Cited by 366Innovative Education and Learning PracticesInnovative Teaching and Learning MethodsPsychology of Development and Education

Formative Interventions for Expansive Learning and Transformative Agency

Open access
Sannino, Annalisa, Engeström, Yrjö, Lemos, Monica·2016·Journal of the Learning Sciences

Abstract

This article examines formative interventions as we understand them in cultural-historical activity theory and reflects on key differences between this intervention research tradition and design-based research as it is conceived in the learning sciences tradition. Three projects, including 2 Change Laboratories, are analyzed with the help of conceptual lenses derived from basic epistemological principles for intervention research in activity theory. In all 3 interventions, learners expansively transformed the object of their activity. The Change Laboratory cases, however, show that this learning process included productive deviations from the researchers’ instructional intentions, leading to significant outcomes, both practical and theoretical, that were not anticipated by the interventionists. Together these cases illustrate that an activity-theoretical formative intervention approach differs from design-based research in the following ways: (a) formative interventions are based on design done by the learners; (b) the collective design effort is seen as part of an expansive learning process including participatory analyses and implementation phases; (c) rather than aiming at transferable and scalable solutions, formative interventions aim at generative solutions developing over lengthy periods of time both in the researched activities and in the research community.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/10508406.2016.1204547

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The methodology of formative interventions, especially Change Laboratory, may serve as an important resource for building and analyzing such transformation coalitions.

    “The methodology of formative interventions, especially the Change Laboratory method, may serve as an important resource for building and analyzing such transformation coalitions (Sannino et al. 2016).”

    From Using activity theory to transform medical work and learning (2021) · cites this paper as Sannino et al. 2016

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 68 · Cited by 366

Authors
Sannino, A., Engeström, Y., & Lemos, M.
Affiliations
University of Helsinki (FI)
Corresponding author
Sannino, Annalisa
Venue
Journal of the Learning Sciences
Published
2016-06-23
Volume
25
Issue
4
Pages
599-633
ISSN
  • 1050-8406 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7809
OpenAlex
W2462370874
Cited by
366
References
68
Citations by year
2026: 30 · 2025: 39 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 55 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 51 · 2020: 40 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 23 · 2017: 18 · 2016: 5
FWCI
117.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
other-oa
Locations
  • Journal of the Learning Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Kansainvälisen Liikkuvuuden ja Yhteistyön Keskus (TM-12-8554)
  • Kulttuurin ja Yhteiskunnan Tutkimuksen Toimikunta (253804, 274244, 292730)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Human Factors and Ergonomics › Innovative Education and Learning Practices
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Innovative Teaching and Learning Methods
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Psychology of Development and Education
Keywords
formative intervention, expansive learning, transformative agency, cultural-historical activity theory, design-based research, collective design, intervention research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review