Early registration for the Networked Learning Conference 2010, #NLC2010, in Aalborg, Denmark, in May is about to end (early-bird registration ends 26 February). As this conference is already a little pricy (and outright expensive from the US), every little savings helps.

As this conference is subtitled A research-based conference on networked learning in higher education and lifelong learning, I am really looking forward to learning together. It will be great to see some of my colleagues (again) there and getting feedback on my paper, Autoethnographer Communities of Practice, as well!

I am re-reading all of the transcripts of the 8 interviews I conducted for my research project, and am so overwhelmed with the stories that were shared. They are so personal, so strong, and seemingly so full of every element of human experience. In some ways, I feel I am peering into a slice of the lives of a group fascinating people who shared their stories with me for the sake of my research.

I hope I do their works justice in my findings. Perhaps the best justice would be giving somebody else an insight or idea that leads to some other action in service of research, self-knowledge, and advancing the benefits of a networked community?

I am thrilled to share the news that my paper, Autoethnographer Communities of Practice, has just been accepted to present to the 7th International Conference on Networked Learning NLC2010! This conference is at the beginning of May in Aalborg, Denmark. It will be the second time I have presented in Europe, and the first time I am presenting there as the single author / researcher on a paper.

I am really looking forward to finally meeting some of the people whose work has helped my own thinking in the Technology Eenhanced Learning (TEL) / Networked Learning field, including Etienne Wenger (one of the keynotes), David McConnell, and Chris Jones. I am also excited to share some of my research findings about studying those who engage in autoethnography, as this is something that does not seem to be frequently used in the networked learning research community.

I will speak more about this as the conference date approaches. Hope to meet some of the other networked learners I speak to online and have never met F2F.

It is now time for me to begin formulating my reserach idea for my Module 3 research project at Lancaster University. I so appreciate the feedback I received on my previous projects, and hope to receive some of the same support with this project as well.

 I have been thinking a lot about this, though find that I really organize it and learn about it (and myself) when I begin to write it out (cf. Richardson, Writing: A method of inquiry, 2000), as the notion of writing as a form of inquiry is valuable for me. I learn as I write, and then the feedback along the way from my distributed community is invaluable.

To this end, I am beginning to look at the concept of Threshold Concepts and Troublesome Knowledge, as it seems related to the concept of transformational learning (something that I think may be related to autoethnographic inquiry). Lots of relationships here. A lot to process, though I just accessed these two articles and a book section that my faculty tutor suggested I read for some ideas. This is now my reading for the remainder of the week.

Meyer, J. H. F., & Land, R. (2005). Threshold concepts and troublesome knowledge (2): Epistemological considerations and a conceptual framewok for teaching and learning. Higher Education, 49(3), 378-388.

Marshall, J. (1999). Living life as inquiry. Systemic Practice and Action Research, 12(2), 155-171.

Perkins, D. (2008). Beyond understanding. In R. Land, J. H. F. Meyer & J. Smith (Eds.), Threshold concepts within the disciplines. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

I will begin tracking and developing my research idea here, and look forward to some feedback along the way.  Any suggestions to help me process this are most appreciated!

I have spent the past 2 hours catching up with colleagues and (perhaps) soon to be colleagues in the CP2 Community, where there have just been 2 Research and Dissertation Fests this week (one I could attend, and one I could not), as well as on Twitter.

Between reading and chatting on Twitter about Nancy White’s amazing recipe, seeing how other people I know were doing the same, discussing ways of using social media for community building (some direct Tweets I received and replied to about this topic), reading how Lilia Efimova had an idea and how she is considering blogging about this still unformed topic as she knows the benefits (and then she finally did blog about these thoughts), not to mention my chats with Jacquie McDonald, chatting about a research idea around Communities of Practice with Etienne Wenger (who did a discussion and co-facilitated the CP2 Foundations course I recently completed), and getting other ideas from colleagues via Direct Tweets, I realize I have a lot of interests and like reaching out to this distributed community.I also like their reaching out to me.

With all this, I wonder why I struggle with consciously enlarging my own community of practice. I tend, for example, not to look for people on Twitter and Facebook, but rather process all this if “friended” first. Perhaps I do not want to be pushy? rejected? or even seem needy? Ironic, as more and more of my work is in the area of communities of practice; perhaps more of my life should be there, too?

