Communities of Practice

Wegner and Lave have taken a concept that has ancient roots, modernized and named it in a way that is understandable and applicable for as long as humans socialize our knowledge. While I believe that individuals can learn effectively if the new information is properly scaffolded and presented, people are motivated in general by others who are interested in similar topics. In my experience in working at NASA, I learned that Engineers really prefer to listen to other Engineers on almost any topic. Since working in support of faculty within a Bay Area Middle School and within higher education institutions at USD and now at Ashford University, it is clear that teachers/professors prefer to "learn" from fellow teachers/professors. There are probably many reasons for the attitude, but one certainly is the sense that others (read "outsiders") just don't get understand matters as clearly as fellow practicioners. Setting aside the times in which it takes an outsider to make change, this thought permeates professions of all kinds where industry jargon supplants regularly understood speech. Not only does it communicate concepts clearly to those in the know, but it also acts as a barrier to outsiders.

Wegner highlights three key characteristics that must be present for there to be a community of practice: A shared domain of interest; the community and the practice. All three are necessary. Regarding organizatinos, I can attest that social networking programs can provide immense leverage to the concept of communities of practice. Ashford University has licensed a social collaboration platform called Jive. It gives employees unofficial time to enter into conversations on select topics such as Critical Thinking and Instructional Design, but also allow those with outside interests to start groups and share best practices and knowledge with others on subjects of their choosing.

Virtual social networking platforms such as Second Life can allow interesting interactions to take place in many fields and interests. The sky seems to be the limit, but I do agree with the Infed article that learning can occur in different ways. I think that there will be competing learning platforms that will come into existence shorty. Augmented reality systems may begin to replace the knowledgable, but fallible colleague with relevant information delivered immediately when needed and in context. For example, "best practices" could be shown in car maintainence. For example, a mechanic pops the hood of a given car, and the augmented system would recognize the make, model, engine-type and tap into databases that overlay schematics onto the mechanics glasses. It would then guide the mechanic through the steps. Other systems, similar to Watson, the IBM computer that beat the world's best Jeopardy contestants, would be available to construct knowedge-building courses. Not just adequate courses, but really great courses that use the most highly-rated materials on the web to create engaging learning experiences.

There are those who feel that Communities of Practice are too limited in scope. Scollon, a previous follower of Communities of Practice feels that a concept of Nexus of Practice is more in keeping with how people learn. That people will cross boundaries to interact with practitioners in other fields in order to learn. They are not constrained by continual connections, but link to "different practices in different sites of engagement and among different participants."