Qualitative analysis of learning, it is not easy. This time I try to apply a description of value creation on communities of practice. It has been in my mind since I read it in Jenny Mackness’s blog in July after her visiting in a workshop around the topic. Value can be measured collecting data (Google Analytics) and adding to it individuaal and collective narratives. Individual narratives become part of the collective one: what is happening means ground narratives and aspirations of the community help to assess value-creation. I copied the diagram here from Jenny’s post where you get the links to the book of Wenger, Trayner and de Laart.
Ground narrative: community or network activities can be found on the left side and aspirational narrative, framing success on the right side of the table. Participation gives the immediate value, some interaction, level of engagement and reflection, having fun.
You can see the quantitative measurements in my former post. I began to participate in CCK08 and a big leap/ jump in numbers happened two years later, during PLENK. My blog got more visitors. But what is my narrative, what this all means to me when I look it inside my mind.
Cycle 2, potential value is interesting: Skills acquired, inspiration, social connections, tools and documents, new views of learning. Three years blogging has given all these potential values to me. I turned to cycle 2 step byt step. Soon after CCK08 my research interests arouse and we had a meeting during CCK09. At the beginning of my blogging I was a novice in connectivism community but soon I turned to research interest. I read my blog posts from the autumn 2008 and could follow how I compared my own knowledge base to principles given in connectivism – and I took a distance inside my mind. But I was polite and grateful for the courses because I could not participate without these opportunities.
Cycle 3, applied value can be seen during the autumn 2010, more active participation, more to give to other co-learners. Cycles 4 and 5, realized value and reframing value are open in my mind just now and that is why I am interested in this description of value creation cycles. I know that I must be independent in my learning journey and seek my real co-learners. I can use conferences and courses but only carefully choosing according to my perspective.
Cycle 3 means change in practice, how people use knowledge capital and cycle 4, performance improvement. I have to define these to myself – aspirational narratives cannot be given outside. Evaluation process needs maturing and it is hard work.
I have been working on these questions many times. My description a year ago was this:
Now I am living through a total reframe and I need new language, new concepts and complexity.Perhaps I must use the concepts given by Kraut: identity-based or bond-based commitment, have written about them a year ago. Or I could use the concept ‘anchor object’ in social self-organisation, written in Feb 2011. Perhaps I cannot accept other anchors but only science and serious research, not opinion-change small talk communities. Learning Analytics gather the instruments, it cannot become a science, only give better and quicker tools. Digital Scholarship needs proper basics, it cannot mean empty publishing.
Interesting times we live anyway. On Wednesday Jenny and Roy have a CIDER session and I have their IRRODL article printed, I am sure that I learn something new by reading it carefully and asking my questions in a dialogue. More information about he session here in Jenny’s blog.