Today, we had the tutorial started with the theme of Writing your Unit Four Evaluative Report. We have discussed the outline for the report shown in the Unit Four assessment brief- YOUR QUESTION, WHAT, WHY, HOW, CONCLUSION. We talked about the data analysis from primary research including qualitative and quantitative data analysis as part of the background research to demonstrate the reason and value of the project. In my project, I mainly used quantitative data analysis by conducting a series of interviews with stakeholders and experts in Unit Three. I realize how the data analysis would help me not only gain evidence but also look for a better understanding of my stakeholders for my next action research engaging with them.
Next plan:
-To conduct more action/primary research, interview with experts/stakeholders, or release an intervention to gain more quantitative and qualitative data.
-Release a new intervention, “The Necklace” Co-Collaborative project.
–Contact Gradsupport@arts.ac.uk. Talk to the grad Support team for feedback.
During the tutorial, I shared my next plan for intervention which I have talked about in the call with Cynthia. I tried to bring my jewellery design perspective in my project which Cynthia thought was a good idea to also conclude my own practice as well. I explained my ideas for “The Necklace” to the group and received a question from Richard: what does success mean to you and what will the stakeholders gain after the intervention? I think it is a good question for me because my main goal for this intervention is to help creative graduates connect with the UK creative industries. At this moment, I can think of two main purpose which is networking and showcasing the message they want to express to the UK creative industries. However, it makes me think about what is the definition of success in this project? After releasing my intervention, I hope to open more possibilities of the routes to achieve their goals, with the relationship built within different areas and the power of creative communication.
Furthermore, Richard mentioned Community of Practice after he heard my idea of this intervention, which is the concept that was first proposed by cognitive anthropologist Jean Lave and educational theorist Etienne Wenger. Members are brought together by joining in common activities and by ‘what they have learned through their mutual engagement in these activities’ (Wenger 1998). Its concept can fairly relate to my intervention in that I provide a space for them to share practice, not just a space for doing the same activity together like a community of interest or a geographical community.
Community of Practice
-According to Etienne Wenger (1998), a community of practice defines itself along three dimensions:
What it is about- its joint enterprise as understood and continually renegotiated by its members.
How it functions- mutual engagement that bind members together into a social entity.
What capability it has produced- the shared repertoire of communal resources (routines, sensibilities, artifacts, vocabulary, styles, etc.) that members have developed over time. (see, also Wenger 1999: 73-84)
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 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; they care about their standing with each other.
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.
Reference
Etienne and Beverly Wenger-Trayner, 2015, Introduction to communities of practice https://www.wenger-trayner.com/introduction-to-communities-of-practice/
Developing theory and practice: Creation of a Community of Practice through Action Research produced excellence in stroke care Cherry k. Lin p. etc https://www.researchgate.net/figure/The-three-essential-elements-of-a-community-of-practice-shown-in-the-middle-column_fig1_346701269