I have been following this discussion with great interest beginning with
your email on April 24th to Martin Packer. I wanted to let you know
that this discussion has been very helpful for me. I'm drawn to the
issue of how to describe "community of practice" without a priori
definitions which delineate and shape a phenomenon which is, to
paraphrase, only made visible as people interact with each other. I
have a dilemma about this as I think about and write my dissertation
proposal for a study of communities of practice at after school
education programs for youth. I am attempting to employ the
theoretical lens of Jean Lave's legitimate peripheral participation,
and I intend to observe a program over a span of a year, as both a
teacher and researcher. I agree that we have to invent a new language
that does not have a universalizing tendency, that can encompass
particular and unique situations and people who live them. The problem
for me is how to achieve a balance between talk using theoretical (and
general) terms such as "communities of practice" and descriptions of
how people go about being or participating in them.
Sara