Group items tagged

This is a summary of the work of Lave and Wenger on communities of practice. It focuses on the need for social participation for learning. The article also highlights how learning is central to human identity.

Wenger and Lave first used the term Communities of Practice (CoPs) in 1991 and furthered their explanation in 1998. CoPs are a process of social learning in which a group of like-minded people regularly collaborate with the objective to learn something. Wenger specifically notes that this definition does not include "intentionality," stating that learning can happen incidentally. This article goes on to explain the three components of a CoP: domain, community, and practice. Finally, the summary ends with a list of methods commonly seen to collaborate in a CoP including problem solving, seeking others' experience, discussing developments, and mapping knowledge

This article also explains how participation is a huge part of communities of practice. It states that these communities are groups that have something in common and people can learn from one another through the interactions taking place. One big focus is how the participation that is going on needs to be active and continuous. A person's active participation can then help motivate them and others in the community to continually want to learn.

This quick overview of CoPs gives a plain-English approach to the definition and components of CoPs. This allows for a quick understanding without having to dissect the meaning of each word of the definition. Wenger's simple definition is given, as well as the required components for a CoP, and it is concluded with the concept of social participation as a learning focus.

Since I hadn't heard of CoPs, I thought I should find out what it is. For those in the same boat, there are 3 things necessary to have a CoP: 1. domain (common interest), 2. community (engaging together in activity and sharing of information), and 3. practitioners (members are not just people with a shared interest, but practicing).

Introduction to and required components of a community of practice.

This article outlines the components of a community of practice as well as discussing what a community of practice is not to help learners better understand what is necessary to have a community of practice.

Communities of Practice were first used in 1991 by Jena Lave and Etienne. A CoP is social learning aimed around a specific subject with people who have common interests and collaborate over a large period of time in an online community. The learning that takes place is often natural and happens through the social interactions. There are three requirements for a proper CoP. The first is that there needs to be a domain. The people involved in the CoP need to have shared interests. The second is that there needs to be a community. The people involved need to interact and engage in activities to help and share information with each other. The final necessity is that there needs to be a practice. This means that they are actively engaged within the community and work to inform everyone involved. CoPs work using social interactions to create the learning community. 

This short but informative article helps get to the root question of "what are communities of practice?" The article describes the three main components of the communities of practice theory which domain (shared, common interest), community (sharing of info, activities), and practice (members of COP need to be practitioners of the domain and not just casual observer). To be a true COP, the above components must be present. The article breaks down Wengers belief that "groups of people who share a concern of a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as the interact regularly". It discussed how COP's are becoming more present through online communities formed through the Internet and social media. COP's are being seen as avenues that promote innovation and building of social capital through the spreading of knowledge.

In this article Etienne defines Communities of Practice (CoP) as "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." This learning that takes place is not necessarily intentional. Three components are required in order to be a CoP: (1) the domain, (2) the community, and (3) the practice.

This was one of the most helpful articles to read because it not only showed connectivism as theory but also its limitations. It explores connectivism as theory and as a phenomenon because detractors feel like it does not fit the qualifications for a theory. However Mr. Bell does show how if not a theory connectivism certainly does have merit. He also compares other theories to connectivism to show that merit in today's digital learning.

This article looks at Connectivism and explores if is a learning theory. The article also addresses how technology has created the need for researchers to move beyond more traditional learning theories and develop theories that relate to the use of technology in learning.

This article is an outstanding review by Mark K. Smith of Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger's theories of social learning through communities of practice. It gives a great overview of the theoretical foundations as well as additional explanations of those theories.

This article outlines the theory and practice of communities of practice, and discusses the idea that learning is social and comes from of our experience of participating in daily life. The authors identify a variety of types of CoPs that all humans are engaged in, even if they are not formally identified as such. A CoP is defined along three dimensions: what it is about, how it functions, and what capabilities/resources it has produced. Also emphasized are the importance of the relationships formed between the people within the CoPs - hence, the community in CoP. Stemming from that, they extend the idea of CoPs to apply to the classroom culture and environment and discuss the need for educators to cultivate a similar idea to best facilitate learning among their students.

