In an earlier definition for Lave and Wenger, (1991: 53 & 98) they consider a CoP as a part of systems of relations that support learning; “… as a set of relations among persons, activity and the world, over time, in relation with other tangential and overlapping CoPs.” In a refined definition, Wenger (2001:2) describes it as “a group of people who share an interest in a domain of human endeavor and engage in a process of collective learning that creates bonds between them.” He explains that many groups are considered communities, but not all are CoPs. He therefore states three crucial characteristics to form a functional CoP; a common domain and shared interest, the community where members share activities and discussions, and the practice where community members develop “a shared repertoire of resources: experiences, stories, tools, etc..”

In summary, using different aspects discussed in the literature, we may describe it as “a natural process of learning, sharing and interaction among a group of professionals who are informally bound together in social and professional relations (Wenger: 1998a). They have a common sense of purpose and work in real world, Seely et al (2007). They always collaborate and keep learning from each other Stewart (1996). Eventually, they evolve new and more creative practices, Gongla et al (2001). These practices enable interdisciplinary knowledge and practice while promoting learning via communication among its members, Johnson (2001). Finally, these members are not just sharing or benefiting from each other, but they show more commitment, sense of responsibility and belonging, (Pór 2001 & Slaouti 2007: towards their participation. Hence, more opportunities for professional development arise for teachers.

Tags: community, cop, of, practice