My own community of practice
Wenger (2010) defines a community of practice as “groups of people who share a concern of a passion about a topic and who deepen their knowledge and expertise in this area by interaction on an ongoing basis” (p.4). These communities of practice are a construct of social learning systems and are developed from research into how apprentices learn within the context of the workplace. Eckert (2006) agrees that these communities are “a collection of people who engage on an ongoing basis in some common endeavour”. Knox (2009) however, more simply describes these as a group of people who share a passion for something they know how to do, and who interact regularly so they can create, expand and exchange knowledge; and develop individual capabilities.
My community of practice (CoP) lies within the science faculty of the secondary school in which I work. It comprises 11 teachers who each hold a passion for “all things science” as well as for teaching how to think and act as scientists. This is a community that is forged, rather than organic. However, it is important to emphasise that the context - a love of science & education - brings us together and form our working relationships.
We meet as a group regularly once per week, as well as have a few scheduled longer meetings per school term. We have sub-groups that also meet to discuss specific areas within science education (i.e. different scientific disciplines).
We build a shared understanding and development of practical science work as well as the continual development of planning, working, assessment and reporting systems around science education (most specifically at secondary school level, but also trying to encompass a broader view encompassing primary & tertiary education.
My role within this community is that of an active member and regular contributor. However, depending on the specific focus or situation, I can also be a leader or facilitator. For example, when leading a discussion around a new tool or technique of assessment.
In order to thrive, communities of practice need to incorporate three areas:
- Community: relationships and a sense of belonging. Relationships within our science faculty community are based on a general mutual respect and enthusiasm for science education
- Domain: All participants in this CoP are actively and consistently trying to progress our students’ scientific abilities, critical thinking and resilience within our
- Practice: Science education (chemistry, biology, physics, geology & astronomy)
(Knox 2009)
In my opinion, one of the most important factors to ensure that a CoP is able to progress is relational trust. According to Levin, Cross, Abrams, & Lesser (2005) what links strong ties and knowledge sharing is trust - in this instance, competence-based trust. Although I feel as though I belong and am valued within this community, & have been contributing to it for several years, there are members that don’t necessarily feel this way. This is a potential barrier to the effectiveness of our CoP; not only to the development of our shared repertoire, but the progression of our students. Addressing this is essential; communication and relationships are one of the essential features of a well-functioning CoP.
References
Eckert, P. (2006). Communities of Practice. Communities, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/B0-08-044854-2/01276-1
Knox, B.(2009, December 4). Cultivating Communities of Practice: Making Them Grow.[video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhMPRZnRFkk
Levin, D. Z., Cross, R., Abrams, L. C., & Lesser, E. L. (2005). Trust and Knowledge Sharing: A Critical Combination. Creating Value with Knowledge: Insights from the IBM Institute for Business Value. https://doi.org/10.1093/0195165128.003.0003
Wenger, E. (2010). Communities of practice and social learning systems: The career of a concept. In Social Learning Systems and Communities of Practice (pp. 179–198). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-84996-133-2_11
I like that you have spoken about the structure of the group and the CoP within the staff but I think it is especially important that you have the student learning as your overarching focus. It sounds like a subject area that students would want to be engaged in and would gain science capabilities as a result. Are there strategies to help staff feel included?
ReplyDeleteThanks Liz, and I agree - there are definitely strategies that are used to gain and maintain relational trust (though I deliberately didn't include them here as I thought that was more relevant to the climate & culture of the faculty!). It is interesting to observe the different strategies that different people use in this respect - and how this changes the climate!
DeleteI particularly like your comment about relational trust Ali. In any relationship, trust is paramount. I find that in professional relationships, trust, reliability and consistency have a crucial role. In our personal relationships we are more inclined to let our emotional compass guide us in our decision making aren't we, but professionally, we are less forgiving. We want people in our CoPs to be fair, to contribute equally, to compromise and be flexible, and to keep the kids at the heart of our work.
ReplyDeleteIt's a hard road to getting everybody working on the same page isn't it Alison? I think as teachers and learners ourselves we all want to foster relationships that (like Jen says) are fair and focused primarily on enhancing kids learning. Everybody in the CoP has a sense of responsibility for making this happen in my opinion as isn't that what we're here for?
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed your 'ramble' Ali, and particularly like your succinct structure and precise content. As a science enthusiast as well, I want to enlarge my CoP to include the college. We have begun to collaborate on the 'Data loggers' project, where I hope to engender a love of science and increase the use of evidence capability with my students. This is an example of direct impact for student engagement within a CoP. I believe our relational trust, formed through introduction at Mind Lab sessions will be a key contributor to the success of this joint initiative. I very much look forward to working with you on the project.
ReplyDeleteHi Alison, I really enjoyed your discussion on your Science faculty as your Community of Practice (CoP); it's a good example. While it's not an "organic" CoP, it still meets the three criteria as identified by Wenger. Your reference to relationships is important; crucial to the success of a CoP! I can make parallels with my faculty - the Social Sciences - with it's many disciplines (History, Geography, Economics etc) within and the personalities and passions that accompany this! Carmen
ReplyDelete