MDDE613+Unit+4

= Unit 4  =

Hill, L. (2005). Community (of practice). In L. English (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of Adult Education (pp. 122-126). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. detailed reading and analysis with notes Key concepts:
 * be able to define practice and community of practice;
 * understand what is not a practice and why;
 * social constructivism;
 * critique of situated cognition;
 * risks of linking education to economic development

Community of Practice (link)
 * Communities of practice are formed by people who engage in a process of collective learning in a shared domain of human endeavour:
 * a tribe learning to survive, a band of artists seeking new forms of expression, a group of engineers working on similar problems, a clique of pupils defining their identity in the school, a network of surgeons exploring novel techniques, a gathering of first-time managers helping each other cope
 * Communities of practice are groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly.
 * sociocultural process by which newcomers learn to become full participants of communities engaged in expressing knowledge in practice and in which established members share knowledge while also gaining from new perspectives to deepen their expertise.
 * Practice: the activities involved in accomplishing work
 * Note that this definition allows for, but does not assume, intentionality: learning can be the reason the community comes together or an incidental outcome of member's interactions. Not everything called a community is a community of practice. A neighbourhood for instance, is often called a community, but is usually not a community of practice.
 * Three characteristics are crucial:
 * The domain
 * A community of practice is not merely 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. (You could belong to the same network as someone and never know it.)
 * The domain is not necessarily something recognized as "expertise" outside the community. A youth gang may have developed all sorts of ways of dealing with their domain: surviving on the street and maintaining some kind of identity they can live with. They value their collective competence and learn from each other, even though few people outside the group may value or even recognize their expertise.
 * 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. A website in itself is not a community of practice. Having the same job or the same title does not make for a community of practice unless members interact and learn together. The claims processors in a large insurance company or students in American high schools may have much in common, yet unless they interact and learn together, they do not form a community of practice.
 * But members of a community of practice do not necessarily work together on a daily basis. The Impressionists, for instance, used to meet in cafes and studios to discuss the style of painting they were inventing together. These interactions were essential to making them a community of practice even though they often painted alone.
 * The practice:
 * A community of practice is not merely a community of interest--people who like certain kinds of movies, for instance. 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.
 * A good conversation with a stranger on an airplane may give you all sorts of interesting insights, but it does not in itself make for a community of practice.
 * The development of a shared practice may be more or less self-conscious. The "windshield wipers" engineers at an auto manufacturer make a concerted effort to collect and document the tricks and lessons they have learned into a knowledge base. By contrast, nurses who meet regularly for lunch in a hospital cafeteria may not realize that their lunch discussions are one of their main sources of knowledge about how to care for patients. Still, in the course of all these conversations, they have developed a set of stories and cases that have become a shared repertoire for their practice.

Communities of practice
 * exist to answer questions that arise in practice and hence need to make use of productive inquiry,
 * generate knowledge that supports practice by using both internal and external information and through the contributions of its members create new knowledge methods, practices, or products within the community's domain of their practice,
 * self-organize to meet a shared purpose and develop norms for self-governance,
 * assume accountability for supporting each other,
 * develop channels of regular communication,
 * collaborate along multiple channels of communication, both through face-to-face interaction and technological mediation.

What is not a Community of Practice? > or having irregular consultations with other members of the profession to solve practice problems, do not constitute the dense network of interpersonal communications required to maintain community and engage in the complex, collective process of negotiation involved in creating meaning and pursuing work to be completed.)
 * It is tempting to consider a profession, or even a professional specialization, as a community of practice. However, members may only solve similar problems in parallel but not in regular communication with each other. (Activities required to maintain licensure such as attending conferences, reading professional journals,

