Activity theory as the basis for developing blended learning in the workplace by Dr. Schaffer

What I learned from this presentation and Collis & Margaryan (2004) is good potentials of Activity Theory (AT) and its use for learning environments. I was especially interested in their descriptions of problem-solution outcomes of the assessment skills, collaborative learning (social interactions), involvement of supervisor/coach (although it's questionable per p. 50) and experts, authenticity in learning, and use of technology with an abundance of resources.

However, I still have hard time understanding what AT really is and whether its application to instructional designs and learning environments is real. I would like to see more examples of actual instructional materials (besides the one of "Health Risk Assessment: Roster: Activities") to solve my dilemma. I also would like to know more about what constitutes "blended learning," especially the aspect that is not the online learning aspect.

First, I am trying to answer Dr. Schaffer's question on his last Powerpoint slide now. "Does AT as applied to instructional design makes senseto you?" My answer is no. For the crucial part of "from activity system to course design" (p. 44), the steps used are modification of Jonassen & Rohrer Murphy (1999), which are I think "constructivist" steps. This use of constructivist steps makes me wonder whether AT is really necessary for instructional designs. What makes AT really unique? I would like to know if a combination of situated learning and constructivistic principles for learning might be sufficient to make such instructional designs as the Shell EP case happen.

Second, the social aspect is the most important aspect of AT. But this article reports Shell’s learning environments and participants that are significantly multicultural and international, and Collis and Margaryan say these are a "major challenge" (p. 50). It appears to me that the most important part of the design based on AT is the most problematic. A case study that would involve only a local learning environment might be more helpful to research on instructional designs derived from AT. Although I am not sure, AT itself does not seem to offer a solution to those multicultural or diversity issues.

The blended learning that was used at Shell EP seems to be for acquiring skills and knowledge. (I might not be discussion any AT issues here.) I was wondering if the health risk assessment skills and knowledge are really "experiential" (p. 38) and helpful. The instructions look to me all about "information" and how to solve problems at the information level. In the case of real emergency involving health hazards, assessments are the initial step before designing what to do and also actually implementing some counter-measures to stop or reduce the hazards.

Shigetake