Recomendados
Recomendados
Más contenido relacionado
La actualidad más candente
La actualidad más candente (20)
Destacado
Destacado (20)
Similar a Communities of Practice
Similar a Communities of Practice (20)
Más de Sungwoo Kim
Más de Sungwoo Kim (20)
Communities of Practice
- 1. Communities of Practice Wenger, Etienne. (1999). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity 2008/03/19 CASSIE DOROTHY LEYMARIE SUNGWOO KIM Language Socialization Professor Joan Kelly Hall Class Presentation
- 2. Communities of Practice Introduction: Social Theory of Learning Four Premises in CoP Framework 1. We are social beings. 2. Knowledge is a matter of competence with respect to valued enterprise. 3. Knowledge is a matter of participating in the pursuit of such enterprises. 4. Meaning is ultimately what learning is to produce.
- 3. Communities of Practice Components of Social Theory of Learning
- 4. Communities of Practice PART I: PRACTICE 1. Meaning in terms of Participation and Reification 2. Community 3. Learning 4. Boundary 5. Locality CommunitesofPractice
- 5. Communities of Practice Introduction T/F Quiz 1 “Communities of practice approach favors agency over structure in its conceptual framework.”
- 6. Communities of Practice CoP vs Traditional Approach Traditional Approach in Social Theory 1. Theories of social structure: institutions, norms, and rules - extreme: structural determinism 2. Theories of situated experience: dynamics of everyday existence, improvisation, coordination, and interactional choreography - extreme: no structure at all CoP perspective on Learning is more about 1. Theories of social practice: everyday activity with emphasis on the social systems of shared resources 2. Theories of identity: social formation of the person
- 7. Communities of Practice Chapter 1: Meaning T/F Quiz “Participation is similar to collaboration.”
- 8. Communities of Practice Meaning 1. Meaning is located in a process of the negotiation of meaning. 2. The negotiation of meaning involves the interaction of two constituent processes: participation and reification. 3. Participation and reification form a duality (not dichotomy).
- 9. Communities of Practice Practice 1. Practice is a process by which we can experience the world and our engagement with it as meaningful. e.g. a piece of painting as a thin veneer vs. as a work of art 2. Practice is about meaning as an experience of everyday life. e.g. eating some snack after watching a video about starvation / experiencing the multilingual contexts after taking the language socialization class
- 10. Communities of Practice Participation & Reification 1. Dialectical Unity – Yin/Yang 2. Each one has its own properties. 3. Each one has its own mode of existence. 4. But each one is interdependent on each other.
- 11. Communities of Practice Participation & Reification T/F Quiz “All participation involves reification: All reification involves participation.”
- 12. Communities of Practice Participation 1. Participation presupposes the possibility of mutual recognition. e.g. Computers do not participate in the communities of practice. A fish does not participate in a family. 2. Participation is a source of identity. e.g. Trajectories and modes of participation transform your identities in the community of practice. 3. Participation is not tantamount to collaboration. e.g. confliction / competition | 4. Participation in social communities shape our experience and it also shape those communities. e.g. teaching internship in a middle school 5. Participation is broader than mere engagement in a practice. e.g. A businessperson does not cease to be one after her or his working hours.
- 13. Communities of Practice Reification Main Entry: re•ify Etymology: Latin res “thing” Date: 1854 Meaning: to regard (something abstract) as a material or concrete thing / to treat (an abstraction) as substantially existing, or as a concrete material object
- 14. Communities of Practice Reification 1. We project our meanings into the world and then we perceive them as existing in the world, as having a reality of their own. This process can be called ‘reification.’ e.g. ‘democracy’ or ‘the economy’ 2. Any community of practice produces abstractions, tools, symbols, stories, terms, and concepts that reify something of that practice in a congealed form. 3. Reification can refer both to a process and its product. 4. The process of reification does not necessarily originate in design. 5. Reification can take a great variety of forms. e.g. pyramids, formula, truck
- 15. Communities of Practice Complementarity of P & R 1. Participation makes up for reification. e.g. Judges interpret our laws. 2. Reification makes up for the inherent limitations of participation. e.g. notes, monuments, photos, blogs, etc 3. The balance between participation and reification is important in communities of practice. If participation prevails there may not be enough material to anchor the specificities of coordination and to uncover diverging assumptions. If reification prevails there may not be enough overlap in participation to recover a coordinated, relevant, or generative meaning.
- 16. Communities of Practice The duality of Participation and Reification
- 17. Communities of Practice Chapter 2 Community T/F Quiz “A residential neighborhood is a community of practice.”
