v Strategies: You identify, “Human engagement in the world as the first and foremost process of negotiating meaning” (53). Consider a community to which you belong (or another in society). How have the dimensions of participation and reification interacted to create the meaning that has shaped that community?
v Skill: In accepting, the strands of weakness in any human engagement that is required to negotiate meaning in the community, I process an argument that participation and reification take time to experience. I assess the meanings before me and then let them build a strengthen posture for the issues in that society.
v Strategies: “Because the world is in flux and conditions always change, any practice must constantly be reinvented, even as it remains ‘the same practice’” (94). Can we just as easily reinvent ourselves? How does our ability (or inability) to do so influence the way we participate in these communities?
v Skill: There is incompetence and there is competence changing transferable skills that influence the flux and conditions in the world. Policies help reinvent performance, so I think we can reinvent conditions to procure competence. People want to show how to practice the basic point they can engage a better atmosphere. People generally know –how to renegotiate forms of participation and assessment of participation. .
v Strategies: Institutional boundaries draw clear distinctions between inside and outside. By contrast, boundaries of practice are constantly renegotiated, defining much more fluid and textured forms of participation.” (119). What boundaries are we negotiating as members of WEC? Are there institutional boundaries in place?
v Skill: In refusing to follow institutional standard methods of classifying the inside and outside we discontinue these boundaries for continuing those engagements in practice over time. Explaining the edges not as inside and outside but as other communities helps to lessen conflicts of interest. Avoiding pain points by using our participation gives us leverage to advance the work. We negotiate a new perspective in WEC leaving the boundaries that are woven together with other edges intact.
v Strategies: Locality how does a “constellation” differ from a “community of practice”? (I thought I understood the distinction on page 127, but as Wenger continued, the terms of relation became a bit muddled. Contributing to this confusion was the fact that I read almost all of Part I with the misunderstanding that Vignette I was provided to ground readers in a sample community of practice.)
v Skill: A learnt capacity or talent to carry out pre-determined results often comes from members of a constellation or interconnected practices. The community of practice may very well be only one community in the constellation.
|
v Strategies: In Coda I: “What does a flower know of being a flower?” and “What does a computer know of being a flower?” Apply Wenger’s philosophy to the questions surrounding technological advancement, specifically writing for electronic communities? (the practice, not the course…) How do we attempt to measure what is compromised against what is gained? |
v Skill: Zen asks too many questions. Skills are not necessarily learnt in the same way that other aspects of a course may be learnt. Skills are usually developed in an individual partly by the introduction of theory, but mainly by practice i.e. learning by doing. We measure what is compromised against what is gained by the amount of experience developed
Leraningleads asked in Chapter 1: Meaning Wenger claims, “Human engagement in the world is first and foremost a process of negotiating meaning” (53). Consider a community to which you belong (or another in society). How have dimensions of participation and reification interacted to create the meaning that has shaped that community?
Electricblogman responds:Fortunately for me, those pain point lessons taught to me in basic, and html, c++ and java script have made a ditgal transformation journey to become a mutual engagement of usable opera table system applications. Here we learned from those bits and pieces developing a belonging in the high road of the super nets’ abundance of information. This super highway of data stores is virtually filled to the roof tops on all kinds of subject matter materials. On the low roads this networks community is shoppers at store breakfront windows, searching to find desired pieces of available materials, paying for them with saved potential mental activity. This information bank has become so demanding it is necessary for us users to learn how to economize in the electric media so we can pay for only desired thought interests. The dimensions of this operating system is moving our traditional fixed and silent signal of print reification forward, enabling us to negotiate an increase in the infrastructure we obtained by the same attention spent for that print subject matter participation.
Learningleads asked in Chapter 3: LearningWenger claims, “Because the world is in flux and conditions always change, any practice must constantly be reinvented, even as it remains ‘the same practice’” (94). Can we just as easily reinvent ourselves? How does our ability (or inability) to do so influence the way we participate in these communities?
