Teacher Learning in a Community of Practice: A Case Study of ...
Teacher Learning in a Community of Practice: A Case Study of ... Teacher Learning in a Community of Practice: A Case Study of ...
Wenger emphasises (1998) that although the term 'community' usually has positive connotations ofpeaceful coexistence, mutual support or interpersonal allegiance, these are not assumed, though they may exist in certain cases. Communities ofpractice can be characterised by conflicts, disagreements and tensions among participants. These are 'normal' forms ofparticipation. A shared practice thus connects participants to each other in ways that are diverse and complex. 3.3.2.3.2 How is 'joint enterprise' a characteristic of practice as a source of community coherence? The negotiation ofa joint enterprise that keeps a keeps a community ofpractice together is based on three premises (Wenger 1998). Firstly, the enterprise is a result ofa collective process ofnegotiation that reflects the full complexity ofmutual engagement; secondly, the enterprise is defined by the participants in the very process ofpursuing the enterprise; and thirdly, the enterprise creates among participants relations ofmutual accountability that become an integral part ofthe practice. The enterprises reflected in practice are as complex as the participants. l This enterprise therefore includes the instrumental, personal and interpersonal aspects ofparticipants' lives. A community ofpractice reflects its attempt to create a context in which participants can proceed with their working lives. A participant's working life includes making money, being an adult, becoming proficient at one's job, feeling good, dealing with boredom, keeping one's job and thinking about the future. Communities ofpractice are 'not self-contained' entities, but develop in larger historical, social, and institutional contexts, with specific resources and constraints (Wenger 1998). Although the practice ofthe community may be influenced by conditions outside the control ofits members (time, resources etc) the practice is still produced by the participants within the resources and constraints oftheir situations and is therefore their response to their conditions. Participants are, however, certainly located within a broader I In the TEMS project, the enterprise would be personal and professional development. 89
system or institution and the influence ofsuch institutions can indeed be pervasive. A community ofpractice can respond to the conditions imposed by the institution in ways that are not determined by the institution. To do what they are expected to do, participants produce a practice with 'inventiveness that is all theirs' (Wenger 1998:79). Their inventive resourcefulness applies equally to what the institution probably wants and to what it probably does not want. Because participants develop and produce a practice to deal with what they understand to be their enterprise, their practice as it unfolds belongs to their community in a fundamental sense. So although conditions, resources and demands may influence a community ofpractice, it is the participants who negotiate these constraints and shape the practice. (N)egotiating a joint enterprise gives rise to relations ofmutual accountability" among the participants. "These relations ofaccountability include what matters ... what is important ... what to do ...what to pay attention to ... when artefacts are good enough and when they need refinement" (Wenger 1998:81). Information and resources are treated as something to be shared. Understanding and taking responsibility for what makes life difficult for others is enforced among participants. Participants understand that making their work life bearable is part oftheir joint enterprise, a phenomenon described by Wenger as a "communal regime ofmutual accountability" (ibid. :81). In a community ofpractice, aspects ofaccountability can be reified in terms ofrules, policies, standards and goals. Those aspects that cannot be reified are just as important. These could include developing specialised sensitivities, an aesthetic sense, and refined perceptions that influence a participant's judgement ofthe quality ofsomething produced or an action performed. The sharing ofthese aspects in a community ofpractice allows participants to negotiate the appropriateness ofwhat they do. The regime of accountability becomes an integral and pervasive part ofthe community ofpractice; because ofits very nature it may not be something that anyone can articulate very readily (Wenger 1998). 90
- Page 53 and 54: Constant reflection on and understa
- Page 55 and 56: Teachers drew on their membership i
- Page 57 and 58: The above arguments about the lack
- Page 59 and 60: change. She highlights the importan
- Page 61 and 62: Differences in the cultures oflearn
- Page 63 and 64: persons and is not considered solel
- Page 65 and 66: and offers insights into how learni
- Page 67 and 68: America. Goodson (1992) and Calderh
- Page 69 and 70: learned meaning and value for them
- Page 71 and 72: 'accommodation' and intimates that
- Page 73 and 74: staffroom and a 'pragmatic' teacher
- Page 75 and 76: Davisson (1984), Lumsden and Scott
- Page 77 and 78: directive in that it guides choices