The point that I learned from this article is that communities of practice go beyond the acquisition of knowledge and skill. They build relationships where people within the community work together to share their skills, knowledge, and interests they have learned in order to complete new or more complex tasks. We learn best through active participation.

Articles like this one make it clear that we are actively involved in communities of practice every day, without even realizing it. This is largely due to the internet; now, if one needs to reach out to another person for advice on baking, for example, one can use online forums or message boards to connect to others in their community of practice. This was not possible before the internet, or at the very least it was difficult to accomplish so easily. I'm interested to learn a little more about what COPs might have looked like before the internet.

Learning is social and takes place by participating in daily life. Learning takes place situationally in communities of practice. These communities of practice exist all around us: home, work, school, etc. As we pursue our goals within our groups, learning occurs. Members off s community of practice (CoP) are united by common activities and by what they learn through participating in those activities. A community of practice is defined by three factors, "what it is about," "how it functions," and "what capability it has produced." For a community of practice to be effective, it needs to "generate and appropriate a shared repertoire of ideas, commitments and memories." There also need to be resources like documents, tools, procedures, and a shared vocabulary. The the developers of this theory, Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger, focused on the kinds of "social engagement" that caused learning to take place. People join groups and initially learn from the periphery. Eventually, they become more proficient through their participation as they move toward the center of the group. The situation in which the learning occurs has a significant effect on the learning.

After reading through this article, I kept coming back to this quote: "Rather than looking to learning as the acquisition of certain forms of knowledge, Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger have tried to place it in social relationships - situations of co-participation." These are ideas I try to integrate into my classroom on a day-to-day basis because healthy social relationships can enhance learning experiences due to students becoming vested in goals. Students are more willing to put their feet outside of the box, without fear of sharing and participating in these learning environments---and they become active inside members of these groups, rather than outside onlookers.

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.

This article explains the basic idea of personal learning networks, especially related to e-Learning. The author makes the argument that the education system needs to adapt the ideas behind personal learning networks in order to be successful in the future.

This article discusses the important trends in personal learning environments. It talks of its importance in life long learning, informal learning, the impact of different learning styles and how technology is playing a huge role in our education today,

This is paper written back in 2007 about PLNs. The author argues that PLN are the future of elearning because of the power they have to offer individualized learning and give the learner the opportunity to organize his/her own learning. That educational institutions cannot expect to simply recreate the same forms of learning used in tradition education online. rather that we must learn to adapt to the new and emerging technologies of ubiquitous computing and social software. Considering that this article was written 9 years ago, I found it to be extremely accurate and representative of PLNs today.

The article looks at personal learning environments and discusses the possibility that some form of PLE will be needed as part of the future of learning. It also discusses the need for changes in education to accommodate PLEs as current teaching methodology is out of date with how current students wish to learn.

This article pushes for a change in learning through Personal Learning Environments. This article recognizes that PLEs help to foster lifelong learning though providing multiple tools and resources to support the learning. It is argued that this learning does not have to be a formal, institutional learning, but can be informal which adapts for different styles of learning. A very interesting aspect of the article to me is the addressing of assessment and how the learning that has taken place through the PLE would be assessed. This primarily explains that evidence could be shown through artifacts and possibly an e-Portfolio. It later goes on to explain what a PLE would look like which include a copious amount of tools that one uses daily for learning. These tools primarily would be comprised of what is called social software connecting collaborators. The important take away from this article is that a PLE is not a tool to be implemented, but instead an approach for the use of a web of tools for learning and sharing creating a bridge between the learner and the world outside.

@kcastello Thanks for the article! I particularly like the distinction you made between PLEs as an approach, not a tool.

Wow, there was a lot of good content in this article. One of my biggest take aways from the article is the great misapplication of online communities. The misapplication lies in the idea that a community follows an online course, like what we are doing right now in 543. The discussion community is created at the beginning of the course and members are active participants, during the course. Once the course ends, the community ends as well. This is not what the online community is intended to do. It is a long-term development of resources that needs to continue on.

This reminded me a lot of an article I shared for this assignment that also discussed the need for currently used LMS-based systems to move toward encompassing PLNs and Web 2.0 tools to up their social networking components. I think this is definitely an important consideration, especially for educators working in an online environment.

