I have appreciate the opportunities to consider communities of practice in a Web2.0 environment this semester. In an effort to organize my materials, I went back through previous class files and found information on communities of practice.
Today I am thinking about legitimate peripheral participation. Is this the same as a lurker?
This wiki suggests the definition of legitimate peripheral participation (LPP) as the way a new individual would interact with a community. It suggests that this is an important step in becoming an experienced member of the community. LPP suggest activities that are low stakes and simple.
This makes sense to me when considering an apprenticeship. An individual will start with providing small, supportive tasks and work up to being more involved. However, what are low stakes and simple tasks for an online community.
For individuals who are joining an new online community what tasks are low stakes and simple? I believe this relates both to the participation in the discussion and the topic.
For example, in a vegetarian online community. LPP might be considered responding to others posts about recipes. Perhaps, they start by commenting on what looks good. The next level may mean to comment on what they liked after they make the recipe. Moving up to posting one's own recipes and futher on to critique and offer detailed feedback on recipes.
This also seems different than lurking. Lurking suggests there is no participation or that the participation is not legitimate such as maybe an occasional like or follow.
What do you think, what is legitimate peripheral participation in an online community? Do experienced members play a role in defining and supporting legitimate peripheral participation?
If you are comparing an apprenticeship to an LPP, I don't think that LPP is lurking. Although you are gaining knowledge, you are not gaining any skills? Usually, the apprentice gets the scut work and progresses towards doing the actual job. Depending on how much control the mentor exerts determines the experience. I really don't know what that would look like online, the mentee would constantly have to have their input screened before posting? Once something is out there online, it’s hard to take it back if it doesn’t represent the community.
ReplyDeleteThanks for your thoughts. I agree that the apprentiship model may not align with online communities. However I wonder if there is a parallel tie. I wonder if other members in an online community serve as "mentors". I am thinking of when administrators take down a post or remind members of the rules. Or when items are voted up and down?
ReplyDelete