Group items tagged

This site describes communities of practice (CoP) as "groups of people who share a passion for something that they do, and who interact regularly to learn how to do it better." It then goes on to describe the history or CoPs, when and how to use them (providing a flowchart for cultivating communities of practice), and concludes with tips, examples, and related resources.

This resource outlines CoPs and provides relevant examples. Explains that the emphasis of these communities is the quality of content shared by individuals. States that the creator to consumer ratio is 0.07%. Where's the YOU?

This article provides an overview of, applications for, and tips the use of a community of practice.

This article give not only the basic idea of a CoP, but also gives tips and lessons, examples and stories, and more references for those interested in learning more. Some of the resources are in Dutch (?), so be aware.

Great summary of CoPs and their usefulness in education. I like how the article explains that they can be short term or long term depending on the purpose and goals of the community. I also really like the graphic and saved it to my desktop!

The image in this article is great! The tips section is also helpful when you are thinking about creating a CoP. Overall, great article with great examples.

This is a really great resource! Like Ryann, I love the image within this page. It really puts some of the important aspects of communities of practice in the simplest terms possible. I love the emphasis on key questions to ask when thinking about CoP. Consistent attitude is something that needs to be taken to all communities! If the purpose is to teach and learn, then the attitude needs to be there to match.

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 draws comparisons between behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism and how they all relate to connectivism. Connectivism has come about with the age of technology, and has gradually become its own learning theory.

Provides an overview of learning theories in terms of creating instructional environments. Discusses principles and limitations of connectivism and concludes that how people work and function is altered when new tools are utilized. Connectivism provides insight in to learning and tasks.

This is is a good breakdown on the history of the connectivism theory and school of thought. It highlights how it the theory is beneficial in our digital age because other theories like behaviorism, cognitivism,and constructivism operate under the tenet that learning occurs by majority inside of a person. It reiterates the point that the network or "pipe" is more important than the content within it.

Explanation of connectivism, including contrasts to behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism. Interesting quote: "The pipe is more important than the content within the pipe. Our ability to learn what we need for tomorrow is more important than what we know today." I'm not sure I totally agree with that statement...

Very interesting piece on the how the half-life of knowledge is shrinking. The amount of knowledge in the world has doubled in the last 10 years and is doubling every 18 months.

George Siemens ideas on the limitations of traditional learning theories and connectivism.

This articles gives information about the basic thought behind Connectivism. This article even gives the background information about the limitations of behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism in the realm of technology and knowledge.

This background paper reviews the limitations of common learning theories in the digital age. Siemens then describes connectivism.

"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." This is a fantastic quote in this article. Our foundations for education are highly impacting the way we learn and soak up the knowledge around us. Everyone in this world needs to gain more knowledge, learn new techniques, and grow their thinking to become a harder worker, more valuable asset, and a better person in general. It is critical for the society to build on the foundations of their knowledge now so we can overcome those future problems and struggles in the future. Technology is opening doors for people to create, develop, and build knew foundations of education.

The resource discusses the need for a changing view of learning due to the development of technology tools to aid learning and information sharing. Many learning theories have not incorporated the use of technology or connectivity. Previous learning theories such as behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism have limitations presented in this article to support the need for connectivism. An important thought stated by the author, "We derive our competence from forming connections". This article states the importance of experience to learn knowledge.

In this piece, Siemens explores behaviorism, cognitivism, and constructivism and their deficits when it comes to learning in the digital world. He explains how Connectivism addresses the change in learning in that it is no longer an internal activity because of technology.

I like the explanation of the difference between a full-blown theory and a developmental theory and whether connectivism is a theory or not at this point. I also appreciated the connection to earlier learning theories that this article termed pre-connectivist. With all of the different theories most educators have studied and incorporate into their teaching practices, it is helpful to see how some of them relate to one another.

Connectivism may not be an actual learning theory, according to the authors of this article. It may, they conceed, be a developmental theory that might one day become an actual theory. However, its full list of contexts has not yet been identified so its title as a learning theory could be premature.

This article argues that connectivism is not a theory because it does not introduce any new ideas. It is a great resource for reviewing other learning theories. In the article is states that Verhangen sees connectivism as a level of pedology and curriculum rather than theory. I like this quote from Downs 2007 "Knowledge is the set of connections formed by action and experience."

The author discusses about connectivism as a theory and how it affects learning in a digital era. Connectivism is a new theory that may not have a ton of research compared to other learning theories, but as the technology world continues to evolve, the theory of connectivism evolves too.

Kop and Hill give an overview of connectivism and discuss it as a learning theory. They also discuss the implications in education the increasing influence of the internet has. Kop and Hill look at the connection between connectivism and formal education. They come to the conclusion that, while they foresee radical shifts in education, they do not view connectivism as warranting its own place in learning theory structure.

In this journal article, Connectivism is referred to as helping develop new pedagogies and not a learning theory on it's own. The role of a tutor is diminishing as learners move from a learning environment controlled by an institution, to an environment where they direct their own learning.

I like this article for the overview of connectivism. The overview gives a good idea about what connectivism is. The article goes on to analyze older learning theories and how they need to be addressed in regards to the digital age. It explains how connectivism can build on older theories to better address current digital learning.

Connectivism: is a framework for understanding learning. Siemens (2004) states, "A community is the clustering of similar areas of interest that allows for interaction, sharing, dialoguing, and thinking together." Knowledge is always distributed and shared across learning networks. Information is gathered from everyone and then relating information back to everybody as well as receiving feedback from others.

This source really compares different theories about connectivism. It is discussed whether or not it is a learning theory or not, and what different people think in terms of connectivity. It also discusses some basics about connectivity, and how it means that information is just stored in different places and learners can move between networks to access different information.