Problems with trying to leverage a COP for business success
 * the informal nature of communities of practice makes them resistant to management, supervision, or interference.
 * Because of their closed nature, communities of practice may be resistant to changes imposed from without, which can be counterproductive if they perpetuate practices that compromise safety or circumvent the law.
 * For example, Gherardi and Nicolini (2000) describe construction workers who learned to organize the exterior of their work sites to manipulate the inspectors' attention so that the work site was not selected for inspection and fines; however, once inside the site the scaffolding or electrical wiring may not be up to standard.
 * They comment that repeated warnings and insistence on compliance will be ineffective; rather people may simply find more creative ways to avoid compliance. Instead, collective and participatory action both perpetuate the knowledge of the community of practice and allow for change.
 * Another consequence of the closed nature of communities of practice is that they may
 * stifle the introduction of new knowledge,
 * claim to have the right to ownership of knowledge, and
 * practice exclusion of certain people and therefore reproduce discrimination of minorities.
 * Practice knowledge is thought to be the product of communities of practice, and therefore business interests in the topic can also be related to social capital theory; Saint-Onge and Wallace (2003) go so far as to refer to **knowledge capital as if knowledge can exist outside or without knowers**. Linking education with economic growth and the global economy risks equating human knowledge and productivity as a **commodity** to be managed for the benefit of business, rather than for human benefit. (Critically reflective adult education practice challenges economic and international modernization because of the resulting cultural homogenization, environmental destruction and displacement of people, most often minorities, for the benefit of business.)

Social Constructivism (social theory of learning) > a mutual social identity
 * learning and knowledge are understood to be cultural and social phenomena created in relationship with others within a social context
 * Knowledge construction is a social process that occurs when people congregate for a joint purpose whether that occurs in a kitchen, community meeting, work setting, or other places where people purposefully gather
 * knowing primarily requires the active participation of people in practice in a social-historical context
 * Learning doesn't merely produce people who know about or know how; people learning to become community members also learn to be in the sense of creating

The concept of communities of practice is related to
 * adult learning theories of experiential learning
 * the role of experience is central to adult learning theory, and
 * a basic principle of classroom practice is the recognition of the life experience that participants bring to new learning situations.
 * situated cognition
 * the social context is inextricable from learning, meaning that learning is a social activity tied to the life experiences, interactions, and activities of people.
 * Learning and knowledge are socially constructed and structured by the setting, the tools used by learners, the interactions among learners, and their social context

Critique of Situated Cognition
 * Gustaysson (1997) cautions that while situated learning theory offers the potential for gaining new understandings of the theory/practice relationship, **learning tied to the personal and the process of doing is insufficient by itself**.
 * In a multicultural, global society we need a learning process in which we can distance ourselves from our everyday patterns and self-evident interpretations and reach beyond our immediate social group.

Hirschhorn, L., Gilmore, T., & Newell, T. (1989). Training and learning in a post-industrial world. In H. Leymann & H. Kornbluh (Eds.), Socialization and learning at work (pp. 185-200). Ashgate Publishing.

read for meaning (although you HR folks out there might want a detailed reading) Key concepts:
 * difference between training and learning;
 * critique of training;
 * the role system of training;
 * critiques of this system

When, for example,
 * managers devalue workers by giving them untimely and poor quality information, workers frequently withdraw into a more narrow definition of their roles.
 * managers cross-train operators on a range of skills, workers come to understand the priorities of other role-holders such as lab-workers and quality control inspectors, who in turn come to appreciate the value that line workers add to production.

Trainers practise their craft in three ways that limit the relevance of training to learning.
 * 1) They typically focus on skills rather than on roles.
 * 2) They do not highlight the natural interdependencies between role holders, and
 * 3) they rigidly separate the training encounter from the learning moments that naturally occur as people solve problems while they are working. They limit learning by encapsulating it.

Problems
 * People experience their work holistically as a set of interrelated situations embedded in a role and relationship system, not as a set of individual competencies. Thus, by focusing on skills, on individual competencies and deficiencies rather that on holistic situations, trainers can not shape relevant learning experiences for people.
 * When trainers will not or cannot consider the role system as a framework for training, they make training irrelevant. For example, management training presumably helps managers develop new ways of interacting with others, but rarely do managers attend a training session with others from their work group. Upon returning to work, participants find that their colleagues, supervisors and subordinates neither appreciate now understand what they have learned.
 * By encapsulating training and by separating the training encounter from the natural world, trainers make it difficult for workers and managers to apply their new knowledge to their work. Training may not 'take' even if several managers from the same unit attend, because the training culture does not address how those with training experience and those without it might learn from one another.

