Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

Mediating between practitioner and developer communities: the Learning Activity Design in Education experience

By Isobel Falconer


The slow uptake by teachers in post‐compulsory education of new technological tools and technology‐enhanced teaching methods may be symptomatic of a general split in the e‐learning community between development of tools, services and standards, and research into how teachers can use these most effectively (i.e. between the teaching practitioner and technical developer communities). This paper reflects on the experience of transferring knowledge and understanding between these two communities during the Learning Activity Design in Education project funded by the UK Joint Information Systems Committee. The discussion is situated within the literature on ‘mediating representations’ and ‘mediating artefacts’, and shows that the practical operation of mediating representations is far more complex than previously acknowledged. The experience suggests that for effective transfer of concepts between communities, the communities need to overlap to the extent that a single representation is comprehensible to both. This representation may be viewed as a boundary object that is used to negotiate understanding. If the communities do not overlap a chain of intermediate representations and communities may be necessary. Finally, a tentative distinction is drawn between mediating representations and mediating artefacts, based not in the nature of the resources, but in their mode and context of use

Topics: LB Theory and practice of education, LC1022 - 1022.25 Computer-assisted Education
Publisher: Taylor and Francis Ltd
Year: 2007
DOI identifier: 10.1080/09687760701472177
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. (2004). A framework for pedagogical evaluation of virtual learning environments, JISC e-learning pedagogies programme report (Bristol, JISC). Available online at: http:// (accessed 22
  2. (2005). A learning design toolkit to create pedagogically effective learning activities, doi
  3. (2007). (accessed 22
  4. (2004). Active artefacts: representing our knowledge of learning and teaching,
  5. (2005). An on-going journey: technology as a learning workbench, Faculty of Behavioural sciences,
  6. (2004). Assessing the relevance of the review of e-learning theories, frameworks and models and the mapping table to evaluators. JISC e-learning models desk study,
  7. (2003). Between work and school: new perspectives on transfer and boundary-crossing doi
  8. (2006). Characterising effective e-learning resources, doi
  9. (2006). Circular for design for learning funding call. Available online at:
  10. (1998). Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity (Cambridge, doi
  11. (2007). Contemporary perspectives in e-learning research: themes, methods and impact on practice (London, RoutledgeFalmer). Mediating between services and learning activities 169
  12. (2007). Contemporary perspectives in e-learning research: themes, methods and impact on practice (London, RoutledgeFalmer).Mediating between services and learning activities 169
  13. (1998). Creating shareable representations of practice, doi
  14. (2002). Developing learning technology networks through shared representations of practice, in: C. Rust (Ed.) Improving student learning through learning technologies
  15. (2003). From pioneers to partners: the changing voices of staff developers, in:
  16. (2001). How do representations of practice enable practice to change?,
  17. (1990). Knowledge acquisition tools, methods, and mediating representations, in:
  18. (1999). Learning relationships from theory to design, doi
  19. (2001). Learning technology and learning relationships, doi
  20. (2006). Mediating artefacts to guide choice in creating and undertaking learning activities, in:
  21. (2007). Mod4L final report: representing learning designs.
  22. (2007). Mod4L project report for JIS C. Available online at: _file.php?fileId=2 (accessed 29
  23. (2006). Mod4L report: case studies, exemplars and learning designs.
  24. (2002). Models of technology and change
  25. (2007). nl/rb.htm (accessed 22
  26. (1999). Perspectives on activity theory (Cambridge,
  27. (2004). Report on the effectiveness of tools for e-learning: report for the JISC commissioned ‘Research Study on the Effectiveness of Resources, Tools and Support Services used by Practitioners
  28. (2004). Review: developing e-learning models for the JISC practitioner communities: a report for the JISC e-pedagogy programme
  29. (2006). Ronline: mediating artefacts to support technology-facilitated learning, in: A. Bunker & I. Vardi (Eds), Critical visions: thinking, learning and researching in higher education
  30. (2004). Sustainability of e-learning innovations—findings of expert interviews.
  31. (2005). The e-framework for education and research: an overview.
  32. (2005). The e-framework for education and research: an overview. Paper prepared on behalf of DEST (Australia), JISC-CETIS (UK). Available online at: (accessed 22
  33. (2004). The effectiveness of resources, tools and support services used by practitioners in designing and delivering e-learning activities: final report (Bristol, JISC). Available online at: resources/effectivefinal/view (accessed 22
  34. (2004). The role of mediating artefacts in the work of educational psychologists during consultative conversations in schools, doi
  35. (1989). The structure of ill-structured solutions: boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving, in:
  36. (2004). Towards a pattern language for networked learning, paper presented at the Networked Learning Conference
  37. (2004). What are the affordances of information and communication technologies?, doi
  38. (2006). Who will own the new VLE? Sharing practice, problems and alternative solutions, paper presented at the
  39. (2001). Writing effective use cases doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.