Information Technology Reference
In-Depth Information
•
Emphasize outcomes about increased pro-
Several technology-based tools have been used
to foster CoPs for TLs. Web 2.0 offers a variety
of social networking tools to communicate and
share documents; blogs, wikis, and social book-
marking provide asynchronous venues. Real-time
online chat (e.g., http://www.tappedin.org), offers
a way to provide guided group discussion; the
chat is recorded and archived, and virtual offices
store group documents. Virtual reality environ-
ments, such as Second Life, enable participants
to synchronously chat and speak using avatars to
represent themselves; documents may be stored
in these environments. However, these virtual
venues require current hardware and significant
training time.
Longer-term CoPs sometimes use online
course management systems (CMS) to provide
a single-entry system that incorporates synchro-
nous and asynchronous communication as well
as archived documents. Both professional and
higher education entities use this technology to
facilitate threaded discussion and a federated
building of knowledge. However, CMSs can be
more complicated than participants want or need,
and they are usually more costly or require ad-
ditional technology expertise if they use an Open
Source model.
Video conferencing (VC) as a collaborative
tool for communities of practice provides a way
to address some of the limitations of virtual
communities. Using cameras, microphones, net-
work connection and supporting hardware (e.g.,
a video conferencing terminal that includes a
codec (“COmpressor/DECompressor”) and a
user interface) two or more parties can see and
hear each other in real time. Current technologies
make it possible for people to conference from
their computer work stations for free with very
little technical set-up. The Video Network Initia-
tive gives good technical guidelines (http://www.
vide.net/cookbook/). Video conferencing has been
used by businesses for over two decades, mainly
because its characteristics resemble a face-to-face
experience more closely than other technologies.
fessional and student learning.
Base actions on group needs.
•
•
Cite research and literature that demon-
strate the impact of CoPs.
Select a reputable
•
CoP leader and group
facilitator.
Develop an atmosphere of openness, re-
•
spect, responsiveness, safety and trust.
Design activities and recognitions that
•
demonstrate the value of all participants;
make CoP membership prestigious and
powerful.
Incorporate social opportunities in an in-
•
vigorating environment.
CoPs also try to be sustainable, outlasting a
single-goal task force mentality. For CoPs to be
effective, there needs to be anticipated reciprocity
(give-and-take of knowledge), increased recogni-
tion, and a sense of efficacy (Smith & Kollock,
1999). The group needs to develop a sense of
trust and commitment that transcends possible
conflicts, gain support from decision-makers, have
sufficient resources to accomplish objectives, and
experience public recognition.
incorporating technology
Increasingly, virtual communities of practice are
being used to complement, supplement or replace
face-to-face communities for several reasons: to
overcome transportation and geographic problems,
to provide a mechanism to communicate more
often, to archive interactions and documents cre-
ated by individuals and groups, to provide timely
feedback, and to keep members active and engaged
(Rheingold, 2000). However, virtual CoPs have
disadvantages: sense of isolation, possibly less
commitment and accountability, lack of nuanced
communication cues (e.g., body language, tone),
less spontaneity, technical limitations (e.g., cost
of equipment, software, difficulty of learning the
technology) (Lynch, 2002).
Search WWH ::
Custom Search