I am hoping to attend the Networked Learning 2010 conference in Denmark in May of 2010 (as long as my paper gets accepted, of course!!), and this conference is doing something different from most other conferences — it is actively engaging potential participants, presenters, and those who are just interested in pre-conference conversations about networked learning.

Very smart.

These Hot Seats are described here, and are free and open to the public. What better way to prepare for a conference on networked learning, than by engaging in this learning medium itself? Right now I find myself engaged in a great conversation with George Siemens ( this week’s facilitator, Athabasca University member, and Connectivism advocate) and the other distant colleagues about how technology changes the possibilities and dynamics in teaching online.

My new online class, Principles and Practices of Online Course Creation and Instructional Design (#PPOCCID) at NYU’s SCPS, began this evening. I am glad to see that there have been some nice improvements to the Epsilen online class platform:

As I am asking my students to blog over our 8 weeks together, I thought I should continue to do the same (and as I have been so busy at work and with food poisoning and a paper to complete as well), I am far-enough behind in my sharing here that I have a lot to say!

In the Foundations of Communities of Practice (#FCoP09) workshop I am attending, I am learning a lot more about communities of practice than I expected. I was not really sure what to expect in this workshop, though I did anticipate (correctly, it seems) that I would meet a lot of interesting people, some of whom I hope become lasting colleagues.

I had a revelation over the weekend, partly due to a number of questions I asked about communities of practice (CoP) that were answered by Etienne Wenger, the CoP guru (and the one who, along with Jean Lave, coined the term). One of the things I learned in the last week is something I have heard more times than I can count about communities of practice (CoP), though it never sunk in until now.

A community of practice is primarily about learning.

This is a social learning framework, and with the 3 domains necessary for a community of practice (domain, community, practice), it seems they all contribute to the learning, whether the learning is the intentional goal or not.

I never really considered learning to be the focus of a community of practice, and this insight is now worth the price of admission for me. I finally get it . . . I now see how to accurately use this as a research framework, as well as how others have been doing this incorrectly . . .

I started considering some of the things I learned in yesterday’s posting, and want to continue this work a little more today, this time considering our guiding question, “What really matters in my professional practice?” from a different perspective. I want to consider a bit about what I learned that has changed the way I approach my practice, mindful that my practice involves educational research, adult learning, and project management.

Word and Meaning (Transcription)

I recorded and transcribed my interviews. What I learned in the process is that what people say and what they mean may at times be different. Related, of course, but often what we begin to say and where we ultimately end up may in fact be different. To record and work only with the literal means that the result may appear clunky, awkward, and at times confusing. This then requires some interpretation, or polishing, not so much to push my own desire, but armed with strategies for trustworthiness and those methods that seek to support believability will enhance the findings and make them not only useful, but an interesting read as well.

New Methods to Stretch the Boundaries

Why always do the same forms of research? Comfort and continual improvement for sure, but that fire that excites me as I seek to study similar issues from different perspectives means that I have to stretch and use methods that are new to me. Using other methods to expand my research horizons, I find that I can gather, understand, and expand upon my findings in ways that help me enlarge my worldview. I see some issues in a more complicated and comprehensive way, so that those things I initially saw as monolithic, I now see more in the light of their own complexities. I definately want to expand on my toolkit of methods. If some aspects of life were sufficiently understandable, we would no longer need to research them!  

Reliance on Community (CoP)

I have learned that I am not struggling alone on my doctoral studies, as there are others out there engaged in the same process who are often quite helpful in offering feedback and encouragement. Likewise, there are those who seem interested in my research who are also very supportive of my work. The more I share what I am doing with my online community, and the more I offer feedback and suggestions to other colleagues who share and engage in their own work, the more my own online community of practice around some of these research issues is formed and strengthened.

Transparency

The more I share my research, perspectives, and struggles with colleagues, the more I get great suggestions and useful insights. Nothing surprising here, but the difference that I am learning is that I do not have to pretend I understand it all, give the impression that I have a handle on my work, or wait to post until everything is clearly formed and finished. Since I am enjoying the process itself, I find that sharing that along the way is most valuable. Being transparent with my own research and meaning-making process often provides as much learning as the formal research itself.

With all this, I am interested to read what my small learning set (a subset of my cohort) has to offer when they comment on these concepts when I share them within our university Moodle Virtual Learning Environment (VLE). Now that I think of it, the learning that occurs within there, just as the learning that occurs within the Foundations workshop VLE, ultimately finds its way into everything else I do.

Interesting how my life and my research are somewhat connected.