the technology; rather, we try to make them comfortable with not always understanding how the technology works and with exploring the tech- nology with the students. In our studies we are always present to deal with technical support issues, and we always provide sufficient technol- ogy. Finally, collegial and institutional support is an important factor. We spend much time ensuring that the school administration, parents, and support staff are comfortable with the use of technology. Thus the environment in which our user studies take place is not always repre- sentative of the situations that we are seeking to change. Thus the question remains: Can technology be a catalyst to educa- tional reform in schools that do not have ready solutions to issues of Designing Eduaatiod Technology 143 community support? The two examples discussed in this chapter address only a small portion of the total activity of an educational situation. These tools focus on the activity of the learner. However, teachers, ad- ministrators, parents, and others are also part of a learning situation. In order to effect change, systems of artifacts must be designed that address the needs of all the participants in the situation and help them all move toward roles and ways of thinking appropriate for an alternative ap- proach to education. Yocam, Wilmore, and Dwyer (1994) have been investigating how to support teachers in changing their educational practices with an ap- proach that embodies the principles of authentic activities, construction, and collaboration described in this chapter. They have created a number of teacher development centers (TDCs) that teachers can attend. Thcsc TDCs are situated in schools that have already been infused with tech- nology and where the classes are technology- based educational environ- ments that model the principles of students engaging in authentic activities, construction, and collaboration. When teachers visit these centers, they are immersed in classrooms that model particular teaching practices- the practices that they want the teachers to adopt. Thus, the teachers engage in exactly those teaching activities that it is hoped they will take back arid use in their own classrooms. Teachers work in col- laboration with a coordinator and the teachers leading the model class- room to construct their own personal curriculum, which they can then use when they return to their own school. The intent is through this process to move teachers from their current educational approach to i1 new approach. Yocam (personal communication) has discovered some problems with this approach, however, the largest being that of the community to which attending teachers belong. Teachers attending a TDC can within the environment of the TDC practice their new understanding; however, on returning to their own community, they are unable to practice their new skills because the structure, rules, and division of labor in their own school community does not readily allow for their new practices. Using the approaches described in this chapter, I am currently engaged in the design of tools and processes that seek to overcome these problems. 1%~ describing the complete situation of educational activity in dctnil, activity 144 R. K. E. Bclkzmy theory provides a powerful framework within which to start investigat- ing possible tools or processes to effect pervasive educational reform. CONCLUSIONS This chapter started with a number of questions about how technology promotes educational change. The first question was why technology should be a catalyst for change. I have suggested that technology can promote change because, according to activity theory, artifacts mediate human activity. The second question posed was that if technology does promote change, what technology should be placed in schools. Activity theory and in particular Vygotsky’s theories of child development were used to answer this question. Three principles for the design of educa- tional environments were derived from these theories: educational tech- nology should support collaboration between communities of learners, construction of artifacts, and authentic activities. However, 1 also suggest that to promote educational change, it is not enough to design technol- ogy that only supports student learning. Students are just one set of par- ticipants in the activity of education. Furthermore, it is necessary to address not just classroom activity but all aspects of the educational sit- uation. Thus to change the underlying educational philosophy of schools, designers must design technologies that support students’ learning activ- ities and the activities of educators and educational administrators. Only by understanding and designing for the complete situation of education described in figure 6.2 will it be possible for technology to bring about pervasive educational reform. NOTES 1. Although the arguments presented in this chapter are probably applicable throughout many Western education systems, because the particular organiza- tional and political structures differ from country to country, I discuss education only within the United States. K- 12 refers to kindergarten through twelfth grade, the complete school education system in the United States for children from the ages of three through eighteen. 