Activity theory is an evolving framework and open to further development as it is applied in empirical studies (Engestrom, 2008). This paper offers an example of this with a study of the collaborative provision of pre-16 vocational education within one UK local authority. Activity theory has been used to great effect in the study of complex systems. It is itself complex with multiple uses methodologically including intervention and is also a powerful analytical tool. But it is demanding of researchers’ and participants’ time and therefore expensive. Potentially threatening to participants, it demands that they expose the way they and colleagues work perhaps with the knowledge that their collective working has been criticised and is required to change. For these and other reasons, the construction and workings of activity theory have been the subject of debate (eg see González, 2006 and Diaper, 2008). In England and Wales schools, colleges and newly built vocational centres are being expected to collaborate to provide new courses for 14-19 year olds. This brings to the fore and exacerbates contradictions that have been present for many years, largely as the result of the competitive environment within which the schools in particular have been expected to operate. To provide the new courses, the schools are expected to devise a collective offer, advise and even encourage students to study outside their home school if another school, college or vocational centre has a more suitable course. Schools therefore have to organise their subject offer, staffing, timetabling and transportation to enable students to have a wide range of choice and be able to move from one institution to another. In order to support this, across the county fora have been established with a co-ordinator (paid by the headteachers from their school budgets) task-oriented supporting committees and led with varying degrees of direct control by the schools’ headteachers in the form of a steering group. In this paper, the application of activity theory to this educational setting and analysis of the data will be discussed.

In two separate research sites to provide some means of comparison of two different models of provision, meeting observations and in-depth interviews of key participants using semi-structured interview schedules were carried out. The resulting data was analysed using activity theory, in particular to consider the extent to which expansive learning was taking place within the collaborations and what changes needed to be made to facilitate this further.

Activity theory could not be applied as a method of data gathering in this study because considerable tension existed within the collaborations created by external pressures and barriers historical in nature resulting in a climate of fear. This suggests the need for closer attention by government and local authorities to the barriers faced by such collaborations. The study identified a range of barriers and how within current constraints their effects might be mitigated. Other findings included the need for participants to put in place mechanisms to allow greater consultation within their own institutions so that a range of senior and middle managers can attend meetings make decisions on behalf of their home institution. Activity theory provided a helpful method of data analysis when considering the extent there was expansive learning taking place in the collective provision of 14-19 education.