Conole, G. Oliver, M. (2002). Embedding Theory into Learning Practice with Toolkits. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, No. 8.

• Expert and theoretical knowledge about the use of learning technology is not always available to practitioners. 1
• … practitioners can be supported in the process of engaging with theory in order to underpin practical applications in the use of learning technologies. This approach involves the design of decision-making resources, defined here as toolkits. 1
• Learning technology is an inherently multidisciplinary field,
  and stakeholders include a range of researchers from different fields (educational research, cognitive psychology, instructional design, computer science, etc) 2
• This multi-disciplinarity is a common feature of emergent research areas and, in one sense is a strength. 2
• Capitalize the richness of expertise
• Learning technology use is shaped by contextual factors
• Beethams argues, that “learning technologists have always started from the “practical concerns of the classroom and we tend to claim validity for our activities according to their impact in the classroom. 2
• Oliver concludes that an appropriation model of theory use implies that purpose will be determined at least in part by situationally specific issues such as the personal background and current needs of its user Oliver 2000. 2
• Applying theory to practice
• The development of toolkits that support decision making and which are derived from specific theoretical perspectives.  2
• A range of aids and resources to facilitate decision-making processes has developed to support the use and integration of learning technologies. As a consequence, the terms tools, toolkits, frameworks, good practice and model abound but are very rarely used with any consistency. 2
• Tools: Mediating artefacts based on Activity theory (Kuutti, 1997) 3
• Good practice: used to denote guidelines that practitioners are exhorted to follow,… Good practice is practice that closely follow the tenets of a given theoretical perspective. 3
• Models: M are representations. 3
• Frameworks: highly restrictive templates or wizards 3
• Templates and Wizards: highly structured decision-making systems 3. They can provide a pre-defined layouts or structures for the user to base their document or presentation on. A wizard is a software tool that makes decisions on behalf of the user, based on solicited information and drawing on predefined templates. … As a result, wizards and templates are relatively easy to use, but are restrictive in the range of outputs that can be achieved, and allow very little engagement with issues or response to the values and assumptions built into the system.  4
• Frameworks: In contrast to the highly restrictive templates or wizards, which provide high levels of support and step-by-step guidance but little possibility of user-adaptation, stand frameworks, which provide a theoretical context and scope for work but leave the user to devise their own strategy for its implementation. 4
• Relationship between frameworks and wizards: Frameworks and wizards, as outlined above, both share a common aim of supporting a users’ engagement with an area. Clearly, however, they are working at very different levels and making different assumptions about the type of support that the user might need. 5
• Theoretical frameworks provide a structure and vocabulary that support the exploration of concepts and issues. Wizards provide automated processes that support the production or selection of resources, and are predicated on the assumption that the user is primarily concerned with efficiency rather than critical engagement. 5
• Between these extremes lie a range of resources, including checklists, guidelines and step-by-step tutorials. Toolkits can be viewed as a mid-point on this continuum: they are decision-making systems based on expert models . 5
• A model is taken to be a simplified account of reality that can be used to explain or predict certain features. 5
• USE: Toolkits are more structured than frameworks; they use a model of a design or decision-making process, together with tools provided at the decision making points, to help the user engage with a theoretical framework and apply it in the context of their own practice: 5
• In summary, toolkits represent a mid-point between facilitated, uncritical development of resources and a deep engagement with fundamental issues and theories. They are not intended to replace expertise, although they are intended to reduce the need for prior expertise before practitioners are able to engage with fundamental issues in a meaningful way. 5
• Toolkits and expert systems differ in four important respects, Firstly, unlike most expert systems, the emphasis with a toolkit is not on providing answers or knowledge in response to a query. Instead, the focus is on modelling the user’s practice. The creation and analysis of these models then forms the basis for the creation of plans knowledge and understanding that is directly related to the users’ context and cultural practice. 6
• Rather than attempting to be authoritative or definitive, toolkits are predicated on the basis of utility. Specifically, they are judged on how useful the system of classification used to represent the underlying knowledge base is in terms of supporting decision making. This represents an important move away from legitimation in terms of meta-narratives and towards a performative definition of value. 6
• USE Toolkits are about each user’s domain rather that one idealised domain. 7
• USE Moreover toolkits are designed so that each knowledge domain described can be extended, as well as amended by the user. 7
• USE The implication of this is that toolkits cannot be expert systems as traditionally understood, although with sustained use, an individual users’ adapted instances of a toolkit might conceivably be described as an expert model of their own practice. 7
• Toolkits are concerned with personal, contextual and often fragmented representations. 7
• … it is in the context of the situated, ill-defined, poorly understood areas of tacit knowledge about professional practice that toolkits demonstrate their value and this is perhaps their key benefits. 8
• Equally significant is the problem that large amounts of research and theory on the use of such resources remain unfamiliar to practitioners. 9
• In summary, toolkits are predicated on the assumptions that they will be: 1) derived from an explicit theoretical framework, 2) easy-to-use for practitioners; 3) able to provide demonstrable benefit; 5) able to provide guidance, without being prescriptive; 5) adaptable to reflect the user’s practice and beliefs; 6) able to produce outputs that reflect the local context.