Analysis of Contradictions in Online Collaborative Learning using Activity Theory as Analytical Framework


  • Mohd Nihra Haruzuan Mohamad Said Department of Educational Sciences, Mathematics and Creative Multimedia Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Johor Bahru, Malaysia
  • Mike Forret Technology, Environmental, Mathematics and Science Education Research Centre (TEMS) University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
  • Chris Eames Technology, Environmental, Mathematics and Science Education Research Centre (TEMS) University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand



E-learning, online collaborative learning, activity theory-based analytic framework


While previous studies have cited the benefits of incorporating online collaborative learning (OCL) in teaching and learning, there are also shortcomings of OCL that should not be ignored. This study aimed to investigate the constraints of incorporating OCL in a Malaysian tertiary classroom using Activity Theory as analytical framework. Activity Theory proved to be useful, particularly for OCL, because it provided a structure for identifying internal contradictions, also referred as tensions or constraints as result of interaction by the components of the OCL. Hence, the objectives of this paper are twofold: to identify constraints of OCL as perceived by students; and to investigate their suggestions or recommendations for improvement of OCL. The findings indicated two keys constraints: technology-related contradictions, which are related to desire for synchronous feedback in forum discussions, cut and paste and plagiarism of ideas, and other technological distractions; and group discussion contradictions. These refer to repetitive and mixed-up postings, clashes on topics of discussion, and discussions being too formal. Suggestions for improvement are reported by students regarding aspects of personalizing an online collaborative learning template; and providing additional support for collaborating online.


An, H., Kim, S., and Kim, B. 2008. Teacher Perspectives on Online Collaborative Learning: Factors Perceived as Facilitating and Impeding Successful Online Group Work. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education. 8(1): 65–83.

Aris, B., Ali, M. B., Harun, J., Tasir, Z., Atan, N. A., and Noor, N. M. 2006. E-Learning Research and Development Experiences Related to Learning Computer Science, Information Technology and Multimedia Subjects. Paper presented at 3rd International Conference on University Learning and Teaching (InCULT 2006). Shah Alam, Malaysia

Barab, Schatz, S., and Scheckler, R. 2004. Using Activity Theory to Conceptualize Online Community and Using Online Community to Conceptualize Activity Theory. Mind, Culture, and Activity. 11(1): 25–47.

Barab, S. A., Barnett, M., Yamagata-Lynch, L., Squire, K., and Keating, T. 2002. Using activity theory to understand the systemic tensions characterizing a technology-rich introductory astronomy course. Mind, Culture, and Activity. 9(2): 76–107.

Dillenbourg, P. 1999. What do you mean by collaborative leraning? In P. Dillenbourg (Ed.), Collaborative-learning: Cognitive and Computational Approaches. Oxford: Elsevier. 1–19.

Dirkx, J. M., and Smith, R. O. 2003. Thinking Out of Bowl of Spaghetti: Learning to Learn in Online Collaborative Groups. In T. S. Robert (Ed.). Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice USA: Idea Group. 132–159.

Embi, M. A. 2011. E-learning in Malaysian Higher Education Institutions: Status, Trends, and Challenges. Putrajaya, Malaysia: Department of Higher Education Ministry of Higher Education.

Engeström, Y. 1999. Activity Theory and Individual and Social Transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen and R.-L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on Activity Theory Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 19–38.

Engeström, Y. 2001. Expansive Learning at Work: Toward an Activity Theoretical Reconceptulization. Education and Work. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4419-1428-6_857. 14(1): 133–156.

Garrison, D. R., and Anderson, T. 2003. E-learning in the 21st Century: A Framework for Research and Practice. London: Routledge Falmer.

Graham, C. R., and Misanchuk, M. 2004. Computer-Mediated Learning Groups: Benefits and Challenges to Using Groupwork in Online Learning Environments. In T. S. Roberts (Eds.). Online collaborative learning: Theory and practice. USA: Information Science Publishing.

Harasim, L. 2012. Learning Theory and Online Technologies. First ed. New York: Taylor and Francis Group.

Huberman, A. M., and Miles, M. B. 2002. The Qualitative Researcher's Companion. California: Sage Publications, Inc.

Jonassen, D. H., and Murphy, R. L. 1999. Activity Theory as a Framework for Designing Constructivist Learning Environments. EtrandD-Educational Technology Research and Development. 47(1): 61–79, doi: 10.1007/BF02299477.

Johnson, D. W., and Johnson, R. T. 1996. Cooperation and the Use of Technology. In H.Jonassen (Ed.). Handbook of Research for Educational Communications and Technology New York: Simon and Schuster Macmillan. 785–811.

Kuutti, K. 1996. Activity Theory as a Potential Framework for Human-Computer Interaction Research. In B. Nardi (Ed.). Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human Computer Interaction Cambridge: MIT Press. 17–44.

Maykut, P., and Morehouse, R. 1994. Beginning Qualitative Research: A Philosophic and Practical Guide. London: Falmer Press

Mason, and Rennie, F. 2008. E-Learning and Social Networking Handbook: Resources for Higher Education. New York, USA: Routledge.

Merriam, S. 2009. Qualitative Research: A Guide to Design and Implementation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Mwanza, D. 2002. Towards an Activity-Oriented Design Method for HCI Research and Practice. The Open University, United Kingdom.

Mwanza, D., and Engeström, Y. 2003. Pedagogical Adaptness in the Design of E-Learning Environments: Experiences From Lab@Future Project. Paper presented at International Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Goverment, Healthcare, and Higher Education, Phoenix, Arizona.

Nardi, B. 1996. Studying Context: A Comparison of Activity Theory, Situated Action Models, and Distributed Cognition. In B. Nardi (Ed.), Context and Consciousness: Activity Theory and Human-Computer Interaction Hong Kong and USA: Massachussets Institute of Technology. 69–102.

Rogoff, B. 2003. The Cultural Nature of Human Development. Oxford, NY: Oxford University Press.

Russell, D. R. 2002. Looking Beyond the Interface: Activity Theory and Distributed Learning. In R. M. Lea and K. Nicoll (Eds.). Distributed Learning: Social and Cultural Approaches to Practice. London: Routledge Falmer.

Said, M. N. H. M., Hassan, J., Idris, A. R., Zahiri, M. A., Forret, M., Eames, C. 2013. Technology-Enhanced Classroom Learning Community for Promoting Tertiary ICT Education Learning in Malaysia. In K. M. Yusof, M. Arsat, M. T. Borhan, E. de Graff, A. Kolmos, F. A. Phang (Eds.). PBL Across Cultures Aalborg University Press. 326–334.

Said, M. N. H M. 2011. The Design and Implementation of an Online Collaborative Learning in Malaysian Tertiary Classroom. Proceedings of International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies. Barcelona, Spain. 5487–5492.

Sannino, A., Daniels, H., and Gutierrez, K. D. 2009. Activity Theory between Historical Engagement and Future-Making Practice. In H. Daniels and K. D. Gutierrez (Eds.). Learning and Expanding with Activity Theory New York: Cambridge University Press. 1–15.

Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.