Group items tagged

This chapter by Hoadley breaks down a community of practice (CoP) and explains the theory behind it as well as well as its history. An interesting piece of the chapter compares a CoP to other groups and how each works a bit differently. It was also interesting to read about how technology is used in successful CoPs.

I learned the feature-based as well as the process based definition of communities of practice. I also learned how we can support a community of practice. It was valuable to learn how technology ties into communities of practices in the form or presentation or communication abilities, integration in content and context, etc. The article mentioned C4P framework, which encouraged me to take a deeper look at the C4P framework.

This is an exhaustive article that covers the definition and history of COPs, thoughts on how to sustain COPs, and ideas on how technology can support and enhance COPs in the 21st century. It is practical, useful, and interesting. While I found it to be perhaps a little too detailed, it was nonetheless a good article.

The concept of communities of practice has been used as both a theory to explain how learning occurs, and a "metaphor for how instruction should take place." From an anthropological view, knowledge is not completely contained within individuals, but is more often found in groups/communities. Knowledge can be "sticky" or "leaky". "Sticky" knowledge is difficult to disseminate, perhaps because it is highly technical, or because the target audience does not absorb it. "Leaky" knowledge is knowledge (like trade secrets) the disseminates despite efforts to keep it secret. Knowledge involves practice in context. One way we learn with situational learning is by peripheral, or tangential, participation. Learners should be allowed to "lurk" before participating, much as beginner social media users do. A knowledge building community and a community are practice are not the same thing. A knowledge-building community seeks to learn and build knowledge, while a community of practice wants to improve some type of work function. The learning may be the same, but the goals are different. Forced knowledge-building communities may never read the stage of community of practice depending on the level of connectedness and peripheral participation. Technology can facilitate communication and collaboration for CoPs.

This explains what a Community of Practice is, it goes into two definitions, features-based and process-based. It also discusses how communities of practice and technology often go hand-in-hand and how this has changed and developed over time.

This chapter provides an overview and history of communities of practice. There is a nice description of the theoretical assumptions underlying its development. The differences of communities of practice and other knowledge communities are explained thoroughly. There is an appreciation for how technology plays a role in today's communities of practice, how it can support it and how it is not less effective than face to face communication. It is explained that the key to a successful community of practice is "connections, conversations, content, and information context."

Christopher Hoadley explains CoPs, focusing on definition and practice. Essentially, Hoadley illustrates that CoPs are informal yet highly connected, constructivist in nature, and supported by technology like social media. He states that technology supports communities of practice by "linking people with similar interests, providing a shared repository of resources, directly supporting communication, and providing awareness of various resources within the information context" (Jonassen & Land, 2012). Additionally, he goes on to express that individual learning fails when it comes to application but that group learning often creates deeper, more meaningful understanding especially when built upon authentic situations.

This article gives two separate definitions for communities of practice, a feature based definition and a process based definition. Between the two it explains how learning through practice can be more beneficial than following a manual or example. It also states how participation is important as well as being viewed as a member of the community of practice. The article then goes into explaining how technology has played a positive role in communities and has helped with communication to allow a community of practice to function even better.

This article, by George Siemens, describes the learning theory of Connectivism. The article begins by discussing the need for a new learning theory for the Digital Age. The author identifies some significant trends in learning and then analyzes the limitation of prior learning theories such as behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. The principles of Connectivism are described and it's implications are discussed.

I appreciated the perspective offered in this item. There seems to be serious discussion as to whether or not connectivism is theory in and of itself, or if it is a component of learning theories that are already well established. I loved the last line in which the author emphasized the ease of access we now have to information as a result of our connections. "When knowledge, however, is needed, but not known, the ability to plug into sources to meet the requirements becomes a vital skill. As knowledge continues to grow and evolve, access to what is needed is more important than what the learner currently possesses."

This article does an exceptional job of explaining traditional learning theories limitations in the modern world and highlighting the current need to understand connectivism. The article is summed up by stating that it isn't what you know today but what you are able to learn to do tomorrow. I found this article very direct and effective in understanding the current state of what's needed in the educational environment to prepare students for the work force.

This work looks at what Connectivism is, especially as an alternative to the learning theories of behavioralism, cognitivism, and constructivism. It holds that the advent and integration of technology has changed learning.

What is Connectivism? According to this article, it is a new learning theory that incorporates the constantly changing state of knowledge and the digital age. Technology is constantly updating, and they say your software is outdated within months of acquiring. According to this article, something similar can be said of knowledge acquisition. Because sources of information are changing and developing at a rapid rate, our knowledge gained has a half-life. One way to combat the "half-life of knowledge" is to stay connected (via the internet or other forms of digital networks), and view learning as a life-long process. In fact, most learning does not take place within a classroom; instead, it occurs in real-life, learner driven environments. Hence the rise of Connectivism as a viable (new) learning theory. People form connections. People use technology daily. Knowledge is constantly changing. Therefore, learning theory should also change and adapt.

Written by George Siemens, this article outlines the necessity of a new learning theory that addresses the impact of the Web 2.0. By explaining behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism, Siemens provides the argument for connectivism in the digital world. The article is a starting point for anyone who needs a working definition of connectivism or wants to compare it to other prominent learning theories. He presents the idea that "the pipe is more important than the content within the pipe."

What really struck me about this article was the idea that knowledge has a half-life. That is to say how long does it take before it's obsolete. According to this, knowledge now doubles every year and a half. The question becomes what do we do about that? I mentioned in the previous entry that our networks become our receptacles of knowledge. That's part of the solution that's introduced in more detail in this article. Below, you'll find a list of the principles of connectivism. It was a good refresher for me, so I included the definition plus the list: …Connectivism is driven by the understanding that decisions are based on rapidly altering foundations. New information is continually being acquired. The ability to draw distinctions between important and unimportant information is vital. The ability to recognize when new information alters the landscape based on decisions made yesterday is also critical. Principles of connectivism: ▪ Learning and knowledge rests in diversity of opinions. ▪ Learning is a process of connecting specialized nodes or information sources. ▪ Learning may reside in non-human appliances. ▪ Capacity to know more is more critical than what is currently known ▪ Nurturing and maintaining connections is needed to facilitate continual learning. ▪ Ability to see connections between fields, ideas, and concepts is a core skill. ▪ Currency (accurate, up-to-date knowledge) is the intent of all connectivist learning activities. ▪ Decision-making is itself a learning process. Choosing what to learn and the meaning of incoming information is seen through the lens of a shifting reality. While there is a right answer now, it may be wrong tomorrow due to alterations in the information climate affecting the decision.

An introduction to why behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism, though suitable theories for their time, are no longer suitable bases for learning and teaching.