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 ...

pfeiffer.nele60
from pfeiffer.nele60 More from this publisher
16.08.2013 Views

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

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

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!