Learning vs training
 * Learning moments rarely coincide with training moments.

Wenger, E. (1998). Introduction: A social theory of learning. In E. Wenger, Communities of practice: Learning, meaning and identity (pp. 3-17). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press read for meaning Key concepts:
 * components of the social theory of learning;
 * role of communication/dialogue in social learning;
 * relationship of social theory of learning to community of practice;
 * implications of social theory of learning;
 * theories which inform social theory of learning

Wenger's sssumptions as to what matters about learning and as to the nature of knowledge, knowing, and knowers can be succinctly summarized as follows with four premises:
 * We are social beings is far from being trivially true, this fact is a central aspect of learning
 * Knowledge is a matter of competence with respect to valued enterprises — such as singing in tune, discovering scientific facts, fixing machines, writing poetry, being convivial, growing up as a boy or a girl, and so forth.
 * Knowing is a matter of **participating** in the pursuit of such enterprises, that is, of active engagement in the world.
 * Meaning — our ability to experience the world and our engagement with it as meaningful — is ultimately what learning is to produce.


 * Participation**
 * Refers not just to local events of engagement in certain activities with certain people, but to a more encompassing process of being active participants in the //practices// of social communities and constructing //identities// in relation to these communities. (Participating in a playground clique or in a work team, for instance, is both a kind of action and a form of belonging.)
 * Such participation shapes not only what we do, but also who we are and how we interpret what we do.
 * A social theory of learning must therefore integrate the components necessary to characterize social participation as a process of learning and of knowing.


 * Components of Social Learning Theory**


 * 1) Meaning: a way of talking about our (changing) ability—individually and collectively— to experience our life and the world as meaningful.
 * 2) Practice: a way of talking about the shared historical and social resources, frameworks, and perspectives that can sustain mutual engagement in action.
 * “a materially mediated nexus of activity where understanding and intelligibility are ordered, a central phenomenon of human/nonhuman life,” Schatzki's definition. This definition highlights the essential component of practice; the duality between //reification// (’materialization’ in Schatzki’s definition) and //participation// (which Schatzki describes as ‘activity’), to instigating //negotiation of meaning// (which Schatzki denotes an outcome, being ‘ordering of understanding and intelligibility’).
 * nexus: a means of connection between members of a group or things in a series; link; bond
 * reification : viewing of the abstract as concrete.
 * 1) Community: a way of talking about the social configurations in which our enterprises are defined as worth pursuing and our participation is recognizable as competence.
 * 2) Identity: a way of talking about how learning changes who we are and creates personal histories of becoming in the context of our communities.

Placing the focus on participation has broad implications for what it takes to understand and support learning:
 * For //individuals//, learning is an issue of engaging in and contributing to the practices of their communities.
 * For //communities//, learning is an issue of refining their practice and ensuring new generations of members.
 * For //organizations//, learning is an issue of sustaining the interconnected communities of practice through which an organization knows what it knows and thus becomes effective and valuable as an organization.

Our perspectives on learning matter: what we think about learning influences where we recognize learning, as well as what we do when we decide that we must do something about it – as individuals, as communities, and as organizations.


 * A perspective is not a recipe; it does not tell you just what to do. Rather, it acts as a guide about what to pay attention to, what difficulties to expect, and how to approach problems.**


 * We must also remember that our __ are designs and that our designs are hostage to our understanding, perspectives, and theories. In this sense, our theories are very practical because they frame not just the ways we act, but also—and perhaps most importantly when design involves social systems—the ways we justify our actions to ourselves and to each other. **

Social Theory
 * A somewhat ill-defined field of conceptual inquiry at the intersection of philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities' In this context,
 * social theory of learning is located at the intersection of intellectual traditions along two main axes,


 * In the tradition of social theory, the vertical axis is a central one. It reflects a tension between theories that give primacy to social structure and those that give primacy to action. A large body of work deals with clashes between these perspectives and attempts to bring them together.
 * Theories of s**ocial structure** give primacy mostly to institutions, norms, and rules.
 * They emphasize cultural systems, discourses, and history.
 * They seek underlying explanatory structures that account for social patterns and tend to view action as a mere realization of these structures in specific circumstances.
 * The most extreme of them deny agency or knowledgeability to individual actors.


