||In school, administrators and teachers often have different points of view. About energy saving, we often concern about whether students do some actions as they have learned. In fact, in most schools, many students actually do many actions to save energy. On the other hand, we seldom concern about the resistance owing to different points of view between school administrators and teachers. Sometimes school administrators complain that teachers or students do not follow the school policies, but teachers or students think that school administrators do not understand the real condition in classroom. Teachers and school administrators usually have a gap between their standpoints; nevertheless they have few opportunities to communicate or negotiate with each other.|
Owing to the circumstances above, we chose an energy saving electric meter curriculum at a junior high school as a research topic, and we need some theories as a lens for research analyses. The junior high school started an electric meter curriculum for one school energy saving plan two years ago, this curriculum has some special design, for example, the cooperation between teachers and school administrators. The participants of this curriculum are administrators, teachers of different subjects, tutors (homeroom teacher) and students. Students learn how to read electric meter numbers, record it, learn some knowledge about energy saving, and self-criticize the behavior which they do about energy saving. Teachers’ and administrators’ rules and working models are different. To understand and find inner contradictions between teacher system and administrator system, we use Engestrom’s Activity theory. We also observe how these people of two systems communicate and negotiate with each other by using Wenger’s theory, community of practice.
Our research method is qualitative research, and we conduct an Ethnography way by attending meetings in the junior high school. After meetings, our team administers in-depth surveys with interviews to teachers, administrators and students who participated in this curriculum to support the information we have got in several meetings.
The result of this study indicated four kinds of disturbances: disturbances about the overlap of areas which teachers and administrators control from contradictions of their division of labor and tools, disturbances about conduction sequence from contradictions of their division of labor and rules, disturbances about different goals from contradictions of their tools and subjects. In the negotiation process of teachers and administrators, many background structure factors influence both sides’ standpoints, but they seldom think about this when arguing. There is also a situation that we called “delayed negotiation”, for example, some tutors or young teachers believe that they do not have influence on school decision making, yet after meetings, they did not really follow the policies other people decided, and then they have to make more efforts to negotiate with each other.
Nowadays, energy saving is still an important concept all over the world. We hope our results can help some schools, which are introducing energy saving curriculum, find some obstructions of practice. Especially for the cooperation between teachers and administrators, we found some contradictions of practices that can aid schools in developing curriculum, and lead to a more problem-solving issue.
||Axelrod, R. S. (1996). The European energy charter treaty--reality or illusion?.|
Energy Policy, 24(6), 497-505.
Bruin, L. (2008). Effectiveness of passive energy interventions in improving
physical learning environments in South African schools. Unpublished master’s thesis, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg, South Africa.
Chen, W. K., Juang, Y. R., & Cai D. L. (2009, July) Courseware design and assessment methodology by fuzzy theory - a case study of energy saving course . Paper presented at the Meeting of the Eighth International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics, Perth, Australia.
Dias, R. A., Mattos C. R., & Balestieri, J. P. (2003). Energy education: breaking up the rational energy use barriers. Energy Policy, 32(11), 1339–1347.
Engeström, Y. (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. United State of America : Cambrige University Press.
Engeström, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics, 43(7), 960-974.
Engeström, Y. (2001). Expansive Learning at Work: toward an activity theoretical
Reconceptualization. Journal of Education and Work, 14(1), 133-156.
Engeström,Y.(2007). From Design Experiments to Formative Interventions. Paper presented at the meeting of the 8th International Conference on International conference for the Learning Sciences, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Engeström, Y. (2009, June). Two layers of expansive learning: building collaborative agency in home care for the elderly. Paper presented at the meeting of Activity Theory and Practice Learning Conference. Milton Keynes, United Kingdom.
Gomezgranell, C.,& Cerveramarch, S. (1993). Development of conceptual knowledge and attitudes about energy and the environment. International Journal of Science Education, 15(5), 553-565.