- 18. Communities of Practice Source of coherence of a community 1. Mutual engagement: mutual relationship such as collaboration, challenges and competitions e.g. having lunch together with colleges while talking about current issues or complaining about company policies 2. A joint enterprise: the negotiation of a joint enterprise, mutual accountability e.g. establishing corporate vision in an interactive fashion http://www.google.com/corporate/index.html - ”Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.” 3. A shared repertoire: common knowledge and artifacts e.g. Knowledge Management System http://www.arescorporation.com/products.aspx?style=2&%20pict_id=189&menu_id
- 19. Communities of Practice Chapter 3: Learning T/F Quiz: “Every community of practice involves learning.”
- 20. Communities of Practice CoP as a view of Learning 1. Learning is another perspective to look at Communities of Practice 2. “Communities of practice can be thought of as shared histories of learning.”
- 21. Communities of Practice CoP as Histories of Learning 1. Practice combines continuity and discontinuity. 2. Learning in practice involves: Evolving forms of mutual engagement Understanding and tuning their enterprise Developing their repertoire, styles, and discourses 3. Practice is not an object but rather an emergent structure.
- 22. Communities of Practice Chapter 4: Boundary
- 23. Communities of Practice Two types of connections between CoPs 1. Boundary object – artifacts, documents, terms, concepts, and other forms of reification and around which communities of practice can organized their interconnections (e.g. IRB form for research protection ) 2. Brokering – connections provided by people who can introduce elements of one practice into another (e.g. Double membership of task force members)
- 24. Communities of Practice Chapter 5: Locality T/F Quiz: “PSU is a community of practice.”
- 25. Communities of Practice Constellation of Practices The term constellation refers to a grouping of stellar objects that are seen as a configuration even though they may not by particularly close to one another, of the same kind, or of the same size. When a social configuration is viewed as a constellation rather than a community of practice, the continuity of the constellation must be understood in terms of interactions among practices.
- 26. Communities of Practice The Local in the Global Participating in the global vs. engaging with the global The cosmopolitan character of practice vs. locality e.g. UN headquarters staff
- 27. Communities of Practice PART II: IDENTITY 1. Identity in practice (parallels between practice and identity) 2. Identities of participation & non-participation 3. Modes of belonging 4. Identification and negotiability CommunitesofPractice
- 28. Communities of Practice Identity in practice: Parallels between practice and identity practice as… negotiation of meaning (in terms of participation and reification) community shared history of learning boundary and landscape constellations identity as… negotiated experience of self (in terms of participation and reification) membership learning trajectory nexus of multi-membership belonging defined globally but experienced locally
- 29. Communities of Practice “In a landscape defined by boundaries and peripheries, a coherent identity is of necessity a mixture of being in and being out” Participation and non-participation
- 30. Communities of Practice Identities of non-participation - not just insider and outsider but an interaction SOURCES: 1) how we locate ourselves in a social landscape 2) what we care about and what we neglect 3) what we attempt to know/choose to ignore 4) with whom we seek connections/whom we avoid 5)how we engage and direct our energies 6) how we attempt to steer our trajectories Participation and non-participation
- 31. Communities of Practice Identities of non-participation - not just insider and outsider but an interaction In the case of peripherality, some degree of non- participation is necessary to enable a kind of participation that is less than full. It is the participation aspect that dominates and defines non-participation as an enabling factor of participation In the case of marginality, a form of non-participation prevents full participation. It is the non-participation aspect that dominates and comes to define a restricted form of participation. Participation and non-participation (Cont’d)
- 32. Communities of Practice Participation and non-participation (Cont’d) Identities of non-participation- not just insider and outsider but an interaction These are not just personal choices but involve processes of community formation where the configuration of social relations is work of the self. This configuration takes place at different levels: •Trajectories with respect to specific communities of practice •Boundary relations and the demands of multimembership •Our position and the position of our communities within broader constellations of practices and broader institutions
- 33. Communities of Practice Institutional non-participation It is often the case that, rather than being direct boundary relations between communities and people or among communities, relations of non participation are mediated by institutional arrangements (ex. Non-participation as compromise, strategy, cover) Participation and non-participation (Cont’d)
- 34. Communities of Practice Modes of belonging- 3 distinct modes 1. Engagement – active involvement in mutual processes of negotiation of meaning -threefold process including conjunction of the ongoing negotiation of meaning, the formation of trajectories, and the unfolding of histories of practice 2. Imagination – creating images of the world and seeing connections through time and space by extrapolating from our own experience - Not confined to mutual engagement (ex. Reading narrative and placing oneself in others’ shoes) 3. Alignment – coordinating our energy and activities in order to fit within broad structures and contribute to broader enterprises -not confined to mutual engagement (ex. We Are Penn State)
