LITERATURE REVIEW
2.3 UNDERSTANDING COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE
The concept of communities of practice (CoP) has gained popularity in the fields of organizational learning and education (Engeström, 2001; Boud, 1999). Originated by social anthropologists Jean Lave and Etienne Wenger, the concept of CoP was based on the authors attempt to explore learning in light of groups of apprentices and to distinguish the core mechanics of apprenticeship, since both of them felt that there was looseness in how the term apprentice was being used, especially in the discipline of organizational learning (Lave and Wenger, 1991b). In their first work entitled Situated learning:legitimate peripheral participation Lave and Wenger (1991b) report on their study of five groups of apprentices which was comprised of butchers, non-drinking alcoholics, naval quartermasters, tailors and midwives. By exploring the process of learning among these groups, Lave and Wenger (1991b) noted that individuals or apprentices constructed knowledge by socially engaging in likeminded groups.
Noting that learning is a social process and is underpinned by constructivism, these authors formulated their theory of situated learning.
Although the work of Lave and Wenger demonstrated a new understanding of the social learning process, it did not engage with aspects of power, group dynamics and varied identities in the group and how these factors impact on the social learning process (Cox, 2005). Further critiques by Brown and Duguid (1991) suggested that the legitimate process of social learning in a group as presented by Lave andWenger’s Legitimate Peripheral Participation (LPP) theory, which
36 posits that newcomers to the group start at the periphery and migrate to the core in terms of support from the expert core group, did not address issues of how the complete network of apprentices dealt with new knowledge and learning in light of their LPP theory.
2.3.1. CoPs and situated learning as knowledge
Lave and Wenger (1991b) created a unique way of understanding learning that occurred as a social process among their sampled apprenticeship groups. Their learning theory describes how an individual begins learning by first being accepted as a legitimate member in a group, that is devoted to a particular skill, occupation or discipline, and engages at a periphery level with the group activities, and through participation begins to move from the periphery towards the core of the group as skills become more increased and learning is at a expert level within the discipline (Lave and Wenger, 1991b). The assumptions of CoPs and the situated nature of learning is that learning is socially and locally constructed and places the individuals at the centre of the learning process (Cox, 2005; Wenger, 1998). This assumption arose from Lave and Wenger’s (1991b) work of the apprenticeship concept clarification which led to an understanding of a social learning theory through situated learning. The authors concluded from this work that situated learning focuses on comprehensive knowledge construction through engaging with the whole person as opposed knowledge acquisition only. Lave and Wenger purport that knowledge generation is an activity in and with the world and assumes that that the agent, activity and the world mutually constitute each other. They further note that learning and social engagement are intricately intertwined and evolve cyclically as apprentices (or professionals) keep moving from a space of being competent to novice in various areas of their discipline.
37 Drawing from this seminal work, Wenger (1998); and Brown and Duguid (1991) further explored situated learning in the context of organizational learning environments. Wenger (1998:
139) defines CoPs as “groups of people who are informally bound together by shared expertise and passion for a joint enterprise”. According to Wenger (1998); and Duiguid and Brown (1991), CoPs are everywhere by virtue of the fact that individuals work and function with others in some kind of pursuit (be it professional, personal, leisure, active or passive engagement), and that the interaction and exchange between individuals brings about learning.
Wenger et al (2002) explain that CoPs are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning and are groups of people who share a common interest, set or problems or a passion of a topic in an area of expertise. Further reflected in the literature, it is observed that the members of a CoP share a common concern or passion for something that they do and, through their regular interaction, learn how to do it better, as they come together to think about these common issues and explore ideas on how to act on them. They generate new knowledge through reflection within their informal structure to develop social knowledge around their common phenomenon of interest and, it is through this inquiry, dialogue and coming together, that social change and learning takes place (Cox, 2005; Wenger, 1998; Brown and Duguid, 1991).
2.3.2 Social Learning Theory and CoPs.
Drawing from the assumptions of CoPs and situated learning, it is evident that CoPs stems from theories that are based on the idea of learning as a social process and thus have a solid underpinning on social learning theories, specifically to that of Bandura of the late 1970’s (Engeström, 2001; Boud, 1999). In social learning theory, it is premised that people learn by
38 observing others and such observations include modeling the behaviours, attitudes and emotional reactions of others in a given context (Bandura, 1977).
