Group items tagged

This article was very informative. Two things that stood out the most for me were: one - the table outlining the engagement, life of network, etc. of Cops, formal work groups, project teams, and informal networks, and two - when Wenger and Snyder said, "Communities of practice are emerging in companies that thrive on knowledge." I totally agree with this statement. Knowledge is power and power puts you on top, so it stands to reason that Cops thrive on knowledge gained. Great source.

This article from the Harvard Business Review provides a great overview for Communities of Practice and what they look like within the context of larger organizations. There is a great chart comparing CoP with other organizational groups and a good description of the hallmarks of effective CoPs.

If you think Communities of Practice or CoPs are just for education, you need to read this article. It gives great examples of non-education based CoPs, including CoPs used in the current business world. In fact, the history of CoPs is traced as far back as ancient Greece in this article. Since this article tends to focus on non-education CoPs, it gives a nice breakdown of how "teams" differ from CoPs. This concept can easily apply to the school setting since many grade levels use team/department approaches for working with students. Looking at the business examples, it's worth noting that CoPs do not just spontaneously start. They take great effort to form and develop.

This article from the Harvard Business Review discusses the use of CoPs in the business world. The author compares CoPs with more traditional group collaboration strategies pointing out the positives of Cops and how their use is changing business.

Wenger and Snyder examine communities of practice and their implementation in the business and private sectors not necessarily education centric. They provide case studies on the benefits of CoP's which show concrete production improvement demonstrating the CoPs effectiveness. The chart comparing CoP's to teams and informal networks is helpful to understanding the differences.

This article discusses communities of practice in a historical sense and provided me with some relevant background information. It also describes the several reasons that communities of practice are formed. Communities of practice, among other things, can be great for "maintaining connections with peers" or can be created for individuals to come together "in response to changes" surrounding them. I recommend this read.

While parts of this article were about ways to create and grow CoPs, I found much of this helpful when illustrating CoPs in real workplaces that formed to solve problems by sharing expertise, commonalities, and without disrupting upper-level management.

This article from Harvard Business Review explores CoPs which were fairly new to the business scene in 2000. Knowledge sharing, learning, and change were thought to be improved through CoPs, though the creation of CoPs is not a directive from management. CoPs are self created and have their own projects and leadership. The article shares a brief history of CoPs. Noted are the differences between informal networks, project teams, formal work groups, and CoPs - looking at their purpose, membership, bonds, and length of relationships. CoPs are recognized for improving company performance.

I like that this website gives different reasons for having a PLN and follows those up with a link to an additional resource for each reason. It gives a good overview of different ideas and provides options to go deeper into the areas you want to explore further. The infographic is nice too. It is something you could save and print to motivate yourself to keep up with your PLNs.

Great graphic organizer in this article. My school has a monthly mandated "PLC" meeting that we all have to go to, that accomplishes few of these goals. I think these communities are more effective if they are organic and not top-down.

I was just looking at this article before I noticed you had already posted! I was really drawn to the graphic provided when you first open the page. It's a good reminder of why PLN's can be such a benefit for educators. I was drawn to the global resources an educator could gain. I often get wrapped up in my immediate circle of "supporters" that I forget there are other educators all over the world that could be a resource.

I love this graphic!! This would be an excellent thing to bring to administration to help allow space and encouragement for teachers to develop PLNs!

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.