Thanks to Stephen Downes for the reference to Dr. Mohamed Amine Chatti’s Knowledge Management: A Personal Knowledge Network Perspective.
Here are some abstracts that I would like to quote:
Knowledge ecologies are thus self-controlled and self-contained entities.
Knowledge ecologies lacked a shared repertoire and are thus open and distributed knowledge domains.
The result of participation in a knowledge ecology is a restructuring of one’s PKN, a reframing of one’s theories-in-use and an extension of one’s external network with new tacit and explicit knowledge nodes; i.e. people and information (external level)
Knowledge ecology is a more general concept than intensional networks.
In essence, a knowledge ecology is a complex adaptive system that emerges from the bottom-up connection of PKNs.
That is a wonderful analysis of knowledge ecology, with a model of Knowledge Management based on Personal Knowledge Network perspective.
I have once conceived that c MOOCs did exhibit the features of community and community of practice, though it certainly differed from the main features of COPs as postulated by Etienne Wenger.
I reckon this knowledge ecology concept re-opens the discourse about the nature of MOOC, in where it functions and operates, and how it behaves, as a knowledge ecology at times. However, I have often noticed that MOOCs would exhibit the configuration of knowledge ecology – with networks and communities embedded in it post MOOCs.
Here I have elaborated such a configuration in my previous post:
Based on my past experiences with CCKs, PLENK2010 and other MOOCs, the community is quite different from the “typical” communities that we would define, as there is no distinct boundary for the community. Instead of a community, in MOOC, it consists of numerous networks and communities which formed and re-formed, with some sustained, and some re-configuration in the network-community that formed. MOOCkers might have morphed along conglomerate networks, or social media as the weeks progressed, thus staying on with a particular media for sometime, and/or created blogs for a particular purpose, and then, engaged with others for a while. This seems to behave in a self-organised manner, without any directions from any facilitators, but then the individuals within particular networks would set their own agenda, goals, or tasks which suited their needs.
Can one reveal the patterns out of these network/community formation and development? Some social network analysis did reveal the trend and pattern.
How about this network and community of practice? COPs need a lot of nurturing before they could grow, develop and sustain.
In this article by Wenger and Snyder suggest that: To get communities going – and to sustain them over time – managers should:
*Identify Potential Communities of Practice.
*Provide the Infrastructure that will support such communities of practice.
*Use non traditional methods to assess the value of these communities of practice.
In MOOC, who will be the manager managing the COPs? May be, there is no one manager, but each of the participants in the MOOC would take up such role, and self-organise the COPs/Networks in a way that suits him or her.
Twitter is a network, though not a community, as many would argue. But under the “infra-structure” of MOOC, would Twitter be re-defined differently? Is it a transitional community, or communities of practice? May be.
Postscript: Here is my post on knowledge and learning ecology.
Finally, I would reiterate about future of education based on a new paradigm of knowledge:
I conceive new and emerging knowledge would be created through such “Global Community and Networks” which would be based on an environment, education and learning ecology with a network of learning platforms such as MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses), MOOCs (Massive Open Online Communities) and MOOP (Massive Open Online Projects) over different spaces, network chains.