Jean Lave, Etienne Wenger and communities of practice
Popularity Report
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
|||
![]() |
URL Tag Cloud
Bookmark History
Saved by 74 people (-10 private), first by anonymouse user on 2006-07-06
- Hshort on 2009-10-06 - Tags no_tag
- Ibbertelsen on 2009-09-11 - Tags community , collaboration , practice
- Sandygautam on 2009-09-10 - Tags no_tag
- Ctladmin on 2009-08-31 - Tags communities , practice , situated , learning
- Maggiev on 2009-08-27 - Tags CoP , studies
Public Sticky notes
Highlighted by paroune
Being alive as human beings means that we are constantly engaged in the pursuit of enterprises of all kinds, from ensuring our physical survival to seeking the most lofty pleasures. As we define these enterprises and engage in their pursuit together, we interact with each other and with the world and we tune our relations with each other and with the world accordingly. In other words we learn.
Over time, this collective learning results in practices that reflect both the pursuit of our enterprises and the attendant social relations. These practices are thus the property of a kind of community created over time by the sustained pursuit of a shared enterprise. It makes sense, therefore to call these kinds of communities communities of practice. (Wenger 1998: 45)
Highlighted by fleabugs
Highlighted by fleabugs
Highlighted by fleabugs
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by rogerchaz
Highlighted by rogerchaz
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by lmilne
Highlighted by rogerchaz
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by youenn
Over time, this collective learning results in practices that reflect both the pursuit of our enterprises and the attendant social relations. These practices are thus the property of a kind of community created over time by the sustained pursuit of a shared enterprise. It makes sense, therefore to call these kinds of communities communities of practice.
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by rogerchaz
Highlighted by lmilne
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by hshort
What it is about – its joint enterprise as understood and continually renegotiated by its members.
How it functions - mutual engagement that bind members together into a social entity.
What capability it has produced – the shared repertoire of communal resources (routines, sensibilities, artefacts, vocabulary, styles, etc.) that members have developed over time
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by rogerchaz
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by klefstadj
The characteristics of communities of practice
According to Etienne Wenger (c 2007), three elements are crucial in distinguishing a community of practice from other groups and communities:
The domain. A community of practice is is something more than a club of friends or a network of connections between people. 'It has an identity defined by a shared domain of interest. Membership therefore implies a commitment to the domain, and therefore a shared competence that distinguishes members from other people' (op. cit.).
The community. 'In pursuing their interest in their domain, members engage in joint activities and discussions, help each other, and share information. They build relationships that enable them to learn from each other' (op. cit.).
The practice. 'Members of a community of practice are practitioners. They develop a shared repertoire of resources: experiences, stories, tools, ways of addressing recurring problems—in short a shared practice. This takes time and sustained interaction' (op. cit.).
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by sandygautam
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
situated learning depends on two claims:
- It makes no sense to talk of knowledge that is decontextualized, abstract or general.
- New knowledge and learning are properly conceived as being located in communities of practice
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by hshort
'the purpose is not to learn from talk as a substitute for legitimate peripheral participation; it is to learn to talk as a key to legitimate peripheral participation'. This orientation has the definite advantage of drawing attention to the need to understand knowledge and learning in context. However, situated learning depends on two claims:
- It makes no sense to talk of knowledge that is decontextualized, abstract or general.
- New knowledge and learning are properly conceived as being located in communities of practice (Tennant 1997: 77).
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by sandygautam
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by sandygautam
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by rogerchaz
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by hshort
Conclusion - issues and implications for educators
The notion of community of practice and the broader conceptualization of situated learning provides significant pointers for practice
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by youenn
Learning is in the relationships between people. As McDermott (in Murphy 1999:17) puts it:
Learning traditionally gets measured as on the assumption that
it is a possession of individuals that can be found inside their heads… [Here]
learning is in the relationships between people. Learning is in the conditions
that bring people together and organize a point of contact that allows for
particular pieces of information to take on a relevance; without the points of
contact, without the system of relevancies, there is not learning, and there is
little memory. Learning does not belong to individual persons, but to the
various conversations of which they are a part.
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by youenn
Highlighted by lmilne
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by sandygautam
Highlighted by lindseybp
Highlighted by lmilne
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by lmilne
Highlighted by klefstadj
Highlighted by hshort
Highlighted by hshort


Public Comment