You are here:

Strategy for progressing from in-house training into e-learning using Activity Theory at a South African university PROCEEDINGS

, Tshwane University of Technology, South Africa

E-Learn: World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education, in Las Vegas, Nevada, USA ISBN 978-1-880094-66-2 Publisher: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE), Chesapeake, VA


This study applies the basics of Activity Theory to the situation of in-house training in Information Technology services at a higher education institution. It examines how we can scientifically describe and analyze the training situation towards the goal of progressively improving the Information Technology training process. The components of the Activity system were identified in the training process. Reasoning into the system yield contradictions which on appropriation enable us to develop a strategy for the improvement in the training on Information Technology services at the institution. The developed strategy indicates the need for a comprehensive e-learning system that would enhance interactions between the trainer and the trainees. Such a system need to accommodate the existing training strengths but foster innovation and responsiveness and most importantly can be developed as a group effort with potential for effective user-developer interactions that could constantly assist in improving the e-learning system and the training process.


Dehinbo, J. (2008). Strategy for progressing from in-house training into e-learning using Activity Theory at a South African university. In C. Bonk, M. Lee & T. Reynolds (Eds.), Proceedings of E-Learn 2008--World Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher Education (pp. 726-733). Las Vegas, Nevada, USA: Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education (AACE). Retrieved November 14, 2018 from .


View References & Citations Map


  1. Adam, A. (2001). Gender, emancipation and critical information systems. In: Proceedings of the 9th European Conference on Information Systems (ECIS), 27-29 June 2001. Bled, Slovenia.
  2. Business Link (2008). Practical advice for business: setup in-house training. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed: 21/04/2008].
  3. Engestrom, Y. (1999). Innovative learning in work teams: analyzing cycles of knowledge creation in practice. In:
  4. Engestrom, Y. (2001). Expansive Learning at work: toward an activity theoretical re-conceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14 (1): 132-156.
  5. Issroff, K. & Scanlon, E. (2002). Using technology in Higher Education: an Activity Theory perspective. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 18 (2002): 77-83.
  6. Kaptelinin, V. (2005). The object of the activity: Making sense of the sense-maker. Mind, culture, and Activity, 12 (1): 4-18.
  7. Kaptelinin, V. & Nardi, B.A. (1997). Activity Theory: basic concepts and applications. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed: 27/02/2008].
  8. Kuutti, K. (1996). Activity Theory as a potential framework for human-computer interaction research. In B.A. Nardi (Ed.), Context and consciousness: Activity Theory and human– computer interaction. (17 – 44). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  9. Kuutti, K. & Arvonen, T. (1992). Identifying potential CSCW applications by means of Activity Theory concepts. In: Proceedings of the ACM 1992 conference on CSCW. [Online]. Available from:[Accessed:27/02/2008].
  10. Leont’ey, A.N. (1981). Problems of the Development of the mind. Moscow: Progress press.
  11. Mintzberg, H. (1983). The power game and the players. The structuring of power in and around organizations. 1: 22-30.
  12. Morrison, D. (2003). Using Activity Theory to design constructive online learning environments for higher order thinking: a retrospective analysis. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 29 (3): 1-16.
  13. Mwanza-Simwami, D. (2002). Towards an Activity-Oriented design method for human-computer interaction research and practice. PhD thesis, Unpublished. The Open University. UK. Quasar. (N.D.). Activity Theory. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed: 27/02/2008].
  14. Scanlon, E. & Issroff, K. (2005). Activity Theory and Higher Education: evaluating learning technologies. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21 (2005): 430-489.
  15. Singh, G., Hawkins, L. & Whymark, G. (2007). An integrated model of collaborative knowledge building. Interdisciplinary Journal of Knowledge and Learning objects, 3 (2007): 85-105.
  16. Weilbach, L. (2007). Social Context of IT: notes and discussions. Unpublished. University of Pretoria. February 2007. Wikipedia. (N.d). Activity Theory. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed:

These references have been extracted automatically and may have some errors. If you see a mistake in the references above, please contact