in that they provide an opportunity to meet with other academic staff and discuss issues common to all academic schools/departments. Participants describe difficulties in accessing communities of practice relating to research and those within the wider organisation. There is sense of exclusivity among some participants in relation to research communities of practice within their schools/departments. They describe how difficult it is to access these communities. UIND3: one of those areas that causes me grief is that how do you get ‘Like involved in doctoral supervision…to me is one of those communities of practice what is very difficult to crack because the goalposts keep changing and keeps changing to suit a particular conglomerate that trying to constantly you’re infiltrate’. In addition, participants describe how access to communities of practice in the wider organisation is controlled by the Head of School. Wenger (1998:149) identifies clear parallels between practice and identity. He describes them as identity as negotiated experience, community membership, learning trajectory, nexus of multi-membership and relation between the local and the global. As identity is formed through participation and reification it involves various competencies including how to engage with others (mutual engagement), understanding the enterprise to which participants are accountable (joint enterprise) and sharing resources (shared repertoire) (Wenger 1998:152). The multiple roles which participants describe and the constant change within their schools/departments appears to make it difficult for participants to engage in a meaningful way with others. This is very evident in the university sector where participants describe the existence of and cultures of constant change. Despite the of ‘plenty committees’ existence of committees participants are clear that they do not constitute communities of practice as they lack a In addition, one participant focus or unified ‘unified purpose’. warns: UFG2P4: have to have a culture behind the scenes of what I alluded to ‘…you before this kind of collegiality and we need to be very, very careful to hold on to to one another, respect one another, encourage one that…talk another…’
in that they provide an opportunity to meet with other academic staff and discuss issues common to all academic schools/departments. Participants describe difficulties in accessing communities of practice relating to research and those within the wider organisation. There is sense of exclusivity among some participants in relation to research communities of practice within their schools/departments. They describe how difficult it is to access these communities. UIND3: ‘Like one of those areas that causes me grief is that how do you get involved in doctoral supervision…to me is one of those communities of practice what is very difficult to crack because the goalposts keep changing and keeps changing to suit a particular conglomerate that you’re trying to constantly infiltrate’. In addition, participants describe how access to communities of practice in the wider organisation is controlled by the Head of School. Wenger (1998:149) identifies clear parallels between practice and identity. He describes them as identity as negotiated experience, community membership, learning trajectory, nexus of multi-membership and relation between the local and the global. As identity is formed through participation and reification it involves various competencies including how to engage with others (mutual engagement), understanding the enterprise to which participants are accountable (joint enterprise) and sharing resources (shared repertoire) (Wenger 1998:152). The multiple roles which participants describe and the constant change within their schools/departments appears to make it difficult for participants to engage in a meaningful way with others. This is very evident in the university sector where participants describe the existence of ‘plenty of committees’ and cultures of constant change. Despite the existence of committees participants are clear that they do not constitute communities of practice as they lack a ‘unified focus or unified purpose’. In addition, one participant warns: UFG2P4: ‘…you have to have a culture behind the scenes of what I alluded to before this kind of collegiality and we need to be very, very careful to hold on to that…talk to one another, respect one another, encourage one another…’
Final%20Submission%20with%20Amendments%20September2015.docx