- Page 79 and 80: economic discourse, the economics p
- Page 81 and 82: • Understand and promote the impo
- Page 83 and 84: 2.7 CONCLUSION This chapter began b
- Page 85 and 86: (Walford 2001; Anderson 1999). With
- Page 87 and 88: • It places value on the research
- Page 89 and 90: The main research question in this
- Page 91 and 92: Lave and Wenger emphasise the centr
- Page 93 and 94: 3.3.2 The Work ofWenger (1998): Com
- Page 95 and 96: agree with the way it takes place o
- Page 97 and 98: Figure 3.3: Refined intersection of
- Page 99 and 100: eflecting. The ability of a communi
- Page 101 and 102: object to something that in reality
- Page 103: practice is not just an aggregate o
- Page 107 and 108: 3.3.2.4 Learning Practice has to be
- Page 109 and 110: new possibilities for meaning. Brok
- Page 111 and 112: These characteristics indicate that
- Page 113 and 114: engage with one another and acknowl
- Page 115 and 116: A structural model ofa community of
- Page 117 and 118: who were regarded as peripheral. A
- Page 119 and 120: Ideally I would have wanted teacher
- Page 121 and 122: they represent key ingredients in s
- Page 123 and 124: that the Wenger framework presents
- Page 125 and 126: more useful and effective than part
- Page 127 and 128: 3.6 CONCLUSION This chapter provide
- Page 129 and 130: • While my professional input int
- Page 131 and 132: • Cycle ofhypothesis and theory b
- Page 133 and 134: observer played themselves out. A c
- Page 135 and 136: organised events and linked communi
- Page 137 and 138: In keeping with ethnographic princi
- Page 139 and 140: In this qualitative study, my inter
- Page 141 and 142: collection. He questions whether co
- Page 143 and 144: physical context, the complex body
- Page 145 and 146: completed, final text: rather, they
- Page 147 and 148: the teacher over classroom events (
- Page 149: 'connoisseurship'. I realised that
- Page 152 and 153: In this study, the criteria for the
Wenger emphasises (1998) that although the term 'community' usually has positive<br />
connotations <strong>of</strong>peaceful coexistence, mutual support or <strong>in</strong>terpersonal allegiance, these<br />
are not assumed, though they may exist <strong>in</strong> certa<strong>in</strong> cases. Communities <strong>of</strong>practice can be<br />
characterised by conflicts, disagreements and tensions among participants. These are<br />
'normal' forms <strong>of</strong>participation. A shared practice thus connects participants to each other<br />
<strong>in</strong> ways that are diverse and complex.<br />
3.3.2.3.2 How is 'jo<strong>in</strong>t enterprise' a characteristic <strong>of</strong> practice as a source <strong>of</strong><br />
community coherence?<br />
The negotiation <strong>of</strong>a jo<strong>in</strong>t enterprise that keeps a keeps a community <strong>of</strong>practice together<br />
is based on three premises (Wenger 1998). Firstly, the enterprise is a result <strong>of</strong>a collective<br />
process <strong>of</strong>negotiation that reflects the full complexity <strong>of</strong>mutual engagement; secondly,<br />
the enterprise is def<strong>in</strong>ed by the participants <strong>in</strong> the very process <strong>of</strong>pursu<strong>in</strong>g the enterprise;<br />
and thirdly, the enterprise creates among participants relations <strong>of</strong>mutual accountability<br />
that become an <strong>in</strong>tegral part <strong>of</strong>the practice.<br />
The enterprises reflected <strong>in</strong> practice are as complex as the participants. l This enterprise<br />
therefore <strong>in</strong>cludes the <strong>in</strong>strumental, personal and <strong>in</strong>terpersonal aspects <strong>of</strong>participants'<br />
lives. A community <strong>of</strong>practice reflects its attempt to create a context <strong>in</strong> which<br />
participants can proceed with their work<strong>in</strong>g lives. A participant's work<strong>in</strong>g life <strong>in</strong>cludes<br />
mak<strong>in</strong>g money, be<strong>in</strong>g an adult, becom<strong>in</strong>g pr<strong>of</strong>icient at one's job, feel<strong>in</strong>g good, deal<strong>in</strong>g<br />
with boredom, keep<strong>in</strong>g one's job and th<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g about the future.<br />
Communities <strong>of</strong>practice are 'not self-conta<strong>in</strong>ed' entities, but develop <strong>in</strong> larger historical,<br />
social, and <strong>in</strong>stitutional contexts, with specific resources and constra<strong>in</strong>ts (Wenger 1998).<br />
Although the practice <strong>of</strong>the community may be <strong>in</strong>fluenced by conditions outside the<br />
control <strong>of</strong>its members (time, resources etc) the practice is still produced by the<br />
participants with<strong>in</strong> the resources and constra<strong>in</strong>ts <strong>of</strong>their situations and is therefore their<br />
response to their conditions. Participants are, however, certa<strong>in</strong>ly located with<strong>in</strong> a broader<br />
I In the TEMS project, the enterprise would be personal and pr<strong>of</strong>essional development.<br />
89