The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Rules, roles and tools: Activity theory and the comparative study of e‐learning
Abstract
Activity theory (AT) is a powerful tool for investigating ‘artefacts in use’, ie, the ways technologies interrelate with their local context. AT reveals the interfaces between e‐learning at the macro‐ (strategy, policy, ‘campus‐wide’ solutions) and the micro‐organisational levels (everyday working practice, iterative change, individual adaptation). In AT, contexts are conceived of as activity systems in which human, technological and organisational elements are interrelated and largely inseparable. Both the subjects of the activity system (internal) and the wider community (external) mediate their activities through tools, rules and roles. This paper shows how a course management system (CMS) exerts an influence over all three of these mediators, though the exact nature of this influence depends on the particular configuration of each activity system. This is illustrated with reference to two case study programmes, both of which used Moodle as their CMS, but which had activity systems structured in quite different ways; the programmes also had different relationships with their external organisational environment.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“AT allows for a focus at the level of individual teacher practices but also at the broader organisational level, as Benson et al. (2008) highlight in their study of online programs: 'AT reveals the interfaces between e-learning at the macro (strategy, policy, 'campus wide' solutions) and the micro-organisational levels (everyday working practice, iterative change, individual adaptation)' (”
From Using activity theory and its principle of contradictions to guide research in educational technology (2008) · cites this paper as Benson et al., 2008
In the citing paper
“An AT perspective on the study of integration of new technologies in education shifts from a focus on tools themselves to tool use (e.g., Benson et al., 2008), or, as Barab et al. (2004) explain, from tools' 'usability' to their 'sociability.'”
From Using activity theory and its principle of contradictions to guide research in educational technology (2008) · cites this paper as Benson et al., 2008
Citations
Cites
Learning by Expanding: An Activity-Theoretical Approach to Developmental Research
Engeström, Y. (2014) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139814744 · Cited by 4,991
Research works printed but not linked: 20
- 10.4135/9781848607859.n1 · DOI
- Argyris C., 1999, On organizational learning
- Bannon L., 1991, Designing interaction: psychological theory at the human computer interface, 227
- 10.1207/s15327884mca1202_4 · DOI
- 10.1080/00140130310001617921 · DOI
- 10.1386/jots.4.1.75_1 · DOI
- Carr W., 1986, Becoming critical: knowing through action research
- Cervero R. M., 1994, Planning responsibly for adult education: a guide to negotiating power and interests
- Conole G., 2007, Contemporary perspectives in e‐learning research: themes, methods and impact on practice, 69
- 10.1080/13600800500046255 · DOI
- 10.1145/306412.306431 · DOI
- Leont'ev A. N., 1981, Problems of the development of the mind
- 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00843.x · DOI
- Mwanza D.(2001).Where theory meets practice: a case for an activity theory based methodology to guide computer system design. In Proceedings ofInteract 2001: 8th IFIP TC 13 Conference on Human–Computer Interaction Tokyo Japan July 9–13 2001. Retrieved January 31 2008 fromhttp://kmi.open.ac.uk/publications/pdf/kmi‐01‐7.pdf
- Mwanza D.&Engeström Y.(2003).Pedagogical adeptness in the design of e‐learning environments: experiences from the Lab@Future Project. InA.Rossett(Ed.) Proceedings ofE‐Learn 2003 International Conference on E‐Learning in Corporate Government Healthcare & Higher Education(pp.1344–1347). Phoenix USA.
- Russell D. R., 2002, Distributed learning: social and cultural approaches to practice, 64
- Senge P., 2001, Handbook of action research: participatory enquiry and practice, 238
- 10.1177/00027649921955326 · DOI · Paper page
- Wenger E., 1999, Communities of practice: learning, meaning and identity
- Whitworth A., 2006, ALT‐C 2006: the next generation, 192
Cited by
Murphy, E., & Rodriguez-Manzanares, M. A. (2008) · Australasian Journal of Educational Technology · doi:10.14742/ajet.1203 · Cited by 213
“AT allows for a focus at the level of individual teacher practices but also at the broader organisational level, as Benson et al. (2008) highlight in their study of online programs: “AT reveals the interfaces between e-learning at the macro (strategy, policy, ‘campus wide’ solutions) and the micro-organisational level…”
BackgroundMethodInfluential
Metadata
- Authors
- Benson, A., Lawler, C., & Whitworth, A.
- Affiliations
- University of Alabama (US)
- University of Manchester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Whitworth, Andrew
- Venue
- British Journal of Educational Technology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-04-21
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 456-467
- ISSN
- 0007-1013 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-8535
- OpenAlex
- W2147684084
- Cited by
- 66
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 6 · 2012: 8
- FWCI
- 17.59
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- British Journal of Educational Technology (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and E-Learning
- Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Education and Learning Practices
- Social Sciences › Education › Online and Blended Learning
- Keywords
- activity theory, online learning, virtual learning environments, Moodle, activity systems, higher education programs, technology adaptation
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Rules, roles and tools: Activity theory and the comparative study of e‐learning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00838.x
- The paper
- Benson, A., Lawler, C., & Whitworth, A. (2008). Rules, roles and tools: Activity theory and the comparative study of e‐learning. British Journal of Educational Technology. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2008.00838.x
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.