Electricblogman responds:The old social worlds of learning are divergent with convergent new dynamic realties. To completely analyze this identity would be a long digest; therefore, I would rather tell you as an audience this new text technology evolves meaningful purpose for developing an environment of learning practices. A how to practice trajectory, a basic point, for becoming, although temporal, is a type of negotiation engaging ongoing multiple convergences of content information. It is to learn a process from a theory of gathering social and personal facts that will increase memory for reification usage in an active community of participation. Similar incidents of practice in a community are supported by weeding out or discontinuity imaginations that give rise to false references. This influence allows us not to reinvent ourselves but to control a continuity of who we really are because we save energy activity interests to pay a quality emergent interaction with the community.
Larningleads asked in Chapter 4: BoundaryWenger claims, “Institutional boundaries draw clear distinctions between inside and outside. By contrast, boundaries of practice are constantly renegotiated, defining much more fluid and textured forms of participation” (119). What boundaries are we negotiating as members of WEC? Are there institutional boundaries in place?
Electricblogman responds:Language components of this new social theory of learning draw clear distinctions in words and phrases, both familiar and new abstractions usage define learning concepts. For example, in a Venn diagram some meanings would overlap in focus on a boundary line while others further back do not. Because of the sensitive, intimate and difficult perspectives to articulate meaning a bridge tool is often a required thing to allow newcomers to experience what is bump being against. The audiences’ of wec interest provides a cohort to observe meaning. The person who is desperately in need of learning requires a language to manage his or her ability to negotiate meaningful use as a respectable human condition. Applying the right words to persuade meaning creates a good social emergence. This supports a trajectory of participation to have a memory from histories that empowered a place of a well rounded identity. The imagination is an understandable nature that defines the orientation of a principle to be acted on. This institutional boundary is a goal and not a place in the playing field.
Leraningleads asked in ,Chapter 5: Locality How does a “constellation” differ from a “community of practice”? (I thought I understood the distinction on page 127, but as Wenger continued, the terms of relation became a bit muddled. Contributing to this confusion was the fact that I read almost all of Part I with the misunderstanding that Vignette I was provided to ground readers in a sample community of practice.)
Electricblogman responds:Definitions of meaning are often created by real life scenarios. For example, take for instance a typical person who has lived a long life and is now faced with some kind of an aging disorder such as dementias that incapacitates them permanently. Those who can no longer do the ordinary things in life and if lucky have only a healthcare worker to assist them daily would be referred as a constellation. The community of practice on the other hand entails the intimacy of health care provides, nurses, insurance, and state agencies people that provide a service for this group of individuals. This observed constellation concept in our case mutual engagement with the health field community of practice on longer remains a local character but blends into a global one of locality. The problem for most is they become confused looking of r the difficult answers. Is where the legal wheels of government start turning and the process for assistant begins. Clients may or may not have property, a car or money in the bank, which are factors to be managed by the some of the office professionals. A reported person in an incapacitated condition must face the legal procedures in court to determine their rights. When the courts can not find a sufficient guardian in their respected families or friends they must be committed to the State’s care and become a client of the Office of Public Guardian.
Learningleads asked in Coda I: Knowing in practice Consider the questions Wenger poses: “What does a flower know of being a flower?” and “What does a computer know of being a flower?” Apply Wenger’s philosophy to the questions surrounding technological advancement, specifically writing for electronic communities? (the practice, not the course…) How do we attempt to measure what is compromised against what is gained?
Electricblogman responds:The flower not only collaborates with flowing but with its on natural law. The computer is a tool that does not flower but refrains to work within man made law. Yet even through both seem to care about what they do they are not human practices. Practice is meaning which neither is thought to process. Each exposure to an engagement forms a reification to negotiate accountability. Through this form of meaning we become competent members belonging to a practice community. This is experience we gain from putting theory learned in to a vessel of memory. We balance the scale by paying with perseverance to gain wisdom, a wonderful and a rewarding knowledge.