The paper outlines 4 key principles for connected learning - autonomy, connectedness, diversity, and openness. The authors' point of view is that all four principles can be "expanded to recognize individual and psychological diversity within connective environments." They conclude by saying that it is in the "context and recognition of the engagement" that makes connectivism a "viable framework for learning, offering great potential..."

In 2011, George Siemens and Stephen Downes launched a massive open online course called "Connectivism and Connected Knowledge" (CCK11.) The article defines Connectivism as "network-based pedagogy" and discusses why these authors value "the process" over "the product." Specifically, why the process of taking the course would be in itself much more important than what learners may have learned. Additionally, they offer 4 major components: aggregation, remixing, repurposing, and feeding forward. In the nutshell, the article argues that, as far as connectivism in concerned, knowledge is not something that can be "neatly packaged and passed along as a finished product"; rather, it is "complicated, distributed, mixed with other concepts, looks differently to different people.."

Interesting to see the authors explaining connectivism in light of personality theory and self-determination theory rather than trying to argue it as a learning theory akin to behaviorism, cognitivism, or constructivism. I appreciated their inclusion of Downes' four key components of connectivism: autonomy, connectedness, diversity, and openness. As I read their discussion of autonomy, my mind was drawn to Daniel Pink's explanation of intrinsic motivation, which is comprised of three key aspects: Autonomy, Mastery, and Purpose. [See Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York, NY: Riverhead Books.] This piece was a helpful read with a very different perspective than I had previously encountered for connectivism.

I'm particularly fond of the idea that connectivism strives for currency of information, and that what is "right" today may not be "right" next week. Hence the need for access to, and participation in, a network of constantly updating information being contributed to by professionals and novices alike.

This is an analysis of connectivism that defines and outlines Siemens fundamental principles of the theory. It highlights how the amount of knowledge needed to be an expert today can't be self-contained within an individual but instead requires the use of networked technology to house it all. It also touches on newer exploration being done to further advance connectivism and the limitations or issues with the theory. The values of connectivism through practice in the classroom and knowledge management are also presented. It also points out some limitations with the theory that need to be addressed such as learner autonomy and balances of power in the network.

This blog is maintained by Kevin Stranack, a librarian and educator at Simon Fraser University working on open source software projects. In this post on connectivism, Stranack furthers his understanding of the theory, examine its limitations, and considers its relevance to both classroom teaching as well as knowledge management practices within organizations.

Interesting, I continue to go back to an idea from an additional post on connectivism that points out our brains have been "re-wired" by the onset of technology. We learn differently than we once did because of the impact technology has had. This post confirms those same ideas.

This review had a slightly different tone than others that I have seen. It helped me to see the fundamental principals of connectivism and the focus on the "one". I also like how it described the development of the network from seeking, to sense-making, to sharing.

This blog post provides a critical review of the theory of connectivism. Stranack also discusses the application of the theory both in the classroom and within knowledge networks.

This post defines and explores the details of connectivism as a theory and then breaks down the application of connectivism in the classroom as well as in society. The author breaks down what a connectivist learning environment would look like and how learning would be impacted.

Interesting article on how PLNs relate to self-directed student learning. The author,Bernard Bull, provides some background on learning theory and self-directed learning to clarify how PLNs could be incorporated into any curriculum. The article includes a few how-to tips at then end.

Really great article about helping students create PLN's and why they need them. It starts with some theory about PLN's and then discusses self directed learning and self blended learning. A student PLN really is a collection of connections to people and resources.

I think PLNs are the cornerstone of self-directed student learning. As I read this article I kept thinking about how I could use this in a math classroom. The author states, "The idea of a PLN is simply a network of people and resources through which you learn and grow". He goes on to summarize key learning principles and accurately states, "a student personal learning network, which is a mix of connectivism, self-directed learning and self-blended learning". Great read Cheronne!

The chart of self-directed and teacher-directed learning is great. Those questions are what educators should be asking themselves everyday before they teach a lesson. This helps us identify exactly what needs to be taught, how to evaluate it and to make sure it was taught successfully.

