Saturday, 23 September 2017

Community of Practice

CISC 8100                              

Applied Practice in Context


Practice 1: Title Critically examine and contextualise the application of your teaching practice

Before I began my reflective journal I had to have a clear understanding of what Community of Practice (CoP) was.  This became the starting point for me to critically reflect on how (if) I was participating and contributing to a CoP.  

My initial thought was meeting regularly with a group of teachers working at the same year level was an example of a CoP.  However, on further research I discovered that a CoP is a phrase coined by Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger citied in Wenger-Trayner ‘Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly.’  
In all cases, the key elements are:
The domain: members are brought together by a learning need they share.
The community: their collective learning becomes a bond among them over time.
The practice: their interactions produce resources that affect their practice.
The team concept however has specific objectives such as, a team can disband once the project is complete, individuals are selected for ability, there is a hierarchy and results need to be delivered.

What I have found is some CoP are small and others are larger groups of people that come and go.  I have identified CoPs can vary between professional and personal.   
An example of a small CoP is working collaboratively with a Mindlab colleague.  I have created a shared working culture that supports our learning.  Following on from this, meeting with a wider Mindlab group to collaborate and share knowledge.  We choose to participate in this group (domain), share and discuss new learning (community).  Google+ has also allowed us to expand and reach a wider audience.  Completing collaborative and individual assignments allows use to (practice) what we have learnt and incorporate this into our classrooms.

Some other examples of CoPs that I am involved in are BOT, Teacher Facebook and committees.  All these activities engage directly as social interactions, collaborative and support new learning.  
The outcome of CoP supports people as lifelong learners, which positively impacts on the teaching of children.  The challenge will be to maintain momentum as we move towards the end.     

What I have learnt is that we move in and out of CoP without realising it.  As we evolve and change personally and professionally you become energised by certain tasks.  This can also swing the other way.

References:

Innovative Learning

Wenger-Trayner


5 comments:

  1. I found there was a fine line between a CoP and a Team. When you look at the 3 elements, our structured groups at school can fall into these. However, I see CoPs as being more fluid and flexible where you can opt in or out and can be a passive contributor. The aim is the same regardless, as you say, to learn what you do better, through interaction.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi. I came up with the same conclusion as you, in that a CoP is so much more that just a group with common interests, the definition that Wenger (2002) shares about the three components of domain, community and practice really give the concept of a CoP some structure. As professionals it is good for us as we can collaborate to build collective perceptions/knowledge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. This comment has been removed by the author.

      Delete
  3. Hi Sarah. I agree with your blog. I too see the Mindlab community as a good example of a 'Community of Practice' (COP) as it fits all three criteria, as identified by Wenger. Even within our initial Mindlab community, further Community of Practices have evolved with smaller groups forming from the original... but they still meet the same criteria! It sounds like you're involved in a variety of COP, such as your Board of Trustees role! Considering the role we play in different COP is useful too.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ki ora Sarah, some interesting thoughts expressed, our Mind lab group numbers 36, and it certainly fits the criteria, plus there has been a combined sharing of data, collaboration within the group for a common cause. The definition also involves in a sense a group of teachers who coach and manage our 1st 15 in the UC Cup in Canterbury, all have passion for the sport and coaching with a common purpose.

    ReplyDelete