Suchergebnisse

One way of studying group involvement is through the paradigm of communities of practice (CofP) (Lave 1988, Lave & Wenger 1991). Students on university campuses are simultaneously members of various CofPs. This article investigates the CofPs Japanese students were involved in while studying in the United States. It found that the whole notion of CofP involvement is framed (Bateson 1972; Tannen & Wallet 1993) differently by Japanese. Specifically, the Japanese frame for attendance obligations and appropriate behavior is tighter (Goffman 1963) than that of their American counterparts. The results of this study suggest that what constitutes good demeanor is different in both societies and highlights the cultural relativity of frames regarding community of practice involvement. (community of practice, frame, obligations, expectations, deference, demeanor, tightness, looseness, giri, ninjo,omote, soto, uchi, ura).

Raffo and Gunter (20087) argue that there is insufficient research which has "systematically examined, categorised and synthesised the types of leadership in schools that might assist social inclusion" (p. 397). In this paper I argue that Wenger's concept of a "community of practice", when applied to the parent-teacher relationship, provides a framework for future qualitative research agendas which explore "how social inclusion/exclusion can be defined in terms of access, recognition and meaningful participation issues ('equity')" (Raffo and Gunter, p.397).

This article explores cultural change and situated approaches to learning as a basis for understanding developments in the daily life of the probation organization. These are highlighted in the concept of 'communities of practice' that describes learning in the everyday activities of practitioners' work. It is argued that the future can be changed by greater attention to context specific knowledge-in-use through practitioner research.

AbstractThis chapter offers reflection and recommendations for advancing leadership education as a community of practice through the lenses of identity, agency, and responsibility.

AbstractThis chapter explores the contexts and systems through which leadership educators organize, engage with one another, and the outputs they produce, as well as contemplate the complex pathways of membership within our field through the lens of communities of practice.

Higher education lecturers are currently overwhelmed with the idea of changing from the old paradigm, in which teaching and learning happened through a teacher-centred perspective, to a student centred approach, currently a more widely accepted new teaching standpoint, which lecturers are eager to transform into a vivid and motivating experience, by exploring various alternatives. The pressure to do so while resorting to several technological tools is enormous. The use of technological tools available to every student, namely smartphones, social networks, new platforms and other devices do not suffice anymore. Teachers and lecturers seek to go beyond the obvious tools and search for a way to combine these technologies and the new pedagogical approach in order to provide a more profound meaning to the teaching and learning process. AduLeT – Advanced Use of Learning Technologies in higher education – is a European project involving seven different institutions, which aims at improving the teaching quality of lecturers by enhancing their skills concerning the use of technologies in an advanced way, through a Community of Practice (CoP) where methods and tools are intertwined, thus envisaging a common outcome: sharing ready-made solutions which have been tested in a higher education context to solve an educational problem. The aims of this contribution are as follows: 1. to describe the project in the given context; 2. to explain the different stages and methodology towards the design of the CoP; 3. to provide insight about the CoP itself; 4. To clarify how higher education teachers can use the CoP in their daily educational routine. The CoP is made available through a platform, currently correcting some functionalities in the evaluating stage with potential end users, which consists of an application developed with an author programming tool that allows getting flexible, visual, easy and logic navigation and interaction. The platform has been developed to provide users with a valuable experience to facilitate lecturers' understanding and usability. Our experience shows that a CoP could facilitate the adaptation process and allow a faster and more effective transferability of teaching innovations among different countries as well as among lecturers and universities at an international level. Currently the CoP already contains methods from different fields of knowledge and a variety of tools which can allow a lecturer to choose from, in order to include them in their lectures and seminars as to obtain a better interaction from the student's side and also to create a more motivated approach on a daily basis. ; AduLeT has been funded with the support of the European Commission and co-funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

To allow for a more contextualized analysis of social discourse, political discourse in particular, many researchers (e.g., Wodak 1997; Holmes and Meyerhoff 2003; Mills 2005, 2011; van Dijk 2009) suggest the use of the concept of community of practice. It can also be applied to an analysis of politicians' self-presentational styles. Members of different political parties, apart from having different views on relevant social issues and different hierarchies of values, can be easily identified by the way they behave and self-present. Political parties function as their communities of practice which determine practices in which they engage, discursive practices included. The aim of the study is to compare self-presentational styles of members of two Polish leading political parties, the Civic Platform, and the Law and Justice. Due to the specificity of the discourse to be analyzed, two approaches have been employed: Critical Discourse Analysis, and the post-modern/discursive approach to face and (im)politeness. The data used in the study come from TV political interviews.