This is a fantastic resource! I had never even thought of Personal Learning Networks for students, as I was so focused on it as professional development for teachers. By helping students create their own Personal Learning Networks you are able to shift from teacher directed learning to student centered learning.

Not only defines PLN's and gives some background learning theory information, but gives some concrete ideas on how to help students develop their own PLN's.

This article from Dr. Bernard Bull discusses ways that students (including all of us) can develop our personal learning networks. While we may have people that help us learn, there are different outreach possibilities to increase our PLN. He states that if students were to grow over time with their PLNs, the number of connections would be of more quality and quantity. He discusses this through the theory of Connectivism. He encourages including PLNs into the curriculum which then may allow for students over time to create personal teaching networks from the information they have learned.

The author not only explains the benefits of Personal Learning Networks but also asks himself what would happen if learning communities and organizations made student personal learning networks an integral part of the learning experience. With the popularity of PLNs, the author believes that students may not only build a personal learning network, but also venture into starting their own personal teaching networks.

This is such a fascinating article! I appreciated the explanation of what a PLN is, but also how to explain it to others and to even help them get started with one. I want to incorporate a great deal of technology with my f2f students this year as well as help them grow to being self-directed learners, so having this article as a resource of how to help students set up their own PLN is great! I hope this will intrigue them to become learners even outside the classroom.

Wegner talking about CoP. Again, although it is a short summary overview, it makes several key points which help my understanding. Firstly that the challenge which can arise in a CoP can become like a sort of curriculum which is wired on and developed. Learning, sharing happen and even new knowledge creation. As he talks about tools he makes it clear that such online tools are not in themselves CoP bbut the tools which enable them. Interesting and digestible.

I like this overview a lot. Thank you for posting. He makes CoPs sound so helpful and the people that are in them so positive and available. It makes me want to join one right now!

I enjoyed this video quite a bit. He's point at 3:25 regarding the correct usage of tools in CoPs seems obvious, but it emphasizes the need for management and organization in successful CoPs.

I really like that you chose a video. This is a great summary of what a CoP is and what it needs to be successful! Defining a community of practice is not easy but using the correct tools appropriately can make all the difference!

This was refreshing to watch a video instead of reading an article about these topics. I think that it was powerful when he mentioned that it is the learners duty to organize and be in charge of how they would like to learn and what they would like to learn. We interact daily with our coworkers, friends, family, etc. We can and do learn from all of them, it is up to how what we want to learn and to what extent.

I really enjoyed watching this video. I had searched for some videos on Communities of Practice, but this is clearly the best one I have seen. It provides a clear explanation of CoP's and even some information on what it takes in order to be successful.This is important because it shows what a successful CoP should look like.

One thing the author mentions is the relationships built and camaraderie within his PLN. Member connections are a theme I have found to be overwhelmingly consistent throughout the research undertaken. One quote in particular that is fresh in my memory says PLNs, have a "commitment to mutual engagement, and to mutual understanding of that engagement" (Eckert, 2006). Members need be connected by vested interests, and within these interests, they become connected on a personal level, often building lifelong friendships.

There were some interesting points made in this article. It really focuses on the personal aspect of a Personal Learning Network and I like how Spiglanin points out that PLN's cannot be designed, they are "organic". After reading this article, I could picture a PLN for the first time and actually see how it relates to Connectivism. I could envision the network and how each individual within a network is connected or related to each other. One of the key aspects of a PLN that Spiglanin mentions stood out to me. The second aspect states,"Learning happens naturally as I engage with others in my professional network across a variety of social media. Recognizing this learning and making good use of it requires effective personal knowledge management practices." This stood out the most to me because it is one area that I still need to work on as I develop my own personal learning networks.

This is a scholarly paper where Stephen Dowes discusses Personal Learning Environments (PLE) centered around the theory of connectivism. His discussion suggests that web 2.0 is unsuitable and too limiting for online learning. He suggests that in the PLE "management of learning migrates from the institution to the learner" (p. 15). In this way, the learner consumes resources as well as creating them.

I had a difficult time finding articles on PLN & PLE that were theoretical and not practical in nature. This article by Stephen Downes actually explores the connection between PLNs and Connectivism.