> That indeed is the collective 'we'
>
> Isn't it something in construction by the very
>>participation here?
>
> It is in construction, hopefully to become, hopefully always becoming a COP
> that welcomes newcomers and affords interaction across degrees and kinds of
> expertise.
Much of interest (to me) has been posted on the "topic" of participation
structures and lchc. Of course, it isn't a topic per se, but a space of
dialogue, and also, probably, pain and anger and anxiety. I would like to
(re)introduce another wrinkle here, which is that I have found it helpful to
pay attention to the ways in which a positive spin is always (already)
interpellated in academic discourses in education. And it doesn't help. When
folks hear "communities of practice" and "conditions for participation" they
seem to forget about conditions for non-participation, the DE-legitimated
peripheral practioners. And this aspect of Lave and Wenger's LPP model has
received far less critical attention than it might have. Diane Hodges
considered this theme in her MCA article.
So part of me, permanently hacked by the virus of Foucault, wants to think
about the ways in which we engineer non-participation and de-legitimation.
It always strikes me that the truer stories are in those places.
Mary
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Tue Mar 07 2000 - 17:54:03 PST