 * Theories of **situated experience** give primacy to the dynamics of everyday existence, improvisation, coordination, and interactional choreography.
 * They emphasize agency and intentions.
 * They mostly address the interactive relations of people with their environment.
 * They focus on the experience and the local construction of individual or interpersonal events such as activities and conversations.
 * The most extreme of them ignore structure writ large altogether.
 * Learning as **participation** is certainly caught in the middle.
 * It takes place through our engagement in actions and interactions, but it embeds this engagement in culture and history. Through these local actions and interactions, learning reproduces and transforms the social structure in which it takes place.
 * **Practice** and **identity** constitute forms of social and historical continuity and discontinuity that are neither as broad as sociohistorical structure on a grand scale nor as fleeting as the experience, action, and interaction of the moment.
 * Theories of **social practice** address the production and reproduction of specific ways of engaging with the world. They are concerned with everyday activity and real-life settings, but with an emphasis on the social systems of shared resources by which groups organize and coordinate their activities, mutual relationships, and interpretations of the world.
 * Theories of **identity** are concerned with the social formation of the person, the cultural interpretation of the body, and the creation and use of markers of membership such as rites of passage and social categories. They address issues of gender, class, ethnicity, age, and other forms of categorization, association, and differentiation in an attempt to understand the person as formed through complex relations of mutual constitution between individuals and groups.



Wilson, A. (2005). Activity theory. In L. English (Ed.,) International Encyclopedia of Adult Education (pp. 25-30). New York: Palgrave Macmillan detailed reading and analysis with notes

Key concepts:
 * activity theory/situated cognition;
 * social, cultural, communicative factors in activity theory;
 * critique of individual learning and development model (i.e. the humanistic paradigm);
 * Fenwick's critique

Cognition
 * the mental act or process by which knowledge is acquired, including perception, intuition, and reasoning

Activity theory (in USA aka situated cognition)
 * defines human learning and cognition as communicative social processes rather than psychological mental activities.
 * learning and cognition requires understanding how their social, tool-dependent, and experiential nature shapes their construction in and through the everyday activities of real people acting in the real world: "cognition observed in everyday practice is distributed - stretched over, not divided among - mind, body, activity and culturally organized settings (which include other actors)"
 * Learning and cognition are **social** because they are produced by and through communicative processes as people interact with each other in specific communities (which have histories, rules and social patterns, norms and assumptions shaping communication); they are not individual mental activities "inside the head."
 * Learning and cognition are **tool-dependent** in that people acting in communities typically act/interact with culturally defined social and material mechanisms that both aid and structure cognition (things such as tools, technology, language). [it is ‘tool dependent’ because the setting provides mechanisms (computers, maps, measuring cups) that aid, and more important, structure the cognitive process]
 * Learning and cognition are **experiential** in that adults act in, interact with, and act on context itself (in terms of producing, reproducing, or altering purposes, norms, and specific activities).
 * knowledge emerges as a result of these elements interacting, and thus, knowing is interminably inventive and entwined with doing
 * Learning and cognition are therefore processes of **enculturation** in authentic situated social practices, not matters of knowledge acquisition and internalized mental processes.

(For a quick/good summary of the differences between: Activity Theory, Situated Cognition, Distributed Cognition see this wiki.)

