Communities of Practice

Over the past week I’ve been reading numerous texts in order to familiarise myself with various concepts and themes. Despite reading an assortment of articles and chapters on pedagogy and inclusivity, a term that keeps recurring is communities of practice (CoPs), so I thought it might be worthwhile establishing what these are.

Generally, the works of Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner are referenced, and so I’ll begin by summarising their Introduction to communities of practice: a brief overview of the concept and its use (2015). They define it as a group “of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly” (p. 2). Whilst they go on to discuss various types of communities, it is worth observing that learning is a, perhaps the, purpose of their existence, although they go on to add that the learning could be ‘intentional’ or ‘incidental’.

Three characteristics are described as crucial. The first of these is the Domain, which is fulfilled by it being more than simply a network of connections and by having “an identity defined by a shared domain of interest”, with each member being committed to it (p. 2). The authors also state that the domain may not be discerned as ‘expertise’ by those outside the CoP.

The second of these characteristics is Community, which necessitates members to be engaged in “joint activities and discussions”, to assist one another, and share their knowledge (p. 2). It is not essential for members to be collaborating on a frequent basis, and they provide an example from the Impressionists who would often meet in places such as cafés to discuss their ideas, then took shared knowledge back to their studios to practice alone.

The final essential component is Practice, with the members being practitioners themselves, and sharing their practice. The authors state that this comes about through “sustained interaction” over a period of time (p. 2). The sense so far may be that these communities are formally orchestrated, but this is not necessarily the case: a scenario of hospital nurses having lunch together is given, in which their informal discussions become a primary source of knowledge in how to best care for their patients (p. 3). A thought that occurred to me at this point is that these less hierarchical communities may create a greater sense of ownership than one more structured, one that members perhaps need to be invited (or instructed) to join.

The authors believe that we all belong to CoPs in our work, education and/or hobbies, sometimes in multiple ones simultaneously, and that we move through manifold communities over time (p. 4).

Art & Design Pedagogy and Communities of Practice

Chatterjee, Hannan and Thomson (2016, p. 6) posit that learning can be viewed not just as an individual acquiring more knowledge, but rather as an ongoing social activity in which people build understanding by actively engaging with others. Interestingly, referring to Lave and Wenger (1991, cited in Chatterjee, Hannan and Thomson, 2016, p. 6) the idea is introduced of people joining a community “at the periphery and [moving] inwards as they increase in competence”. Drew (2015) sees “full participation” of design students within a CoP as a state moved towards, rather than achieved at the point of entry (p. 97). This comes about “by engaging in ‘legitimate peripheral participation’ which is taking part in the authentic activities of the practice, albeit with guidance, at the edges of the community”.

In their treatise on teaching practices, Orr and Shreeve explore collaborating, in which students and tutors come together in their learning activities (2017, p. 98). They suggest that tutors do not distinguish significant difference between themselves and their students, with both being “on a journey of discovery within the practice”. The context here is one of tutors simultaneously also being practitioners and not perceiving any distinct separation “between their practice and teaching worlds”, with the students seen as being “on the periphery of the community of practice”.

Holland-Gilbert (2019), in her contribution to advancing inclusivity in HE, cites research into Asian women entering higher education that observes them opting for local institutions rather than “more prestigious” ones (pp. 127-8). The motivation given is that they believed forming a CoP was more probable as there would be fewer social/cultural barriers in such a place of study. I wonder if these women would have been familiar with the term ‘communities of practice’, but it seems clear they comprehended the concept and realised its value. Holland-Gilbert goes on to observe that student friendship groups can develop into CoPs (p. 130), so clearly must be of a type that possesses little or no hierarchy. The example given is of participants forming a WhatsApp group: this was initially as a means of disseminating practical information, but developed into an effective support network (pp. 130-131). This puts me in mind of a class of online Pre-sessional English students who took it upon themselves to set up a WeChat group – this network seems to be the default choice for Chinese students – in order to communicate outside of class (and sometimes within class if they experienced connectivity issues on our systems). This not being a UAL platform meant that I would not utilise the app myself, but there seems sufficient anecdotal evidence that it helped establish a class community.

Returning to Drew (2015), a distinction is drawn between student-focused learning and teacher-focused learning (p. 108). The latter prioritises skills development, whereas the former “helps students to develop as individuals” and exhorts students “to learn through authentic practices (real-world projects)”. In so doing, the teacher is “inducting students into the community of practice”. Drew’s research concludes that a skills-based approach is insufficient: instruction that incorporates skills within ‘real-world’ projects aids students in building confidence in these skills, enabling them to construct meaning.

The final point from my reading is perhaps incongruous with this induction to a community of practice: a common viewpoint suggests that getting learners ready for a career as a creative practitioner fundamentally involves preparing them for independent and solitary work (Drew 2015, p. 97). The case of the Impressionists above working solo in their studios, but sharing practice in more social settings, may mitigate this eventuality. Perhaps we should not only be establishing these communities within our student cohorts, but also encouraging their continuation after graduation, likely utilising social networks. I’d rather mix with my peers in a Montmartre café, but ‘Virtual CoPs’ could prove a viable, and valuable, alternative.

1086 words

References

Chatterjee, H, Hannan, L, & Thomson, L. (2016) ‘An Introduction to Object-Based Learning and Multisensory Engagement’, in H. Chatterjee & L. Hannan (eds.) Engaging the Senses: Object-Based Learning in Higher Education, London: Taylor & Francis Group. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. (Accessed: 20 January 2024).

Drew, L. (2015) ‘The Experience of Teaching a Creative Practice: An Exploration of Conceptions and Approaches to Teaching, Linking Variation and the Community of Practice’, in M. Tovey (ed.) Design Pedagogy: Developments in Art and Design Education, Farnham: Taylor & Francis Group. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. (Accessed: 23 January 2024).

Holland-Gilbert, J. (2019) ‘Precariat insurgency: A means to improve structures of inclusivity in higher education’, in K. Hatton (ed.) Inclusion and Intersectionality in Visual Arts Education, London: Institute of Education Press (IOE Press). Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. (Accessed: 11 December 2023).

Orr, S. & Shreeve, A. (2017) Art and Design Pedagogy in Higher Education : Knowledge, Values and Ambiguity in the Creative Curriculum, Milton: Taylor & Francis Group. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. (Accessed: 21 January 2024).

Wenger-Trayner, E. & Wenger-Trayner, B. (2015) An introduction to communities of practice: a brief overview of the concept and its uses. Available at https://www.wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice. (Accessed: 20 January 2024). N.B.: Page numbers refer to the PDF version downloadable from this page.