A community of practice approach to the development of non‐traditional learners through networked learning

Abstract

This paper analyses a sample of online discussions to evaluate the development of adult learners as reflective practitioners within a networked learning community. The context for our study is a blended learning course offering post-experience professional training to nontraditional university students. These students are parents and carers of people with autistic spectrum disorder (ASD). We use Lave and Wenger's 'communities of practice' as a theoretical framework for establishing how students develop a learning community based upon mutual engagement, joint enterprise and shared repertoires. Those three aspects are analysed according to two measures. The first focuses on learner appropriation of the professional discourse, values and goals of the ASD carer through the network. The second relates to changes in the quality of collaborative activity over time. Our analysis demonstrates that students belong to an overarching community of practice, with different subsets who work at sharing and co-constructing common understandings. This shared discourse and common notions of what constitutes good practice help create a safe interaction space for the students. Once group identity is consolidated, more challenging questions emerge and the group are able to define further common values, understandings and goals through processes of resolution.

A Critical Review of the Use of Wenger's Community of Practice (CoP) Theoretical Framework in Online and Blended Learning Research, 2000-2014

“…Theory verification was also evident in the final group of 17 studies that we identified for our guiding question 3. In this group, we found six studies showing this trend: Evans, Yeung, Markoulakis, and Guilcher (2014), Gray (2004), Guldberg and Pilkington (2006), Moule (2006), Rogers (2000), and Brosnan and Burgess (2003). The aims of the first five studies coincided: Each sought to understand the extent or the nature of CoP formulation in the online learning environment.…”

“…Among these, two studies (Correia & Davis, 2008;Guldberg & Pilkington, 2006) stood out because, before the actual analysis, they identified a need for acknowledging how different dynamics lead to different types of communities. To illustrate this point, both studies drew on Henri and Pudelko's (2008) classification of four levels of communities: communities of interest; goal oriented communities; a learner's community; and communities of practice.…”

“…More than half of the 17 studies included in our final analysis sought to determine whether the study participants actually attained a CoP (Clarke, 2009;Correia & Davis, 2008;Ellaway, Dewhurst & McLeod 2004;Goggins et al, 2001;Gray, 2004;Guldberg & Mackness, 2009;Guldberg & Pilkington, 2006;Rogers, 2000). Among these, two studies (Correia & Davis, 2008;Guldberg & Pilkington, 2006) stood out because, before the actual analysis, they identified a need for acknowledging how different dynamics lead to different types of communities.…”

“…Similar variation was present when looking across the studies focusing on professional development. These studies ranged from 3 weeks (Rogers, 2000), 7 weeks (Gray, 2004;Guldberg & Mackness, 2009), and 10 to 12-weeks (Brosnan & Burgess, 2003;Evans et al, 2014), to one year (Guldberg & Pilkington, 2006). …”

Matching intention with agency: Lessons from practice

“…In particular, Guldberg and Pilkington (2006) attempted to establish how participants developed a "learning community based upon mutual engagement, joint enterprise and shared repertoires" and the resulting "changes in the quality of collaborative activity over time … with different subsets [of students] sharing and coconstructing common understandings" (p. 159).…”