Differences
 * American interpretations have come to focus on questions of learning and education
 * European tradition has continued to focus on the analysis of cognition to understand how thought, meaning, communication, and activity are socially constructed and interpreted

Guile, D., & Young, M. (1998). Apprenticeship as a conceptual basis for a social theory of learning. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 50(2), 173-192. read for meaning Key concepts:
 * traditional conceptions of learning in the apprenticeship model;
 * zone of proximal development;
 * ZPD in the apprenticeship model;
 * a societal perspective of ZPD

The traditional concept of apprenticeship involves four main elements
 * 1) the apprentice as learner,
 * 2) the idea of trade or craft knowledge as fixed and unproblematic,
 * 3) the master as teacher
 * 4) and the idea that learning in workplaces is a form of context-bound understanding not conducive to transfer

Apprenticeships
 * portrayed as lacking an explicit theory of instruction and not dependent upon formal teaching.
 * Some see learning is seen as a natural process that occurs via observation, assimilation and emulation which happens over time without any substantial intervention from more experienced others. (classic cognitive psychology/anthropology of education)
 * Others have identified models of apprenticeship that embrace formal and informal learning within structured on- and off the job training provided by employers
 * Mainly, apprentices and employers are concerned with the implicit rather than the explicit dimensions of learning.

Apprenticeships and Theory of Learning
 * The focus on apprenticeship in developing a theory of learning, directs us away from the idea of //learning as transmission// towards //learning as a process// in which the apprentice is involved in 'learning by doing' with the 'master' as the major role model.
 * The idea of apprenticeship creates the overriding impression that expertise is developed through the gradual accumulation of experience under the guidance of an established master.
 * Theories of learning not only need to take account of differences in the degree of expertise needed within specific occupations, but also in differences in the content and quality of such expertise
 * collaborative practices mediate opportunities for learning and thus there is the need for further analysis of the complex interrelationship between cognition and context, and a review of the model of learning associated with traditional apprenticeships.

Newer Studies Highlight Weakness in the Traditional Concept of Apprenticeship
 * 1) they stress the importance of how knowledge is socially constructed and how the new apprentice becomes part of a work-based 'community of practice' (Lave & Wenger, 1991).
 * 2) they emphasize learning as a process of 'boundary crossing' mediated by access to different 'communities of practice' (Lave, 1993; Engestrom et al, 1995).
 * 3) they show how learners increasingly need to relate scientific and everyday concepts in making sense of workplace practices or problems (Gott, 1995).
 * 4) they point to how resources external to 'communities of practice' maybe needed to overcome internal contradictions (Engestrom et al, 1997).
 * 5) they indicate how 'learning' technologies can be seen as 'resources' for learning and that to do so involves rethinking some of our assumptions about intelligence, learning and workplace activity (Tikhomirov, 1981; Pea, 1993).

Zone of proximal development is central to Vygotsky's theory
 * it has been modified and developed by Cole in the USA and given a broader interpretation within `activity theory'
 * in the soviet tradition of psychology by Leontiev via his notion of 'cultural practices'

'zone of proximal development' Scaffolding/modelling/fading
 * the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more able peers.
 * to help children to participate in activities slightly beyond their current competence

Versions of Zone of proximal developmen Rogoff Davydov Cole
 * 'zone' is a dynamic region of sensitivity to learning the skills of a culture in which children develop through 'guided participation' in problem solving with more experienced members of the culture
 * Rogoff was therefore able to extend Vygotsky's focus on the basic teacher/student relationship and include the interrelations between children, their caregivers and other companions. She was thus able to understand how children learn to participate in the skilled activities of a culture.
 * 'zone' refers to a 'cultural region' where children close the distance between the extent of known scientific knowledge and their articular knowledge
 * One consequence of this insight has been that Brown & Collins and their colleagues have been able to show that formal learning can be enhanced if the skills and knowledge that students learn are embedded in a social and functional context. They proposed students should be given ill-defined tasks and real-world problems in order to explicitly enculturate them into the ways of knowing, the cultural practices and the belief systems of the school subject in question
 * broadened the use of the concept by suggesting that culture and cognition create each other within the 'zone' via a dynamic interrelationship between people and social worlds as expressed through language, art and understanding.
 * Cole laid the conceptual foundations for the concept to be applied to human development in general, rather than being restricted to analysis of child development

