Communities of practice as stimulating forces for collective learning

Abstract

Purpose -The purpose of this research is to get a clear view on how can we judge groups in relation to the characteristics of a community of practice (CoP), and the presence of collective learning in these groups. Design/methodology/approach -A review of literature on collective learning and CoPs led to the development of a conceptual model, which was tested through case study research against empirical data from three groups in organizations. Findings -The groups differed concerning group characteristics, but also concerning the collective learning processes and learning outcomes present. The group that can be characterized as a CoP learns a lot, but the (learning) processes in the group are not always in favour of the organizational learning process.Research limitations/implications -The conceptual framework was helpful to evaluate the characteristics of CoPs in relation to collective learning. These findings suggest that it will be interesting to expand the model, for example with consideration to the way CoPs experience the need to change. Practical implications -The developed framework might help managers to judge if groups in an organization have characteristics of a CoP, if they are in balance and what might be needed to develop towards an ideal CoP with a great learning potential. Originality/value -A first attempt is made to build a framework for judging CoPs for several aspects of their functioning. The research also shows that CoPs are not always stimulating forces for organizational learning.

Collective learning in primary schools and teacher education institutes

“…Professional learning communities are fundamentally about learning for students, as well as learning for teachers, learning for leaders and learning for schools (Katz & Earl, 2010). Not only teachers can be involved in this collective learning but also students (see Lundy, 2007;Cook-Sather, 2007) and the school's management (see Katz & Earl, 2010;Mittendorf et al, 2006). When not only professionals like teachers are involved, but also others, it is more 8 appropriate to use the term 'communities of learners' in stead of professional learning communities.…”

The casualisation of teaching and the subject at risk

“…Research into professional formation, much of which currently draws on social learning, social constructivist and socio-cultural theory to understand professional learning largely as engagement or co-participation in non-formal workplace affordances, has emphasised the situated and social nature of learning as occurring through collegial, collaborative, supportive communities of practice (Boud, 1999;Eib & Miller, 2006;Knight, Tait, & Yorke, 2006;Mittendorff, Geijsel, Hoeve, de Laat, & Nieuwenhuis, 2006;Visovic, 2006). Knight et al (2007) argue for the need to view 'professional formation' as an holistic and 'ecological' process that can and should be supported within the learning communities where casual teaching staff are engaged.…”

Examining work-education intersections: the production of learning reals in and through practice

“…Gee, Hull, & Lankshear, 1996;Hughes, Jewson, & Unwin, 2007), it has become a popular model for theorising learning at work (e.g. Jawitz, 2007;Köpsén, 2014;Mittendorff, Geijsel, Hoeve, de Laat, & Nieuwenhuis, 2006).…”