I am having a few days off between the last assignment and the full blown end of module assessment. Off in the sense of allowing myself to read some of the pile of literature that i didn't read as part of the lit review and that now seems ever more pertinent. Slightly worried that this will just give me even more far too much material for the EMA but it is a gift to myself to have a few days reading. The works are kind of split into three groups - practical 'typology of a virtual community of practice' type docs, theoretical social learning docs, and organizational understanding collaboration type docs. I like the middle ones best. What this means is that a. i run the risk of my EMA trying to run in three directions simultaneously and going nowhere, b. i run the risk of ending up with too much material and too many ideas, c. if i favour the middle i run the risk of being too airy fairy for this practice oriented project. Wow. Studying is really a risky business.
Anyway, just wanted to note about CoPs, i have this paper by Kimble (2006), a very good critique of the concept showing how it evolved with the evolving historical context. CoPs have been seen as a heuristic device, a theory, and an application in turn. I guess what I am doing is going back to seeing it as a heuristic device, but what i thought i was doing at times was looking at it as an application. Which is why sometimes i end up trying to name the parts as it were "This is the purpose" "This is the community". Using it as a heuristic allows for a more fluid 'becoming' view (Chia, 1995). With thanks to helen for lending me that paper.
random thoughts
I am having a few days off between the last assignment and the full blown end of module assessment. Off in the sense of allowing myself to read some of the pile of literature that i didn't read as part of the lit review and that now seems ever more pertinent. Slightly worried that this will just give me even more far too much material for the EMA but it is a gift to myself to have a few days reading. The works are kind of split into three groups - practical 'typology of a virtual community of practice' type docs, theoretical social learning docs, and organizational understanding collaboration type docs. I like the middle ones best. What this means is that a. i run the risk of my EMA trying to run in three directions simultaneously and going nowhere, b. i run the risk of ending up with too much material and too many ideas, c. if i favour the middle i run the risk of being too airy fairy for this practice oriented project. Wow. Studying is really a risky business.
Anyway, just wanted to note about CoPs, i have this paper by Kimble (2006), a very good critique of the concept showing how it evolved with the evolving historical context. CoPs have been seen as a heuristic device, a theory, and an application in turn. I guess what I am doing is going back to seeing it as a heuristic device, but what i thought i was doing at times was looking at it as an application. Which is why sometimes i end up trying to name the parts as it were "This is the purpose" "This is the community". Using it as a heuristic allows for a more fluid 'becoming' view (Chia, 1995). With thanks to helen for lending me that paper.