logo

Articles

Vol. 3 No. 1 (2023): Activity theory in technology enhanced learning research

Using activity theory to shine a light on Teaching and Learning Regimes in graphic design education

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21428/8c225f6e.727fea84
Submitted
9 August 2026
Published
15-08-2026

Abstract

This article builds on previous research (McDermott-Dalton, 2021) in which I used cultural and historical activity theory, along with a Change Laboratory methodology, to enable participants to model, expose and aggravate contradictions within the graphic design portfolio activity. In this paper, I consider whether the use of an activity system, which focused on a specific activity within an academic programme, could be adapted to chart a more generalised object such as graphic design education. The additional lens of Teaching and Learning Regimes (TLRs) aims to provide further insight into the culturally and historically situated practices of graphic design education, which emerged during the original study, but which were not captured in the final paper. Analysis of the original portfolio activity system’s object was extended to include the broader educational context of graphic design education. Co-constructed learning was used as a focus to capture the collaborative nature of graphic design education. Primary and secondary contradictions were revised where necessary to suit the broader remit, with eight Teaching and Learning Regimes used as a lens to examine the situated practice of graphic design education. The portfolio activity system was useful as a lens to consider the broader object of graphic design education. The community, rules and division of labour, documented in the activity system, related to the wider design context, while the outcome was arrived at through the investment of all stakeholders in a co-constructed learning environment. The additional lens of TLRs provides a new perspective on the generalized object of graphic design education, and reveals deeply embedded socio-cultural organisational practices. This approach will be useful to researchers and practitioners who wish to extend research on specific activity systems to explore practice sensibilities within a particular academic context.

References

  1. Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-Based Research: A Decade of Progress in Education Research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25.
  2. Bligh, B., & Flood, M. (2015). The Change Laboratory in Higher Education: Research-Intervention using Activity Theory. In J. Huisman, & M. Tight (Eds.), Theory and Method in Higher Education Research, 1, 141–168. Emerald.
  3. Daniels, H., Edwards, A., Engestrom, Y., Gallagher, T. and Ludvigsen, S. (2010). Activity Theory in practice promoting learning across boundaries and agencies. Routledge.
  4. Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Orienta-Konsultit.
  5. Engeström, Y. (2008). Enriching Activity Theory without shortcuts. Interacting with Computers, 20(2), 256–259.
  6. Engeström, Y., Virkkunen, J., Helle, M., Pihlaja, J., & Poikela, R. (1996). The Change Laboratory as a tool for transforming work. Lifelong Learning in Europe, 1(2), 10–17.
  7. Jacoby, S., & Ochs, E. (1995). Co-Construction: An Introduction. Research on Language and Social Interaction, 28(3), 171–183.
  8. Kaptelinin, V., & Nardi, B. A. (2006). Activity Theory in a Nutshell. In Acting with Technology: Activity Theory and Interaction Design (pp. 29–72). MIT Press.
  9. Karlgren, K., Ramberg, R., & Artman, H. (2016). Designing interaction: How do interaction design students address interaction? International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 26(3), 439–459.
  10. Lupton, E., & Phillips, J. C. (2015). Graphic Design: The New Basics: Revised and Expanded. Chronicle Books.
  11. McDermott-Dalton, G. (2021). Putting the ‘e’ in portfolio design: an intervention research project investigating how design students and faculty might jointly reimagine the design portfolio activity. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 32, 1207-1225.
  12. Potter, P., & France, B. (2018). Informing a pedagogy for design and problem-solving in hard materials by theorising technologists’ learning experiences. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 28(1), 101–120
  13. Raff, J.-H. (2013). Theoretical frameworks for the conceptualization of graphic design in use. Iridescent: Icograda Journal of Design Research, 2(2), 10–21.
  14. Sannino, A., & Engeström, Y. (2018). Cultural-historical Activity Theory: founding insights and new challenges. Cultural-Historical Psychology, 14(3), 43–56.
  15. Tan, S., & Melles, G. (2010). An Activity Theory focused case study of graphic designers’ tool-mediated activities during the conceptual design phase. Design Studies, 31(5), 461–478.
  16. Tarbox, J. D. A. (2006). Activity Theory: a model for design research. In A. Bennett (Ed.), Design studies: Theories and research in graphic design (pp. 73–81). Princeton Architectural Press.
  17. Trowler, P. (2005). A Sociology of Teaching, Learning and Enhancement: improving practices in higher education. Papers: Revista de Sociologia, 76, 13–32.
  18. Trowler, P. (2020). Accomplishing Change in Teaching and Learning Regimes: Higher education and the practice sensibility. Oxford University Press.
  19. Trowler, P., & Cooper, A. (2002). Teaching and learning regimes: Implicit theories and recurrent practices in the enhancement of teaching and learning through educational development programmes. Higher Education Research and Development, 21(3), 221–240.