The Zone of Proximal Development and Apprenticeship
 * a reconceptualization of apprenticeship could be the basis for a social theory of learning was that it provides an approach that does not rely on behaviourist and individualist assumptions about the learner or on a transmission model of teaching.
 * Lave built upon Cole's original argument that culture and cognition create each other within the 'zone of proximal development'.
 * Lave concept of apprenticeship emphasises the dynamic interrelationship between social, cultural, technological and linguistic practices.
 * Lave identifies how such practices afford individuals and groups opportunities to learn, over a period of time--in this way she highlights the collective nature of learning

Studies revealed how apprentices generate new knowledge, an outcome that has previously been assumed to be only associated with formal learning. Despite this recognition, these studies still retain a conception of the `zone of proximal development' that sees apprentices as largely learning from experts. This has a number of implications.
 * 1) it continues to limit the focus to an individualistic approach to learning at the expense of acknowledging the importance of the social and cultural processes that shape learning (Guile & Young, 1996).
 * 2) it fails to differentiate between the 'official' conceptions of knowledge offered to apprentices within their formal training programmes and apprentices' own skills of acquiring, within a community of practice, the forms of tacit knowledge relevant to their emerging job-related needs (Orr 1990, Ghererdi et al 1997).
 * 3) it maintains a focus upon learning existing work practices and skills, rather than pointing to how new forms of capability needed by many forms of advanced production can be encouraged (Prospect Centre 1991).
 * 4) these studies assume, by implication, that the traditional features of apprenticeship as a learning context - for example, strong hierarchical divisions of labour, an emphasis on task-specific skills and the close proximity of craft or professional 'experts' will remain constant. On the other hand, there is growing evidence that as the organisation of work changes 191, demands for more generic problem solving abilities and of greater levels of collaboration and devolved responsibility are emerging. These changes clearly emphasise the need for an approach to learning that links the way employee identities are formed to the increasingly collective character of work and supports a greater emphasis on self-reliance so that learners are able to cope with the changes in work that are taking place.

One consequence is likely to be a shift from understanding apprenticeship as a 'social institution' inextricably bound up with traditional craft activities and technical skills, to seeing it as a basis for conceptualizing the process of learning that is more broadly applicable to a variety of modern work contexts.

In contrast to the more normative interpretations of the zone of proximal development referred to earlier, the 'societal' perspective highlights the historical and social dimensions of learning.
 * 1) it directs attention to the distance between individuals' everyday activities and the historically new forms of social practice that need to be collectively generated as solutions to everyday problems.
 * 2) it identifies learning as a social process and acknowledges the contribution that technological and other external 'resources' can make in support of such learning processes.


 * The Zone of Proximal Development: a societal perspective**
 * Lave & Wenger identify what they define as a 'societal' perspective on 'zones of proximal development':
 * we place more emphasis upon connecting issues of //sociocultural transformation// with the changing relations between //newcomers// and //old-timers// in the context of a changing shared practice.
 * The define learning in terms of participation (since it) focuses attention on ways in which it is an evolving, continuously renewed set of relations. (learning = increasing participation). Learning becomes a matter of developing social relationships and hence identities within different 'communities of practice'.
 * They define intelligence as a distributed process rather than as an attribute of individuals.
 * They suggests that 'zones of proximal development' are populated by resources such as physical and cultural tools, and other people, and that these resources are used, or come together to be used to shape and direct human activity.
 * It follows that, from their perspective, intelligence and expertise are acquired through a process of accomplishment, rather than being a matter of self-possession.
 * They define 'knowledgeability' as the combination of knowledge and skill required to successfully operate within a `community of practice'.
 * They do not deny that individuals develop particular forms of knowledgeability' (i.e. forms of knowledge and skill). However, Lave & Wenger, emphasize the collective basis though which individuals develop a social identity, learn new forms of social practice, and become `knowledgeable'.