- 35. Communities of Practice Identification and negotiability Our identities have tension between our investment in various forms of belonging and our ability to negotiate the meanings that matter in those context. Identity formation is thus a dual process. Identification is one half, providing experiences and material for building identities through investment of the self in relations of association and differentiation Negotiability, the other half, is just as fundamental because it determines the degree to which we have control over the meaning in which we are invested. (the ability, facility, and legitimacy to contribute to, take responsibility for and shape the meanings that matter within a social configuration) negotiability Economies of meaning Ownership of meaning
- 36. Communities of Practice Identification and negotiability Dual nature of identity must be considered Dual nature of power Dual nature of belonging
- 37. Communities of Practiceidentity identification negotiability communities structure economies of meaning Figure 9.1. Social ecology of identity identities of participation Identities of non- participation mode of belonging identities of participation identities of non participation close circle of friends doing everything together experience of boundaries through a faux-pas engagement having one’s ideas adopted Marginality through having one’s ideas ignored affinity felt by the readers of a newspaper prejudice through stereotypes imagination vicarious experience through stories assumption that someone else understands what is going on allegiance to a social movement submission to violence alignment persuasion through directed experience literal compliance as in tax returns Forms of membership Ownership of meaning
- 38. Communities of Practiceidentity identification negotiability communities structure economies of meaning Figure 9.1. Social ecology of identity identities of participation Identities of non- participation mode of belonging identities of participation identities of non participation experience of boundaries through a faux-pas engagement having one’s ideas adopted affinity felt by the readers of a newspaper imagination vicarious experience through stories assumption that someone else understands what is going on allegiance to a social movement alignment persuasion through directed experience literal compliance as in tax returns Forms of membership Ownership of meaning
- 39. Communities of Practice How would you design the communities of practice? How to participate What to reify To make better Communities of Practice How would you contribute to yourcommunities of practice? How to engage collectively CommunitesofPractice
Notas del editor
- Hello, everyone. Today Cassie and I will talk about Communities of Practice, a piece by Etienne Wenger. As you can see from the title, it deals with Communities of Practice from the perspectives of learning, meaning, and identity. The book is divided into three large sections: First section deals with practice from the standpoint of learning and meaning. Second one deals with the issue of identity in Communities of Practice. The last section covers how we can apply the framework to designing education and organization. I will present the first part, Cassie will present the second. Third part will be skipped because it kind of reiterates all the content in part one and two.
- In developing Communities of Practice framework in the book, Wenger offers four premises. First, We are social beings. Second, Knowledge is a matter of competence with respect to valued enterprise. Third, Knowledge is a matter of participating in the pursuit of such enterprises. Fourth, Meaning is ultimately what learning is to produce. So it can be said CoP framework is about how social beings participate in valued enterprises in a meaningful way.
- Wenger uses this figure to overview his framework. We can guess how Wenger wants to conceptualize learning. According to him, Meaning is a way of talking about our changing ability to experience our life. Practice is a way of talking about the shared historical and social resources, frameworks, and perspectives. Community is a way of talking about the social configurations in which our enterprises are defined as worth pursuing and our participation is recognizable as competence. Lastly, identity is a way of talking about how learning changes who we are. Let’s look at these one by one.
- The first part is divided into five chapters. Now you need to remember this five items so that you can talk about this book to any other person. “Practice can be viewed from five points: meaning, community, learning, boundary, and locality.”
- So here is the first quiz. “Communities of practice approach favors agency over structure in its conceptual framework.” Who thinks that this is true? Raise your hands! Who thinks that this is false? Raise your hands!
- Wenger situates his CoP framework in contrast to traditional approach in social theory. Traditionally, Theories of social structure usually dealt with institutions, norms, and rules. If this tendency goes extreme, they can fall into the fallacy of structural determinism. On the other end of the theoretical continuum lies theories of situated experience. This dealt with dynamics of everyday existence, improvisation, coordination, and interactional choreography. However, this might also fall into the blind endorsement of agency and falsely argue that there is no structure at all. In contrast, CoP perspective on learning is more about Theories of social practice. It addresses everyday activities with emphasis on the social systems of shared resources. It is also closely related to theories of identity, which cover social formation of the person.
- So here is another quiz. “Participation is similar to collaboration.” Anybody thinks True? False? OK. We’ll see the answer soon!
- So where does meaning come from? Wenger says three points. Meaning is located in a process of the negotiation of meaning. Here we should pay attention to the argument that meaning is not given in a well-packaged learning components. Rather, it emerges in one’s negotiation of meaning. The negotiation of meaning involves the interaction of two constituent processes: participation and reification. Participation and reification form a duality (not dichotomy).
- Then what is Practice? Practice is a process by which we can experience the world and our engagement with it as meaningful. For example, we interpret a piece of painting as a thin veneer or a work of art. Practice is about meaning as an experience of everyday life. For example, eating some snack after watching a video about starvation is a wholly different experience from eating some snack last night. Experiences of the multilingual contexts after taking the language socialization class is not the same as ones you used to have.