Premised on the cognitive orientation of Piaget (1962) and the behaviorist orientation of Watson and Pavlov, Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory views learning as a process and an outcome, noting that through observation and modeling, which is the process of learning, a change in behaviour is observed. He adds, furthermore, that in order to make the statement that learning has taken place, an individual’s experience needed to be used in the process of learning (Heeter, 2005). Thus, conditioning of behaviour, which occurs as a result of modeling, is the outcome of the individual drawing from both experience and the observed behaviour, attitudes or emotional reactions of others (Bandura, 1977). Bandura believed that most human behaviour is learned through modeling and that ideas of new behaviours are formed and performed at a later occasion through information learnt from observations (Merriam, 2004; Bandura, 1977). Bandura’s work, which integrated the behaviourist and cognitive assumptions of learning, constructed learning as reciprocal and continuous interaction between behavioural, cognitive and environmental influences (Merriam, 2004).
Säljö (1979), cited in Ramsdeen, (1992), perceives learning as a social construct to make sense of the world, which involves blending new insights gained from observation, cognitive processes and behaviourial change. Supporting this, Bandura notes that learning is about interpreting and understanding reality in different ways and involves comprehending new experiences by reinterpreting knowledge (Merriam, 2004; Bandura, 1977). Bandura (1977) explained that attention, retention, reproduction and motivation are necessary conditions for effective modeling. With regard to attention, Bandura notes that various environmental and cognitive
39 factors affects the amount of attention paid and that characteristics such as arousal to the learning event, sensory capacities and past reinforcements to a similar learning experience affects the attention. In terms of retention, Bandura speaks of symbolic images, motor or symbolic rehearsal as characteristics which influence the individual’s learning. He describes reproduction as the physical capabilities of reproducing the observed behaviour and, lastly, explains that motivation is the reasons why certain observed behaviours are imitatated, and these include reinforcing a successful practice or learning to rectify a previous error (Bandura, 1977).
Similar to the social learning theory of Bandura (1977), Lave and Wenger (1991b; Lave and Wenger, 1991a) have developed the situated learning of legitimate peripheral participation, which argues that learning is deeply interconnected with being with others and mutually defining in terms of meaning, practice, community and identity. According to these authors, learning can be central or peripheral, but always remains a process within which new members of a group learn through observation from others. The situated nature of legitimate peripheral participation reiterates that learning is a social, rather than a psychological, process (Brown and Duguid, 1991;
1991b).
2.3.3 CoPs and group knowledge creation in nursing
Nurses are currently challenged with a changing environment of clinical practice as a result of clinical workloads and changes in treatment and care policies. Seaton and Sobeck (2007) stated that changes and disparities in the health care profession mean that innovative measures need to be fostered to enhance sustained workplace learning. These authors maintained that a CoP among nurses is especially useful in promoting workplace learning, stating that it not only allows individuals to function effectively in their role, without having to have had training on that
40 component (fosters experience learning), but also facilitates newcomers facing similar clinical or work challenges in the organisation to participate in the community. Wenger (1998) supports this, suggesting that members of a CoP develop an ongoing “story”, in which the community is always developing and evolving as the members have an interest in the shared practice of others, thus continuing after their specific need or problem is resolved. Scott (2008) and Ousey and Gallagher (2007) believe that those who function in the context of improved health care outcomes must focus on enhancing group working relationships to succeed in information sharing and knowledge creation. This is supported by Schlager and Fusco (2003), who argue that increased learning which takes place in CoPs is a useful framework which supports new knowledge construction and the transfer of good practice. In relation to adult education, Odara- Hoppers (2002) suggests that CoPs and the situated form of learning do not focus on the transfer of knowledge, but rather on fostering a relationship between knowledge and the knowing process. This is supported by Lave and Wenger (1991a: 175), who stated that “knowledge is not a factual commodity but rather takes on the character of a process of knowing”.
Various researchers have conducted studies on CoPs in the context of nursing, especially among student nurses with the aim of improving the longstanding problem of the theory practice gap (Watson, Marshall and Sexton, 2006; Lamb, 2003; Greenwood, 2000). Findings showed that CoPs were successful in integrating student nurses into their roles as clinicians, as they offered a supported mechanism to build the capacity of the student nurse in applying knowledge to practice (Levett-Jones and Lathlean, 2008; Watson et al., 2006; Kupferman, 2005).
Implementing CoPs in the context of health care, especially among already practicing nurses, is a fairly new concept, only referenced in the 2000s in terms of empirical evidence (Chandler and
41 Fry, 2009; Parboosingh, 2002). Findings of a recent study that was conducted in Scotland among practicing gerontology nurses showed that by establishing a CoP consisting of practicing nurses in gerontology in collaboration with the university academics, it was possible to achieve scholarship and bridge the gap of evidence and practice among the nurses, thus proving that the CoP framework is a useful point of learning among nurses (Tolson, Schofield, Booth et al., 2006). Booth, Tolson and Hotchiss (2007) are of the opinion that the learning framework of CoPs provides a new method of knowledge generation among vocation professions such as nursing, wherein the social nature of learning can be integrated into the practice and professional duties of nursing.