This article discusses what learning theories meet the needs of today's learners and how connectivism is built on older theories to connect newer theories. (I didn't check the resources page until after I posted this - I'm hoping I can still use it because I spent a good 20-30 minutes on it!)

This article is a good critical evaluation of connectivisms usefulness in the modern classroom. Ultimately, the authors state that while new theories are emerging in response to technology, connectivism still plays an important role. This is due to the connective nature of technology and the internet.

This article sets out to distinguish Connectivism as either learning theory or developmental (learning) theory. The similarities and differences between the two are briefly discussed before relating how connectivism fits within the frameworks. One interesting aspect of this article is the importance placed on higher-order thinking skills and applications, which seems to be a growing demand in our current education and business markets.

It gives great insights on how connectivism is a learning theory. Also, I find the explanation for how connectivism fulfills the three main tasks for developmental theories.

Thanks for sharing this Alanna! This was a thorough article explaining the past and future of Connectivism. I liked how it puts it all into perspective and we can envision what is in store in the future regarding Connectivism.

Connectivism is a learning theory for the digital age. What does that mean for existing learning theories. This articles questions if previous learning theories still meet the needs of today's learners, and the needs of learners of the future. This articles analyzes connectivism to determine if it has anything new to offer as a learning theory.

I truly appreciated this quote..."New learning environments are informing present and future trends from which both educators and students stand to benefit. Moreover, the way in which global networks and communities of interest are currently being formed through emerging technologies is encouraging young people, in particular, to develop new, creative, and different forms of communication and knowledge creation outside formal education." I also appreciated how this article examined, and almost made the reader feel, the discourse that often arises when new theories emerge. As an educator, I have learned that balance is key! It truly isnt one method or theory over another! Rather an intersection of theories is where powerful learning can take place. Connectivism is certainly a 21st century theory which I believe is built to capitalize how how connected today's learner are through the Internet and social media! Connectivism, to me, feels that a theoretical vehicle to deliver many different theories and strategies.

In the opening section it describes the community of practice as being different from the typical teacher development model because it reaches "beyond individuals and toward alignment". This confused me at first, because it seemed to oppose the other information about communities of practice. I had seen a community of practice as a way for individuals to find what they need. However, as I read on, I realized that it was referring to the fact that teachers are now linked to one another and can work together to find coherence and best practices.

As an English teacher I can see the value of the example in this brief. The English department gets together and reflects on similar commenting styles for students to revise papers. They study which commenting helped the best after students turned in their revised copies. My English department just had to do this type of collaboration, but we were analyzing introduction paragraphs written by students and how we could improve teaching this. Unfortunately it was one of those times that were "mandated from the top down" as the brief mentions. Our collaboration was not voluntary and our department is not cohesive. I liked this idea of creating a community of practice with my department, but I am not sure how to get everyone on board Think of the power a CoP would make if it were campus wide, cross-curricular.

A research brief produced by the National Council of Teachers of English, this publication focuses on three aspects of a successful community of practice: mutual engagement, joint enterprise, and shared repertoire. Although the phrasing is different, the central concepts are similar to other reports on this topic. It does, however, also break down the needs of institutional support as a necessary condition for these communities to thrive.

The national Council of Teachers of English reviewed Communities of Practice as they worked to develop better feedback for student writing. Successful Communities of Practice have been shown to be beneficial provided that specific characteristics are in place, including a common goal. Both face to face CoPs and online CoPs need these specific elements. What sets communities of practice apart from other professional development models is their reach beyond individuals and toward alignment

I found this article or brief by the NCTE (National Council of Teachers of English) helpful in that it gave context to how teaching organizations view of the communities practice theory. The article paints a picture of how schools try to use the theory as a framework for collaboration. I appreciated how it presented the goals of COPs in schools with some possible pitfalls. The main takeaway being that COPs are less successful when they are implemented "from the top down". It still drives home the reality however that COPs do need an organizational structure and good leadership, but that connections and shared vision are still the cornerstones of COP's. The article was published in 2011 and appears to be preparing it's readers for the wave of new media. It references blogs as emerging COPs and drives home point that online communities, while not face-to-face, still need strong leadership and organizational structure to be successful. It ends by providing questions to consider when trying to form COPs.

Re: The main takeaway is that COPs are less successful when they are implemented "from the top down". I agree with this statement, The most successful CoP that I have been involved in were initiated within the district, but the administration was not overseeing the work being done. This freedom allowed for a more relaxed and teacher supported group. The department was kept in close communication, however, as some time to open our community funds were necessary and therefore it was important to have an advocate.

Etienne Wenger seeks to simplify communities of practice by elaborating on three distinct features that make a a community of practice different than a community. A community of practice is defined by its' domain, the shared connection based on a common interest; the community; a group of individuals that interact with each other through collaborative activities; the practice, common experiences and resources to take on similar problems. The text is particularly user friendly in that it offers provides charts that contextual types of activities that would make a community a community of practice such as: visits, mapping knowledge, problem solving, etc.

Wenger identifies CoP's as"groups of people who share a concern or passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly". Here it is indicated that three main things must be present to call it a CoP: the domain, the community, and the practice. One item that stood out to me is that a community is not by default a CoP. Rather, a CoP must not solely be a community of interest but a CoP is a community that is built on the acquisition of skills, knowledge, or practice within the community. CoP's can come in a variety of sizes, shapes, and domains. All are vested in the "bettering" of individuals.

This article looks at the bones of communities of practice. This is an easy read, an introduction to communities of practice, which explains important characteristics, activities, concepts behind, and concepts applied in the case of communities of practice. It looks at traditional classroom learning compared to communities of practice.