96
and shaped by each person’s social and cultural experience. In addition, Vygotsky [ 4 ]
saw human activity as distinct from non-human entities; it is mediated by tools, the most
signifi cant of which is language. Vygotsky’s [ 4 ] work was continued by others, among
them Leont’ey [ 5 ], who developed a conceptual framework for a complete theory of
human activity. According to Leont’ey [ 5 ], activity is a system that has structure, its own
internal transitions and transformations, and its own development.
Essentially, Vygotsky [ 4 ] defi ned human activity as a relationship between
subject and object, i.e. a person working at something. In this dynamic, purposeful
relationship the “always active” subject learns and grows, while the object is
interpreted and reinterpreted by the subject in the ongoing conduct of the activity.
Approach of activity theory is promising for environmental leadership because it
arrives at logical conclusions through a complex interpersonal process of transfer
knowledge from individual to group. Engeström [ 6 ] gave a more concrete expression
to this structure in the triangular representation, which is commonly used to depict
an activity. The core of an activity is the relationship between subject (human) and
object (purpose) mediated by tools and community. This is a two-way concept of
mediation where the capability and availability of tools mediates what is able to be
done; the tools, in turn, evolve to hold the historical knowledge of how the community behaves and is organized. The third-generation of activity theory, proposed by
Engeström [ 7 ] in 2001, advanced the idea of internal contradictions as the driving
force for change, diversity and dialogue from divergent perspectives within an
activity system, and of networks of interactive activity systems.
Activity theory today is based on the idea that people change or learn when they
engage in productive activity, but in productive activity they also change their
system. For fostering future leaders, activity theory suggests that leadership occurs
through the interaction of the leader with other components of an activity system,
such as the tools the leaders have available and the people with whom they interact
in a division of labor. Thus, a leader is directed toward a particular goal or outcome.
Krasny and Roth [ 8 ] explained that any one activity system may overlap with
another system, for example, a school and a watershed organization both focus on
taking measurements with the goals of producing a report for a class and impacting
environmental policy, respectively.
6.3 GPRD Implementation
The search for a sustainable future has made fostering environmental leaders essential, especially for mediating between knowledge societies and the community.
Studies have shown three behaviors that appear relevant for environmental leadership: articulating an appealing vision with environmental elements, changing perceptions about environmental issues, and taking symbolic action to demonstrate a
personal commitment to environmental issues [ 9 ]. During the GPRD fi eld exercise,
APIEL also emphasizes six attributes for environmental leadership education:
information , or the ability to fi nd, understand, and transmit needed information;
K.J. An
and shaped by each person’s social and cultural experience. In addition, Vygotsky [ 4 ]
saw human activity as distinct from non-human entities; it is mediated by tools, the most
signifi cant of which is language. Vygotsky’s [ 4 ] work was continued by others, among
them Leont’ey [ 5 ], who developed a conceptual framework for a complete theory of
human activity. According to Leont’ey [ 5 ], activity is a system that has structure, its own
internal transitions and transformations, and its own development.
Essentially, Vygotsky [ 4 ] defi ned human activity as a relationship between
subject and object, i.e. a person working at something. In this dynamic, purposeful
relationship the “always active” subject learns and grows, while the object is
interpreted and reinterpreted by the subject in the ongoing conduct of the activity.
Approach of activity theory is promising for environmental leadership because it
arrives at logical conclusions through a complex interpersonal process of transfer
knowledge from individual to group. Engeström [ 6 ] gave a more concrete expression
to this structure in the triangular representation, which is commonly used to depict
an activity. The core of an activity is the relationship between subject (human) and
object (purpose) mediated by tools and community. This is a two-way concept of
mediation where the capability and availability of tools mediates what is able to be
done; the tools, in turn, evolve to hold the historical knowledge of how the community behaves and is organized. The third-generation of activity theory, proposed by
Engeström [ 7 ] in 2001, advanced the idea of internal contradictions as the driving
force for change, diversity and dialogue from divergent perspectives within an
activity system, and of networks of interactive activity systems.
Activity theory today is based on the idea that people change or learn when they
engage in productive activity, but in productive activity they also change their
system. For fostering future leaders, activity theory suggests that leadership occurs
through the interaction of the leader with other components of an activity system,
such as the tools the leaders have available and the people with whom they interact
in a division of labor. Thus, a leader is directed toward a particular goal or outcome.
Krasny and Roth [ 8 ] explained that any one activity system may overlap with
another system, for example, a school and a watershed organization both focus on
taking measurements with the goals of producing a report for a class and impacting
environmental policy, respectively.
6.3 GPRD Implementation
The search for a sustainable future has made fostering environmental leaders essential, especially for mediating between knowledge societies and the community.
Studies have shown three behaviors that appear relevant for environmental leadership: articulating an appealing vision with environmental elements, changing perceptions about environmental issues, and taking symbolic action to demonstrate a
personal commitment to environmental issues [ 9 ]. During the GPRD fi eld exercise,
APIEL also emphasizes six attributes for environmental leadership education:
information , or the ability to fi nd, understand, and transmit needed information;
K.J. An