Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization

By Yrjö Engeström. 2001

1,762 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Education, Human Factors and Ergonomics, Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/0851ac84a9a5fda10cd9e5608ddc670407bb38d0

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Education

In Human Factors and Ergonomics

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Conceptions of learning and understanding learning at work (2004, methodology): “Engestrom puts this assumption of what he calls ‘standard theories of learning’ as follows: ‘a self-evident presupposition that the knowledge or skill to be acquired is itself stable and reasonably well-defined’ (Engestrom 2001, p. 137).”
Technology affordances for intersubjective meaning making: A research agenda for CSCL (2006, neutral): “Analysis of large-scale changes in communities and organizations may lead to understanding of emergent social learning phenomena (Engeström, 2001) as well as elucidate the role of embedded groups in driving these changes. At the other extreme, Shaffer & Clinton (2005) argue that even the interaction”
Re-mediating Literacy: Culture, Difference, and Learning for Students From Nondominant Communities (2009, background): “Engeström (2001) proposed the theory of expansive learning, within the framework of cultural–historical activity theory, as a new approach to re-mediating previous theories of learning and their intervention projects.”
Cultural-Historical Activity Theory: Exploring a Theory to Inform Practice and Research (2014, background): “…knowledge and professional tools of social work, their personal histories related to their chosen profession, the course community of students and future colleagues, and concurrent social work courses and field experiences (Engeström, 2001; Fire, 2009; National Association of Social Workers, 2008).”
Reflections on activity theory (2009, background): “This activity‐theorists typically construe as the first‐generation model of action (Figure 2 ) (see Engestrom 2001 , 134).”
Learning and Expanding with Activity Theory: The Future of Activity Theory: A Rough Draft (2009, background): “These five mechanisms partly overlap the conceptual framework of expansive learning (Engeström, 1987, 2001).”
Why hasn't technology disrupted academics' teaching practices Understanding resistance to change through the lens of activity theory (2008, background): “Activity systems are characterised by contradictions (or systemic tensions), which trigger innovation and change and are source of development (Barab, Barnett, & Squire, 2002; Engestro¨m, 1987, 2001; Helle, 2000).”
Boundary Crossing and Boundary Objects (2011, neutral): “This extended scope of analysis has been an explicit part of what is referred to as the third generation of cultural historical activity theory (CHAT), which states that two activity systems are the minimal unit of analysis (Engeström, 2001; Roth & Lee, 2007).”
Learning and expanding with activity theory (2009, background): “2 However, it can be asked to what extent the definition of the secondary contradictions of separate activity systems suffices to make sense of the evolving contradictions in a network of activity systems (Engeström, 2001).”
Learning at the workplace (2009, neutral): “DR AF T Various models explaining the process of experience-based learning are presently discussed, including, for example, models based on the so-called activity theory such as the expansive learning model (Engeström, 2001), the connective model (Griffiths and Guile, 2003) or the learning cycle of ”
Practice as the Site of Knowing: Insights from the Field of Telemedicine (2011, background): “…Wenger 1991, Chaiklin and Lave 1993, Cook and Yanow 1993, Blackler 1995, Orr 1996, Engeström and Middleton 1996, Cook and Brown 1999, Gherardi 2001, Engeström 2001, Brown and Duguid 2001, Carlile 2002, Orlikowski 2002, Bechky 2003, Nicolini et al. 2003, Swan and Scarbrough 2005, Handley et al.…”
Communities of Interest: Learning through the Interaction of Multiple Knowledge Systems (2001, neutral): “Members of CoIs must learn to communicate with and learn from others [Engeström, 2001] who have different perspectives and perhaps a different vocabulary for describing their ideas.”
Voice without accountability: the changing relationship between employers, the state and education in England (2004, background): “If Engeström and Young (2001) are correct, and cognition is culturally ‘situated’ inside and interacting with the settings within which it is being developed and deployed, then expecting the classroom to mimic or anticipate the workplace may be something of a lost cause (Wolf, 1998).”
The learning organization (2007, background): “Theoretically, these organizations are viewed as “activity systems” that experience equivocality when having to work together in the CIP, which may lead to tensions that can be solved through expansive learning (Engeström, 2001).”
Distinguishing knowledge-sharing, knowledge-construction, and knowledge-creation discourses (2009, methodology): “Knowledge creation The term “knowledge creation” is used in the literature on expertise and innovation to describe how companies, organizations, and academic fields develop the ideas needed to sustain innovation (e.g. Engeström 2001; Gundling 2000; Nonaka and Takeuchi 1995).”
From design experiments to formative interventions (2008, background): “Of particular interest are “possibility concepts” (Engeström, 2007a) and”