As stated in the question for this blog 'It is easy to belong to a community on the web' which if you are a regular web user you will understand and probably be part of a community yourself. However to be part of a community of practise a joint enterprise needs to exist within the members of each community.
As stated in the previous blog a joint enterprise is something that is 'understood and continually renegotiated by its members' (http://hannahbellv.blogspot.com/2009/02/communities-of-practice.html) therefore, the members of the community need to have not only a similar interest, but also a goal in mind, they should all want to have something that they all want to achieve.
Take Facebook and this site itself Blogspot, do you think that this is a community of practice? After all we do have similar interest - to provide the members of this community with our information that we want to put on our blogs. However, do we all have a goal that we all want to reach?
You have fan websites that the members of the community all have the same interest in the fact that are a fan of the individual/individuals although again is there a certain goal that they all want to reach? If not, how could they change to allow their community to become a community of practice?
Wenger's model describes that 'A community of practice 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.' Can you think of an online community of practice? In addition, when i discussed in my previous blog about my community of practice, do you think that there can be such a thing of a community if practice when you don't meet face to face?
One example that i can think of is online dating communities. I believe that that is a community of practice because there is a joint enterprise, each member has a similar interest - to find someone to love. (up to negotiation) In addition, there is a mutual engagement because they all engage in talking to each other about their hobbies and their life outside this community and they all discuss this online. Also,the shared repertoire could be that over time the members of the community learn how to communicate on the site and how to interact with the members. Adiitionally, they all have the same goal in mind - to find their loved one. Do you agree?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Yes i agree online cofp do fit in with Wenger's definition, but it raises questions for me about whether the people involved are building up the same relationship online, as people would be offline. Using my example of weightwatchers, would the group get enough support and guidance from their peers as they would from face-to-face contact IRL? Yes it is a cofp, but are they meeting people's needs that a cofp brings them?
ReplyDeletei see what you are asking here and i think you are right. it seems that there are different levels of cofp some that are stronger than others and some kind of pattern i emerging in the fact that maybe online cofp wouldn't be as successful as irl cop's. what you think?
ReplyDeleteI think that cofp online are an advancement of irl, with the advancment of technology. I think it shows socio-determinsim with how the internet is changing to represent the audience needs. It's easier and more convienient for people to meet in communities online in the comfort of their own homes. However, im still not convinced these online communities constitute offline ones because of the lack of interaction that they allow. People aren't understanding each other on a deeper level eg. body language and all other aspects that comes with face-to-face engagement. Therefore, this could limit how 'close' the people in a community online feel!
ReplyDeletei completely agree with what youa re saying and i do agree that online cofp's aren't as good as cofp's irl, and it doesn't neccesarily fulfil the 'togetherness' however does it matter?
ReplyDeletePleased to see this group still interacting so well and you are keeping up your regular and thorough posting Hannah.
ReplyDeleteIt might be best to avoid that route to comparing online/offline CofP though - maybe best to agree they are just different. What seems to be important here is the notion of definition again. It's interesting how often theoretical definitions have come up as problematic in this unit - can you think of any reasons why this might be?
one issue could be the fact that the definition of a cofp does not state that it takes place online or offline. it seems to be a bit broad. therefore for me i feel that i could really apply cofp to things online and offline resulting in the discussion claire and i have had above. Although i think it is good when the definition doesn't state exacty what it is applied to for the reader can then experiment with it and apply to it other things also.
ReplyDelete