Guldberg, K. (2010). Using the lance of socio-cultural activity and community of practice to guide an empirical study. Paper presented at the meeting of international Conference on Networked Learning, Aalborg, Denmark.
Helle, M. (2000). Disturbance and contradictions as tools for understanding work in
the newsroom. Scandinavian Journal of Information Systems, 12, 81-114.
Julie, E. (2009). Influences on US middle school teachers’’ use of environment-based education. Environmental Education Research, 15(1), 71-92.
Goldman C., Reid M., Levy R., & Silverstein A. (2010). Coordination of Energy Efficiency and Demand Response. (Rep No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.). Berkeley, USA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Leeming, F. C.,Dwyer, W. O.,Porter, B. E., Cobern, M.K. (1993). Outcome Research
in environmental education: A critical review. Journal of Environmental Education, 24(4), 8-21.
Lyzanne De Bruin, (2008). Effectiveness of passive energy interventions in improving
physical learning environments in South African schools. International Journal
of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, Published on line Doi:
Makitalo, J. (2005). Work-related well-being the transformation of nursing home work. Oulu Finland, University of Oulu.
Milne, C., Scantlebury, K., Blonstein, J. & Gleason, S. (2010). Coteaching and disturbances: Building a better system for learning to teach science. Research in Science Education. Published on line DOI 10.1007/s11165-010-9172-7.
Mourik, R. M., Breukers, S. , Heiskanen, E., Bauknecht, D., Hodson, M., Barabanova, Y., et al.(2009). Contextualising behavioural change in energy programmes involving intermediaries and policymaking organizations working towards changing behaviour.( Rep. No: 213217). Brussels, Belgium: European Commission.
Murphy, E., & Rodriguez-Manzanares, M. A. (2008). Using activity theory and its principle of contradictions to guide research in educational techonology. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 24(4), 442-457.
Mwanza, D. (2001, July). Where theory meets practice: A case for an activity theory based methodology to guide computer system design. Paper present at the meeting of Eighth IFIP TC 13 Conference on Human-Computer Interaction, Tokyo, Japan.
Nathan, M., Ernst, W., & Lynn, P. (1999). Energy efficiency and carbon dioxide
Emissions reduction opportunities in the U.S. iron and steel sector. (Rep No. DE-AC03-76SF00098.). Berkeley, USA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
Peterson, P. C. (2009, May 1). Teaching sustainable education and the energy conservation ethic. DigitalCommons@University of Rhode Island. Retrieved September 8, 2010, from http://digitalcommons.uri.edu/srhonorsprog/121.
Peterson, T. D., & Rose, A, Z. (2006). Reducing conflicts between climate policy and energy policy in the US: The important role of the states. Energy Policy, 34, 619–631.
Pierce, J., Schiano, D. J., & Paulos, E. (2010,April). Home, habits, and energy: examining domestic interactions and energy consumption. Paper present at the meeting of CHI 2010: Home Eco Behavior, Atlanta, GA, USA.
Pinto R., Couso D., & Gutierrez R. (2005). Using research on teachers’ transformations of innovations to inform teacher education. The case of energy degradation. Science Education, 89(1), 38-55.
Saka, Y., Southerland, S. A., & Brooks, J. S. (2009). Becoming a member of a school community while working toward science education reform: teacher induction from a cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) perspective. Science Education, 93(6), 996–1025.
Suthers, D. D., Yukawa, J., & Harada, V. H. (2007). An activity system
analysis of a tripartite technology-supported partnership for school reform.
Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2(2), 1-29.
Teräs, M. (2007, September). Interculturality in immigrants’’ integration
training to labour force. European Conference on Educational Research, Ghent,
Worrell, E., Lynn, P., & Martin, N. (2001). Energy efficiency and carbon dioxide
emissions reduction opportunities in the US iron and steel sector. Energy, 26,
Yavuzsaka, Southerland, S. A., &Brooks, J. S. (2009). Becoming a Member of a school Community While Working Toward Science Education Reform: Teacher Induction from a Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) Perspective. Science Education, 93(6), 996-1025.