Sociocultural learning 1 Sociocultural learning within craft communities of practice

As craft production is a social enterprise, this document outlines the educational role of sociocultural theory within craft communities. Craft practitioners, whether they are aware of it or not, form themselves into groups which serve as their community and assist in the sharing of knowledge; relevant to this social clustering are the concepts of situated learning, cognitive apprenticeship and activity theory. The purpose of this paper is to raise the awareness among studio art educators and craft practitioners as to the role of sociocultural learning in naturally occurring groups. Sociocultural learning 3 Introduction The domain of creating objects from natural materials is an activity that can be traced to the early origins of human existence. As a result, the skill and knowledge associated with working with natural materials has connected human beings throughout time. As increased mechanization and technology has withdrawn us as a civilization from our connection to the natural world and thus separated us from the activities associated with locating and harvesting natural materials, the need for sharing of knowledge has increased. The advent of internet technology, rather than fragmenting groups further, has enabled isolated communities to share knowledge, thus forming themselves, quite naturally and perhaps unwittingly, into Distributed Learning Communities or DLC’s. According to Wilson, and Rider (1998) DLC's “take shape in settings where learning is needed, but where formal instruction. is not available. ” An example of such a DLC is www.potters. org, which is referred to as ClayArt by its participants. It is an online support group where potters and ceramic artists share information and knowledge surrounding techniques, methods and sources of knowledge associated with their specific area of practice. In contemporary society, the area of practice in which members produce objects from natural materials using pseudo-traditional techniques is referred to generally as craft. The natural materials referenced include ceramics, glass, textiles, small metals (metalsmithing) and iron (blacksmithing). While there is some confusion surrounding this term and its contemporary application, for the purposes of this text, we will define the term as follows: Craft refers to the products of artistic production or creation that require a high degree of tacit knowledge, are highly technical, require specialized equipment and/or facilities to produce, involve manual labor or a “blue collar” work ethic, are accessible to the general Sociocultural learning 4 public and are constructed from traditional materials with histories that exceed the boundaries of Western art history. (Stevens, 2004) Within the context of sociocultural learning theory, we may refer to the general field of craft as a community of interest; this is because the specific areas of practice within craft as mentioned above represent their own distinct communities of practice which can all be categorized within the larger paradigm of craft. Therefore, the sociocultural study of communities of practice is especially relevant to the study of the sharing and transfer of knowledge within craft communities of practice. Defining communities and their differences In terms of craft communities, it is important to distinguish that communities of practice differ from communities of interest. Communities of practice are formed when social units are united by common areas of concerns or interests, interact regularly, share a common vocabulary and quite often, even without acknowledging the activity, learn with and from one another in the process (Wegner, et al., 2002). Our earlier example of the ClayArt DLC represents a smaller portion of the population of ceramics artists and potters, which can be viewed as a smaller community of practice (CoP) situated within a larger one. As CoPs are formed as result of social participation in common activities, similarly, a community of interest is a group which sometimes interacts socially and is connected by a common interest in a specific subject or endeavor; however, a participant’s level of interest may vary within a community of interest. Therefore, it can be generally surmised that within communities of interest, the social bond is weaker than in communities of practice and while admittedly, knowledge is sometimes shared within communities of interest, ongoing knowledge transfer is less likely to occur as a result of sustained participant interaction and contact. Sociocultural learning 5 So just what is knowledge? Within this discussion of knowledge sharing within a community of practice, it is important to outline what constitutes knowledge versus information; this has been described by Hildreth, et al (2002) who offers that social learning occurs “through experience and interaction with our milieu” and that learning often involves both tacit and explicit knowledge. The authors further maintain that both types of knowledge remain in people's heads and only when explicit knowledge is transferred to an external medium, such as paper or computer data, does it become information. Seely, et al (1998, p. 91) further describes this activity in the following passage: "The organizational knowledge that constitutes 'core-competency' is more than 'know-what' explicit knowledge which may be shared by several. A core competency requires the more elusive 'know-how' the particular ability to put know-what into practice. " The “know-how” that Seely, et al is referring to in this passage is tacit knowledge. The meaning of the term tacit knowledge was first articulated by Dr. Michael Polanyi (1958) has been defined as personal ‘know-how’ or a form of embodied knowledge, as opposed to the theoretical. As communities of craft possess various forms of tacit knowledge, which are clearly, demonstrated within the act of working with one’s hands with skill and workmanship, it is important to note that this type of knowledge is difficult to share since it must be experienced. As a result, at the core of these concepts of sociocultural learning within craft communities of practice is the idea that the transfer of tacit knowledge occurs through shared interaction and experience and learning occurs through mutual influence and negotiation. Sociocultural learning 6 Situated knowledge within communities Brown, et al (1989) originally posited that specific cognitive learning could be improved by using concepts observed in craft-based apprenticeship. Brown, et al. were particularly interested in how enculturation into a community of practitioners allowed the learner to engage in the culture of a domain and learn through authentic activity as opposed to theory. The following further reinforces this notion: “Craft apprenticeship enables apprentices to acquire and develop the tools and skills of their craft through authentic work at and membership in their trade. Through this process, apprentices enter the culture of practice. So the term apprenticeship helps to emphasize the centrality of activity in learning and knowledge and highlights the inherently contextdependent, situated, and enculturating nature of learning” (Brown et al., 1989, p. 34). Consequently, the theory of situated learning suggests that learning and knowledge is best situated in the activity, context and culture in which it was developed and is used (Brown et al, 1989, p.32). Additionally, this research originated the term ‘cognitive apprenticeship’ which is used generally within the field of education to describe “an instructional model that seeks to emulate the opportunities for extended practice on authentic tasks that apprentices have while working under a master craftsman” (Wilson, Jonassen and Cole, 1993, p. 21.22). All of the research surrounding the concepts of situated cognition and cognitive apprenticeship have their antecedents in Vygotsky’s concept of ‘zone of proximal development,’ which he describes as "the distance between the actual development level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or in collaboration with more capable peers" (Vygotsky, 1978, pp.86-87). In other words, when applied to the learning environment, it suggests that Sociocultural learning 7 participants can learn more with guidance or by working in groups than they can learn by working alone. At the core of his research and influence, is the notion that social learning is an effective means of education within specific contexts. Likewise Vygotsky later states, “. the basic law of historical human development, which proclaims that human beings are created by the society in which they live and that it represents the determining factor in the formation of their personalities, remains in force” (1994, p. 176). However, following Vygotsky’s ideas but contrasting Brown, el al’s theory of situated cognition, Valsinser (1994) argues that rather than being situated, knowledge is co-constructed from that which is socially sourced combined with the learner’s own existing knowledge, thus offering a theory that combines social learning and an individual’s ontogeny or the sum of previous experiences (Billett, 1998, p. 256). Further embedded in this sociocultural constructivist perspective, while also having its antecedents in the ideas of Vygotsky, is the notion of activity systems. The definition of activity systems originated in the work of Leonteyev (1981) and is described as “the social system which shapes activity” and “provides a useful basis for elaborating the nature, organization and goals of the particular situation in which activity is undertaken” (Billett, 1998, p. 263). Further advancement of the concept of activity systems can be found in the work of Engestrom (1993) in which he begins to delineate the individual elements of activity systems that comprise a community of practice (Billett, 1998, p. 264). Th