Lave & Wenger's `societal' conception of the zone of proximal development introduces a radically different approach to three issues that are central to any understanding of learning in modern societies.
 * 1) they emphasize that activity, meaning, cognition, learning and knowing must be seen in relation to each other (Lave, 1991).
 * 2) they indicate the importance of studying how people develop their social identities through participation within different 'communities' and in more than one 'community'.
 * 3) they highlight the importance of examining how individuals maintain their identities and sense of meaning while moving across organizational and cultural boundaries.

Lave & Wenger's approach highlights how providing an extended range of opportunities in workplaces can enhance personal and group learning and encourage students to try out ideas learned in school or college. It follows that increasing access and participation, within and between different `communities of practice' will increase individual and collective 'knowledgeability'.


 * The Zone of Proximal Development: a transformatory perspective**


 * Engestrom elaborates the idea that 'zones of proximal development' are collective and can be the basis for the transformation of contexts, cognition and practice
 * Engestrom concentrates upon identifying how collaborative activity is needed to reconfigure workplace activity and knowledge
 * He recognizes that many existing approaches to learning assume that it involves the circulation of existing knowledge rather than the production of knowledgeability' (combination of knowledge and skill required to successfully operate within a `community of practice').

Hall, B. (2006). Social movement learning: Theorizing a Canadian tradition. In T. Fenwick, T. Nesbit, & B. Spencer (Eds.), Contexts of adult education: Canadian perspectives (pp. 230-238). Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishers. read for meaning

Key concepts:
 * definition of social movement learning;
 * cognitive practice

Hall claims that it is precisely
 * the //learning// and //knowledge-generating capacities// of social movements that account for much of the power claimed by these movements, and
 * thus we must deepen our understanding of learning within the contexts of social movement.

Social movement learning refers to
 * learning by persons who are part of any social movement and
 * learning by persons outside of a social movement as a result of the actions taken or simply by the existence of social movements. Learning by persons who are part of a social movement often takes place in informal or incidental ways because of the stimulation and requirements of participation in a movement.

Problem,
 * There is an absence of specific references to learning or education in the social movement literature.

Cognitive Praxis
 * Eyerman and Jamison (1991) were unique among social movement scholars in their recognition of the creative and central role of learning processes in what they called //cognitive praxis//.
 * Eyerman and Jamison stated, "There is something fundamental missing from the sociology of social movements"
 * North American social movement theory, they suggested, focuses on //what movements do// and //how they do it// and **but not on what their members think**. Knowledge is seen to be largely outside the sociologist's areas of competence, according to Eyerman and Jamison.
 * They proposed that it is 'through tensions between different groups and organizations over defining and acting in that conceptual space that the (temporary) identity of a social movement is formed" (p. 22).
 * Through the notion of cognitive praxis, they emphasized the creative role of consciousness and cognition on all human action, individual and collective.
 * They focused simultaneously on the process of articulating a movement identity (cognitive praxis),
 * They focused on the actors taking part in this process (movement intellectuals),
 * They focused on the context of articulation (politics, cultures, and institutions).
 * What comes out of social movement action is neither predetermined nor completely self-willed; its meaning is derived from the context in which it is carried out and the understanding that actors bring to it and/or derive from it.

Welton, M. (2005). How business organizations learn and unlearn, p. 72-79. Inhibited learning in business organizations, p. 100-126. Ethics and empowerment in business organizations, p. 127-149. In M. Welton, Designing the just learning society: A critical inquiry. Leicester: NIACE.

Welton readings: read summaries in Conference 3E, then do your own detailed reading and analysis Ch 4 (72-29) Key concepts: define Taylorism and scientific mgmt; effect on worker knowledge and conceptions of workplace learning

Ch 5 Key concepts: defencive routines in organizations; inhibitors to learning in orgs. you may also want to do a quick review of the Habermas article posted in Announcements. Think especially of how silence inhibits lifeworld and supports colonization

Ch 6 Key concepts: difference between power and communicative power; types of power; empowerment in organizations; micro-emancipation

..