- Now we are entering the most important notions of this book: Participation and Reification. This two concepts are two sides of one coin. You need to take a dialectical view of these concepts. You must be familiar with the notion of Yin and Yang. They form a dialectic unity. In other words, Each one has its own properties. Each one has its own mode of existence. But each one is interdependent on each other.
- So here is another quiz. OK. Let’s see who are right.
- Participation presupposes the possibility of mutual recognition. e.g. Computers do not participate in the communities of practice. A fish does not participate in a family. Participation is a source of identity. e.g. Trajectories and modes of participation transform your identities in the community of practice. Participation is not tantamount to collaboration. e.g. It can involve confliction or competition as well as collaboration. | Participation in social communities shape our experience and it also shape those communities. e.g. Let’s think about teaching internship in a middle school. You as a intern goes through changes of identities. But your internship experience also transforms the classroom atmosphere as well as practiees of teachers in the school Participation is broader than mere engagement in a practice. e.g. A businessperson does not cease to be one after her or his working hours.
- Main Entry: re•ify Etymology: Latin res “thing” - I just think reification sounds better than thingification. Date: 1854 Meaning: to regard (something abstract) as a material or concrete thing / to treat (an abstraction) as substantially existing, or as a concrete material object
- We project our meanings into the world and then we perceive them as existing in the world, as having a reality of their own. This process can be called ‘reification.’ e.g. ‘democracy’ or ‘the economy’ Any community of practice produces abstractions, tools, symbols, stories, terms, and concepts that reify something of that practice in a congealed form. Reification can refer both to a process and its product. The process of reification does not necessarily originate in design. Reification can take a great variety of forms. e.g. pyramids, formula, truck
- Having reviewed the concepts of participation and reification, we need to how to strike balance between them. If participation prevails there may not be enough material to anchor the specificities of coordination and to uncover diverging assumptions. If this goes extreme, there might be just energetic people with a lot of talks and actions but no products for the community. If reification prevails there may not be enough overlap in participation to recover a coordinated, relevant, or generative meaning.
- This diagram sums up the dialectical relationship between participation and reification.
- Here is another quiz “A residential neighborhood is a community of practice.” !
- information vs. friendliness, homogeneity vs. diversity, partiality as resource as well as limitation, Mutual engagement: mutual relationship such as collaboration, challenges and competitions e.g. having lunch together with colleges while talking about current issues or complaining about company policies A joint enterprise: the negotiation of a joint enterprise, mutual accountability e.g. establishing corporate vision in an interactive fashion http://www.google.com/corporate/index.html - ”Google's mission is to organize the world's information and make it universally accessible and useful.”This is a really short mission statement of a company. However, it is a product of negotiations of a joint enterprise. Accordingly, the mission presupposes different weights of accountability among the company’s stakeholders. A shared repertoire: common knowledge and artifacts e.g. Knowledge Management System http://www.arescorporation.com/products.aspx?style=2&%20pict_id=189&menu_id=103&id=104 This kind of knowledge management system is a clear example of shared repertoire.
- Here goes another quiz! “Every community of practice involves learning.”
- Yes. Every Community of Practice involves learning. In fact, Wenger says Learning is another perspective to look at Communities of Practice. In other words, “Communities of practice can be thought of as shared histories of learning.”
- Then what involves histories of learning? Practice combines continuity and discontinuity. Lave and Wenger discusses this topic in some detail in their 1991 book. Learning in practice involves: Evolving forms of mutual engagement Understanding and tuning their enterprise Developing their repertoire, styles, and discourses But we should keep in mind that practice is not an object but rather an emergent structure. Learning itself cannot be designed. Only learning environment can be designed. I think this idea is closely related to our discussion of designing ecologies.
- There are two kinds of connection among communities of practice. One is through boundary object and the other is through brokering. Boundary object includes artifacts, documents, terms, concepts, and other forms of reification and around which communities of practice can organized their interconnections. Let’s take an IRB form for research protection as an example. It is a boundary object among different communities of practice such as government agency, legal entities, research communities, and other organizations, which are objects of study. Brokering means connections provided by people who can introduce elements of one practice into another. Think about the double membership of task force members in a company. A person belongs both to one’s regular team and a task force, coordinating two teams with his knowledge and experiences.
- The last T/F quiz is “PSU is a community of practice.”
- Actually, Wenger refuses to think of a large, complex organization as one community of practice. Instead, he proposes the notion “constellation.” The term constellation refers to a grouping of stellar objects that are seen as a configuration even though they may not by particularly close to one another, of the same kind, or of the same size. When a social configuration is viewed as a constellation rather than a community of practice, the continuity of the constellation must be understood in terms of interactions among practices.