Expanding the foci of activity theory: accessing the broader contexts and experiences of mathematics education reform

Abstract

In this paper, we consider our use of activity theory to examine empirical data from a study of reform in England – the implementation of the mathematics strand of the Key Stage 3 Strategy in two schools. Our concerns are largely methodological – we consider the aspects of reform that more traditional activity theory methods and foci were able to theorise – questions related to “what” had changed, and then consider those aspects that were left aside – participants' experiences of reform and the influences of broader dominant discourses relating to mathematics classroom practices. We then go onto show how concepts related to the notion of “boundaries” – boundary objects and boundary crossing can be used within an activity theoretical frame to theorise the gaps. We conclude by detailing the ways in which this expansion of foci adds to our understandings of policy implementation.

Keywords:

• activity theory
• boundary crossing
• boundary object
• Key Stage 3 Strategy
• mathematics education
• reform

Acknowledgements

The empirical research referred to in this paper was enabled by an Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC) research studentship (award number R42200034428).

Notes

1. “Practice” and “activity” are widely and varyingly used in educational research literature. It is thus necessary to note our use of these terms. We use the term “practice” to refer to patterns of work organization within our focal activity systems which are not directly oriented towards the system's specific object of reform, but which remain important in order to explain differences between the two departments in relation to their integration of the policy. The word “activity” is used to talk about collective actions that are focused on the object of reform within the system. Activity systems in our theorization are therefore stretched somewhat to encompass both object‐oriented activities and historical patterns of practice which may not be directly aligned to the focal object.