2. It is important to point out that this type of embedding is significantly different from other seemingly similar types of linking. Some applications allow the user to Designing Edwcationul Technology 14s insert bitmap images‘ of other applications, but these are static pictures that do not support exploration. Some applications allow the user to create a “hot link” to another file (possibly opened by another application), but these typically take the user to a fixed document (e. g., a text editor document or a HyperCard stack). REFERENCES Bellamy, R. K. E., Borovoy, R. and Cooper, E. B. W. (1994). Supporting collah- orativc learning through the use of electronic conversational props. In PROCESS- ings of Eust- West Conference on Human Computer lnteruction. Sr. Pctcrsburg, Russia, August 2- 6. Borovoy R. and Cooper, E. (1993). Model- based communication. Apple patent pending. Bruncr, J. S. (1960). The Process o/ Education. Cambridge, MA: I larvard llu- versity Press. Bruner, J. S. (1975). The ontogenesis of language. Journal of Child Lunguuge 2: 1- 19. Cole, M., and EngestrBm, Y. (1991). A cultural- historical approach to distributed cognition. In G. Salomon, cd., Distributed Cognition (pp. l- 47). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. David, J. L. (1991). Partnerships for change. Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow Report 12. Dwyer, D. (1994). Apple classrooms of tomorrow: What w& c Icarncd. Educu- tionul Leudership (April). Ehn, P. (1988). Work- Oriented Design of Computer Artifucts. Stockholm: Swedish Ccntcr for Working Lift. Fenton, M., and Bellamy, R. K. E. (1994). Ecotypc: A simulated geological rcscarch environment ‘for the classroom. In Proceedings of the fnterrtutiotrd Conference on Technology in Education. London, UK. Hancock, C.,‘ Kaput, J. J., and Goldsmith, L. T. (1992). Authentic inquiry with data: Critical barriers to classroom implementation. Educutionul Psychok~ gist. Lave, J. (1991). Cognition in Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lave, J., and Wenger, E. (1991). Situuted Leuming: Legitimate Peripheral Pur- ticipution. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Lcont’ev, A. N. (1981). The problem of activity in psychology. In J. V. Wcrrsch. ed., The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpc. McClintock, R. (1992). Power and Pedagogy: An Essay on Technology in Edrc- cation. Bloomington, Indiana: Phi Delta Kappa Educational Foundation. . 146 R. K. E. Bellamy Papcrt, S. (1980). Minds~ otvns: children. Computers, and Pownfrrl Idcar. New York: Basic Books. Ringstaff, C., Kelley, L., and Dwyer, D. (1993). Breaking the mold of instruction with technology: Formative case studies of the unit of study process. ACOT Report (August). Suchman, L. A. (1987). Plans and Situated Action: The Problem of Human- Ma- chine Communication. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Mental Processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Vygotsky, L. S. (1981). The instrumental method in psychology. In J. V. Wertsch, cd., The Concept of Activity in Soviet Psychology. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe. Yocam, K. Wilmore, F., and Dryer, D. (1994). Situated Teucber Developrnenk ACOT’s Two- Year Pilot Project. Apple Classrooms of Tomorrow Report. 7 Applying Activity Theory to Video Analysis: How to Make Sense of Video Data in Human- Computer Interaction Susanne Bedker This chapter examines bow activity theory can be applied lo s114d- ing artifucls in use. Based on an analysis of the context of 14s~. 1 outline a technique for Ihe mapping of use situalions lhal hauc been recorded on videotape and show bow focus shifts and brcak- downs are instrumental in analyzing human- computer interactiott. The analysis uses examples from u project with the Danish Na- tional Labor Inspection, where the computer applicutions used by labor inspectors were studied in detail. Activity theory helps to structure an analysis of hours of vidw- tape withour totally prescribing what to look for. An analysis of rhc context and history of the actions and operations prevents looking ut the interaction in isolation. In 1991, Liam Bannon and I (Bannon and Badker 1991) discussed the potential role of a human- computer interaction (HCI) theory based on activity theory. Our focus was the limited view of the use of compurcr applications put forth by most cognitive science- inspired HCI research. We were further concerned with the lack of breakthrough attempts to reframe HCI research from within the field despite the growing awarc- ness of the limitations of cognitive science. In our paper, we emphasized that a better understanding of use was important to the continuing de- velopment of methods and theories in HCI, argued that design must bc based on use, and noted the importance of including on the design team those using the technology. We emphasized that activity theory seems to provide an interesting alternative framework for developing a more comprehensive unit of analysis for our studies. More recently I have sought to develop ways of working with HCI questions based on activity theory (B8dker 1989,1991,1993). In various